Tv Licence Rip Off, Time To Stop.

You only need a TV licence to receive broadcasts that are watched as they are transmitted. If your TV is being used to watch DVD's or video's, you do not need a licence. You do not need a licence for the BBC iPlayer as it is not a 'live' broadcast. It is very clearly outlined by the licencing authority.

 

Seems you're right, I think the law's changed recently as that didn't used to be the case – seems they're now putting the onus of trust on the public, very shaky ground that and almost impossible to prove one way or another.

 

Yup, I'd agree it's shaky. So if I get a visit from those friendly people I just need to make sure that I can prove that I cannot watch any TV broadcasts because my laptop (with TV adapter) is not booted up, my TV doesn't have an aerial etc. etc.

 

No.
You have to prove nothing.
The authorities have to prove you watch live broadcasts without owning a license. It matters not whether you own equipment that can receive live broadcasts. If you do not avail yourself of them you do not need a license. You do not have to have a TV licence to own a TV set.
It isn't shaky at all the law is unequivocal it is just the idiots that the licencing authority employ who do not understand it.

 

That's right, you don't have to prove you are not breaking the law.

Innocent until proven guilty, in this country. They have to prove guilt.

There is no other area of life where the authorities try to insist that you must prove you are not a lawbreaker.

 

Totally irrelevant to me but useful for others I may be able to pass this interesting info onto, just goes to show you need to keep up with this stuff or you get left behind

 

I was quite pleased when the TV inspector or whoever the hell he was turned up. I had no aerial connection to my TV and no way of ever connecting one but I was making full use of DVD. It still didn't stop the paper notifications arriving on the doorstep via the post though. If it proves one thing it is that you must know the law.

 

You should not have let him in. They have no right of access without a court order.
I hope you just ignored all letters and didn't waste time responding to them.

 

Too right! And in order to get a court order they have to produce some evidence that you are breaking the law. Not having a licence is not evidence.

 

I did knuckle down and let him in but I simply dismissed all of the threatening letters thereafter. As I said earlier in this thread, what they do is basically harrassment and that is a criminal offence in the UK. Isn't it funny how the TV licencing authority seem to get away with it when the rest of us would have a court injunction against us...???

 

if you check my url above you'll see that it's standard practice...

 

Indeed.

I wrote them a snotogram and haven't heard from them since.

I also did as Mark suggested, and withdrew implied right of access. That means that if they knock on my door they are trespassing.

Unfortunately, my understanding of their MO (no, not the forum member.... Modus Operandi) is that writing a nasty letter gets you put on an ignore list for two years, after which their threats begin again.

 

Try getting them to understand a relative has died and no longer needs a licence, apparently they epect the deceased to put it in writing!
Last thing i need is dealing with nobbers like that.

 

Guys, I can't help thinking that it is perhaps too for licence dodgers to avoid paying up. If everyone did that who will suffer in the long run?

P.S. Please note that my comment is not aimed at those who genuinely don't need to pay the licence fee.

 

Mmmm... a reduced rate for those who cannot see...!!! Aren't they so bloody generous.

 

Strangely.... you don't need a TV license if you have a freeview box that you use to listen to the sound (with no picture - ie with no tv attached), but that a blind person with a tv must pay?

Dev - then they should detect those people's tvs and bring them to court with that evidence and convict them. Then they don't need to make unpleasant threats to people who genuinely choose not to watch tv.

 

Experience would suggest that isn't true. My best mates girlfriend did not have a TV so ignored their letters. They came round with the police and broke the lock on her apartment door when she was out. They even made a fuss about hanging around and fitting a new lock. I guess being Japanese they thought she was a terrorist?!

She had started the proceedings to take the police and BBC to court, but sadly she got very ill and passed away recently.

 

I haven't read the entire thread, but I think Nando's point to begin with was that if you have Sky TV, not Freeview or terrestrial, then why should you pay the BBC? The only reason I can think of is you can still receive the BBC on Sky TV.

Still, I like the BBC radio, news service and Top Gear, so if I had a TV I would be happy to pay the license. I don't have a TV though, so I don't hehe!

 

Same here Bob... in fact only few Italians pay :JOEL:

 

Despite Tenson's sad post let's be quite clear here. Without a court order the TV licensing people have no more right to enter property than a milkman.