No TV licence - anyone else?

[AndyRM]

Nights of passion, 7 days a week.

Mary Whitehouse would have conniptions about such a thought!

 

[Electric_Andy]

The Radio

 

[Drago]

they'd probably need a warrant just like they do in order to enter your home

The would need a warrant to search your house, but cannot examine computer devices of any kind, including telephones. You need to be an accredited L1 (crime), L2(serious crime) or L3(major crime) hi tec crime investigator before any evidence found on such devices would be accepted by the CPS, never mind a court. The reasons for this are very lengthy, every button press, mouse click and swipe must be documented, and all actions repeatable, and they simply aren't trained for it - courts know this, and word the warrants accordingly to confine them to TVs.

But the offence is watching BBC output or live TV. Simply owning a TV is no longer the offence, and just because you watched the Beeb in the past and your gear is capable of receiving it does not mean you are using it for that purpose at the present time. After all, we all own kitchen drawers full of knives, but we haven't murdered anyone.

That being the case, it's difficult to see what they hope to achieve with a warrant, and I'm as sure as I can be they muddy the waters at court over the distinction between possession of a tv and eatching one, and the average TVL punter can't afford a decent brief to correct the magistrate.

The warrants do not carry a power to force entry, and the dibble won't force entry on their behalf as the warrant is not issued to a constable, so don't answer the door. This is a much easier tactic with modern cctv and ring doorbells. The warrants are only valid for 28 days anyway, and unless they fib quite seriously a court won't grant them a second one if the first was not executed.

 

[Rezillo]

I would happily sell my house and all its contents to pay my TV licence fee.

That Points of View sketch was brilliant.

"The test card is quite magnificent. It justifies the licence fee on its own"
"£400 pounds for a TV licence? It's far too low".

[edit] Just dug out the sketch - quotes are roughly right but my memory is not 100%

 

[SpokeyDokey]

The would need a warrant to search your house, but cannot examine computer devices of any kind, including telephones. You need to be an accredited L1 (crime), L2(serious crime) or L3(major crime) hi tec crime investigator before any evidence found on such devices would be accepted by the CPS, never mind a court. The reasons for this are very lengthy, every button press, mouse click and swipe must be documented, and all actions repeatable, and they simply aren't trained for it - courts know this, and word the warrants accordingly to confine them to TVs.

But the offence is watching BBC output or live TV. Simply owning a TV is no longer the offence, and just because you watched the Beeb in the past and your gear is capable of receiving it does not mean you are using it for that purpose at the present time. After all, we all own kitchen drawers full of knives, but we haven't murdered anyone.

That being the case, it's difficult to see what they hope to achieve with a warrant, and I'm as sure as I can be they muddy the waters at court over the distinction between possession of a tv and eatching one, and the average TVL punter can't afford a decent brief to correct the magistrate.

The warrants carry a power to force entry, and the dibble won't force entry on their behalf as the warrant is not issued to a constable, so don't answer the door. This is a much easier tactic with modern cctv and ring doorbells. The warrants are only valid for 28 days anyway, and unless they fib quite seriously a court won't grant them a second one if the first was not executed.

It does irritate me that the law stops you from watching non-Beeb output live.

Not that I want too but I don't know what the rationale is.

 

[MontyVeda]

The would need a warrant to search your house, but cannot examine computer devices of any kind, including telephones. You need to be an accredited L1 (crime), L2(serious crime) or L3(major crime) hi tec crime investigator before any evidence found on such devices would be accepted by the CPS, never mind a court. The reasons for this are very lengthy, every button press, mouse click and swipe must be documented, and all actions repeatable, and they simply aren't trained for it - courts know this, and word the warrants accordingly to confine them to TVs.

But the offence is watching BBC output or live TV. Simply owning a TV is no longer the offence, and just because you watched the Beeb in the past and your gear is capable of receiving it does not mean you are using it for that purpose at the present time. After all, we all own kitchen drawers full of knives, but we haven't murdered anyone.

That being the case, it's difficult to see what they hope to achieve with a warrant, and I'm as sure as I can be they muddy the waters at court over the distinction between possession of a tv and eatching one, and the average TVL punter can't afford a decent brief to correct the magistrate.

The warrants carry a power to force entry, and the dibble won't force entry on their behalf as the warrant is not issued to a constable, so don't answer the door. This is a much easier tactic with modern cctv and ring doorbells. The warrants are only valid for 28 days anyway, and unless they fib quite seriously a court won't grant them a second one if the first was not executed.

According the blackbelt barrister, live broadcasts on YouTube, which are becoming quite common, also fall under TV licensing

 

[MontyVeda]

It does irritate me that the law stops you from watching non-Beeb output live.

Not that I want too but I don't know what the rationale is.

initially it was because other broadcasters were using the same network as the beeb to transmit, so the licence was for the network and not just one station.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Had inspectors out, never opened the front door 👍

 

[SpokeyDokey]

initially it was because other broadcasters were using the same network as the beeb to transmit, so the licence was for the network and not just one station.

That makes sense but I wonder why the legislation hasn't kept pace with reality.

 

[Slick]

According the blackbelt barrister, live broadcasts on YouTube, which are becoming quite common, also fall under TV licensing

Whilst I don't doubt him, that really doesn't make any sense.

 

[MontyVeda]

That makes sense but I wonder why the legislation hasn't kept pace with reality.

Because it's how the BBC is (partially) funded. The Government determines what the legislation is. The Government also wants to spend as little as possible of 'their' money on the Beeb, which is why the Laws haven't changed a great deal and the TV 'tax' continues to generate around £4billion a year.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I don't have a TV or radio...but I pay the licence anyway to support a great British institution.

I got rid of my TV in protest when they stopped playing the National Anthem at the end of the evening's broadcasting.

 

[Saluki]

I have just had my letter informing me that I don’t have a tv licence. I have been online and informed them, again, that I don’t need one. They do like to pry from time to time. Never had a detector person around though.

 

[Slick]

The old detector vans were brilliant.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

I don't have a licence because the last time I had a TV was 20 years ago.
Of course I'm at work when they visit, but once, many years ago, they found me home.
I did let them in, they believed me for a few years, then it started again with the threads