pigin stripes
New member
Sorry mate you are wrong, you only need to have the equiptment capable of recieving........I know I have had to assist said TV nasties in the past
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
TV Licensing intend prosecuting me for just owning TV sets
- Thread starter Nottseagull
- Start date
Hillian1
( . ) ( . )
At the risk of incuring your wrath, we tend to go through the same subjects every week, if we didn't this place would be very boring.
readingstockport
New member
Then you were breaking the law. You are simply wrong.
Albumen
Don't wait for me!
If you're never going to use it, rip the arial out.
Nottseagull
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #25
You have underlined 'who intends to' but then go on to categorically state that I need a licence. Yes, I intend to use them in the future, perhaps if the Albion start appearing regularly on BBC/ITV. But in that case I would be getting a licence and therefore not be in contravention.
I studied all the regulations before making my decision. Missing MotD was the biggest wrench, but this became bearable when MotD2 was changed to being viewable on iplayer (retrospectively).
pigin stripes
New member
I think not......" picture this large block of flats with one aerial......shout goes up that tv nasties have arrived and all pull the aerial leads. Nasties knock on doors and see tv, If they believe its capable of recieving then you need a licence thats what Part 4 of the Communications Act 2003 is all about, in reality when it gets to court it will get thrown out without the meter readings to prove reception......best bit to remember is they have no power of entry.
readingstockport
New member
Doesn't matter. They still need to PROVE that you were using the TV to recieve signals. If you were not doing so then you do not need a licence. There is case law on this and it was also discussed in parliament within the past 18 months. The offence is USING the equipment to recieve signals, not simply possessing the equipment.
And what you just wrote contradicted what you wrote earlier by the way.
pigin stripes
New member
No It did not re read..... anyway as I was trying to say its all about the actus reus the nastie here thinks he can prove it which is why he is going with a threat of court.
I'm afraid you're wrong - I should know, I have worked for Capita.
You're saying Part 4 of the Communications Act 2003 is all about 'if they believe its capable of recieving then you need a licence'
Where does it say that in the Act? Because you've written a load about the Act here:
and that says you have to intend to use it in contravention of the main offence.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,393
if there is a lesson to take from this, its just simpler to respond in the first place to their letters. for the cost of a stamp an envelop, or a few minutes on a low cost number (im pretty sure it wont be an expensive one with 08*) would have made this disappear at the beginning. I had the letter when i brought a TV a couple of years ago, demanding i pay, but the missus pays for the licence, so said this and no bother since. note there how shit their database or process is, that they didnt cross reference the address.
pigin stripes
New member
sorry had to go to a meeting........you are all right and I am not disagreeing with that, however in simple terms if you have a tv and no licence even if the nastie has no evidence of use (such as on a communal aerial) if they think the tv can recieve eg:its working then part 4 of the act allows them to take it to court. In reality it wont go anywhere and yes there is some case law, however the act allows it.
In this case I expect after allowing the inspector in and during the chit chat it has been admitted the only reason its not recieving is because its unplugged, he has become an easy target re a threat and obtaining money for a new licence. As he has refused the inspector has not backed down and threatened court.
Again I am not stating what WILL happen only what could happen under the act
In this case I expect after allowing the inspector in and during the chit chat it has been admitted the only reason its not recieving is because its unplugged, he has become an easy target re a threat and obtaining money for a new licence. As he has refused the inspector has not backed down and threatened court.
Again I am not stating what WILL happen only what could happen under the act
NMH
Banned
You state the answer is above, yet the above confirms the opposite.
This defies belief - didn't you just read what you edited and posted?
The op doesn't "intend to install or use", and if they eventually did they can get the license at that time.
In reality, you also do not need to open the door to tv licensing people. They then need to get a warrant.
Edit; I now see this is being pointed out already, so my post is just late. Ignore.
public school boy
Banned
Take the fuse out of the plug or cut the plugs off. The TV bods will have to prove that you did so after they visited your house in the first place. REMEMBER if a TV licencing officer knocks on your door you can refuse him, her or it entry .
there is a letter on line somewhere that you send them - it shows that the BBC are funded by the EU so are not a public service - hence you wont pay - they leave you alone after this.
if you are not watching BBC on a TV then you are commiting no offence - PERIOD. do not let them scare you.
if you are not watching BBC on a TV then you are commiting no offence - PERIOD. do not let them scare you.
Mileoakman
Well-known member
Don't think its anything to do with watching BBC TV, you need a licence for any TV station received through your ariel. Otherwise we would all swear blind we never watch anything other than ITV.
- Jan 18, 2009
- 4,751
Tricky Dicky
New member
Given the crap that ITV contijually broadcast, who on earth would believe that !!
Colossal Squid
Returning video tapes
I'm not ashamed or afraid to admit that I've NEVER bought a TV licence. I think the whole thing these days is a SHAM.
Regular letters make it into my building addressed to The Occupier, but for every flat, so I can't be the only one avoiding it. As others have said you don't have to allow their "enforcement officers" in and in all honesty I've never come across one anyway.
I think if you are caught out and they attempt to prosecute you there are a whole host of defences you can pull to wriggle out of it as essentially they need to prove that YOU personally have been watching live broadcasts, and this isn't as simple as saying you have a TV and an aerial and therefore must be watching TV. They need proof.
Have a look on BBCresistance.com | Home where there's a lot of info about avoidance and the law.
A lot of people are bullied into buying licences when they genuinely don't need to. The key is to stand up for yourself and not let their threats and demands intimidate you
Regular letters make it into my building addressed to The Occupier, but for every flat, so I can't be the only one avoiding it. As others have said you don't have to allow their "enforcement officers" in and in all honesty I've never come across one anyway.
I think if you are caught out and they attempt to prosecute you there are a whole host of defences you can pull to wriggle out of it as essentially they need to prove that YOU personally have been watching live broadcasts, and this isn't as simple as saying you have a TV and an aerial and therefore must be watching TV. They need proof.
Have a look on BBCresistance.com | Home where there's a lot of info about avoidance and the law.
A lot of people are bullied into buying licences when they genuinely don't need to. The key is to stand up for yourself and not let their threats and demands intimidate you