TV LICENCE why should people pay when paying for Sky?

[Total Chaos]

No you're not. The law clearly states that to operate a television signal receiver you need to be in possession of a licence.

 

Just because you are avoiding being caught doesn't make your actions any more legal than driving at 80 down a country lane out of sight of the police makes speeding legal.

 

WRONG,i do not need a license if i only watch dvd's,catch up TV,watch programs from sites like netflix or youtube.I do not need a license if i watch recorded material eg home and away 2 hours after it was broadcast LIVE.Oh dear, another tit that thinks he knows it all.If i do it this way, i am not doing anything illegal or against the law.So im still a law abiding citizen.

[dosxuk]

WRONG,i do not need a license if i only watch dvd's,catch up TV,watch programs from sites like netflix or youtube.

When you are watching DVDs, catch up TV, netflix or youtube you ARE NOT operating a television signal receiver because you're not receiving a broadcast television signal, and therefore don't need a licence to operate said equipment.

 

I do not need a license if i watch recorded material eg home and away 2 hours after it was broadcast LIVE.

 

WRONG, you DO need a licence to operate a video recorder in your house, because it is receiving a broadcast television signal. And it's illegal for someone else to give you tapes of programmes they recorded in order for you to watch them at your own leisure. Video recorders are only legally allowed to be used for personal timeshifting, not distribution or archival (unless you have negotiated permission from the rights holder(s) of the material in advance).

 

Oh dear, another tit that thinks he knows it all.If i do it this way, i am not doing anything illegal or against the law.So im still a law abiding citizen.

 

You're not a law abiding citizen if, as you say, you are watching live broadcasts.

Even with an inspector sat on his settee,while TV was broadcasting LIVE

[Total Chaos]

When you are watching DVDs, catch up TV, netflix or youtube you ARE NOT operating a television signal receiver, and therefore don't need a licence to operate said equipment.

 

 

 

WRONG, you DO need a licence to operate a video recorder in your house. And it's illegal for someone else to give you tapes of programmes they recorded in order for you to watch them at your own leisure. Video recorders are only legally allowed to be used for personal timeshifting, not distribution or archival (unless you have negotiated permission from the rights holder(s) of the material in advance).

 

 

 

You're not a law abiding citizen if, as you say, you are watching live broadcasts.

 

Then why was'nt he prosecuted and fined?

 

Do people still have video recorders?

 

The last inspector who came to mine,before i removed replied rights of access.He asked if i had a TV,i told him yes thanks, i have a 50inch smart TV.When i refused to give him my name,he walked off and never heard anything since eg NO fine.I'm guessing,with an educated guess, that from 2016, BBC will be pay per view,because they realise that they don't have a prayer in catching anyone watching live TV.All you have to do if someone knocks on your door unexpectedly, is turn the TV off.

 

So, it seems i am still a law abiding citizen.

[dosxuk]

[/b]

 

Then why was'nt he prosecuted and fined?

 

You would have to ask TV Licensing that question. Could I also suggest asking the Police why they don't prosecute everyone who speeds, it's in the same vein of questions.

 

Do people still have video recorders?

 

Maybe I should have said "video recording equipment"? Anyway, VCRs, DVRs, Sky+, TIVO, all of those types of equipment which allow you to store a broadcast. You need a licence in order to receive a broadcast signal regardless of the equipment which receives the signal or whether you're watching it.

 

The last inspector who came to mine,before i removed replied rights of access.He asked if i had a TV,i told him yes thanks, i have a 50inch smart TV.When i refused to give him my name,he walked off and never heard anything since eg NO fine.

 

That's good for you. Still doesn't make watching a live broadcast with no licence legal.

 

I'm guessing,with an educated guess, that from 2016, BBC will be pay per view,because they realise that they don't have a prayer in catching anyone watching live TV.All you have to do if someone knocks on your door unexpectedly, is turn the TV off.

 

Almost certainly not. There are no plans for it to go PPV, and it would completely go against the idea of a public service broadcaster. Any change to the licencing system is more likely to end up with an increase in general taxation and the BBC funded from that. Yes, it would abolish the licence fee, but then everyone would be paying for it rather than just those who are using the service (broadcast reception, not the BBC). Remember, the licence fee does not just go to the BBC, it also funds crucial parts of the national broadcast infrastucture, and various other projects / ideas that Governments keep coming up with (such as subsidised Freeview boxes for over 75's during DSO).

 

So, it seems i am still a law abiding citizen.

 

No. Operation of a television broadcast receiver without a licence is illegal, regardless of whether you've been caught or prosecuted. Using your argument it's legal to murder people, provided you don't get convicted.

[Total Chaos]

You would have to ask TV Licensing that question. Could I also suggest asking the Police why they don't prosecute everyone who speeds, it's in the same vein of questions.

 

 

 

Maybe I should have said "video recording equipment"? Anyway, VCRs, DVRs, Sky+, TIVO, all of those types of equipment which allow you to store a broadcast. You need a licence in order to receive a broadcast signal regardless of the equipment which receives the signal or whether you're watching it.

 

 

 

That's good for you. Still doesn't make watching a live broadcast with no licence legal.

 

 

Almost certainly not. There are no plans for it to go PPV, and it would completely go against the idea of a public service broadcaster. Any change to the licencing system is more likely to end up with an increase in general taxation and the BBC funded from that. Yes, it would abolish the licence fee, but then everyone would be paying for it rather than just those who are using the service (broadcast reception, not the BBC). Remember, the licence fee does not just go to the BBC, it also funds crucial parts of the national broadcast infrastucture, and various other projects / ideas that Governments keep coming up with (such as subsidised Freeview boxes for over 75's during DSO).

 

 

 

No. Operation of a television broadcast receiver without a licence is illegal, regardless of whether you've been caught or prosecuted. Using your argument it's legal to murder people, provided you don't get convicted.

 

Because again, a speeding fine is another unlawful way by the authorities to obtain money.

 

I will again quote a section from the uk bill of rights.

 

"grants and promises of fines or forfeitures" before conviction are void

 

They know i have a TV,blu-ray and freesat, all with internet connection,but where are they?where is my fine?why are the police not banging on my door?why send me a letter saying ok Mr chaos,we will not send our inspectors round,basically have a nice time watching TV for free :hihi:as there are 60million others to intimidate and con.

 

I don't watch live broadcasts.You be a good little boy and pay your unlawful taxes.What do you think of the new public park permit that will be arriving soon.Pay to take your kids into the park or walk your dog.How does it feel to be bent over and shafted,every time some dimwit sees another way to tax us.No wonder the country is in the state it is,because of sheeples like yourself.

 

Anyway, Dr who is on now

[Cyclone]

They don't just need to "know" what you have, they need to prove that you are receiving broadcast TV without a license. If they had proof that they believe a magistrate would accept then they'd prosecute you.

That's why you have to turn off your TV and do your best to keep people from your door, to avoid them collecting that proof.

 

Re: a speeding fine, you are not required to accept a fine without conviction, if you decline to pay the fine you will be taken to court, convicted and fined. Thus the fine is in no way unlawful, you only pay it if you agree to the charge and plead guilty to it.

[buck]

I wonder how much of the money you pay for a license to watch TV goes into policing it. Paying for the detection vans and their crews, and all the other people sending out summons etc. We don't pay TV licenses, just suffer 30% commercial breaks every hour. Thank you for the BBC material we get on Public TV for free, and commercial free except when they're touting for our donations.

[koikeeper]

not a bad idea

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRQTkOk__48

[Total Chaos]

not a bad idea

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRQTkOk__48

 

Because it is on you tube, the usual Mr wonderfuls on here will say its fake.They are told by the authorities,its illegal and you MUST pay it,then they will,because they have been told to.Evidence is there,even a warrant signed,UNLWFULLY under their oath?? by a magistrate.The cops are only there to keep the peace,same as when bailiffs turn up for non payment of a loan etc,its a civil matter.

 

---------- Post added 27-04-2013 at 17:57 ----------

 

I wonder how much of the money you pay for a license to watch TV goes into policing it. Paying for the detection vans and their crews, and all the other people sending out summons etc. We don't pay TV licenses, just suffer 30% commercial breaks every hour. Thank you for the BBC material we get on Public TV for free, and commercial free except when they're touting for our donations.

 

Buck, in the UK,a company such as Capita or TVLA can not lawfully obtian monies without a contract or consent.This is the same with non payment of a loan for intance.a bank will sell the debt onto a debt collector,this debt collector has effectively just paid off your debt,with the bank you originaly signed the CONTRACT with.The only way now the debt collectors can get there money back from you is through intimidation and threats,oh and the all important trying to get you into a contract eg sign paperwork,just like the BBC.

 

 

These are your detector vans it was on the one show if you wish to google the full version,incidently it was shown by the BBC

 

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=tv%20detector%20vans%20on%20one%20show&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CDsQtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DLweldrmZh50&ei=CgZ8UcL9G4mg0QXhkIDQAg&usg=AFQjCNFEiyUJIiYQPJXSqXpX8y78PMU8DQ

 

Buck,there is no such thing as a detector vans or their crews,it was all fabricated in the 60s,its all a con to unlawfully obtain monies from the public.Thanks to the internet it is all coming out.The BBC get money also from advertising,from the other channels they own eg DAVE + money from the gullible public.

 

---------- Post added 27-04-2013 at 18:00 ----------

 

They don't just need to "know" what you have, they need to prove that you are receiving broadcast TV without a license. If they had proof that they believe a magistrate would accept then they'd prosecute you.

That's why you have to turn off your TV and do your best to keep people from your door, to avoid them collecting that proof.

 

Re: a speeding fine, you are not required to accept a fine without conviction, if you decline to pay the fine you will be taken to court, convicted and fined. Thus the fine is in no way unlawful, you only pay it if you agree to the charge and plead guilty to it.

 

Then why don't they use their infamous detector vans,that can tell what channel im watching,like they say on the adverts to detect my signal.

 

Any way, once the magistrates get their way and stop TV license "Evaders" being sumoned to court, the BBC won't have a leg to stand on,if they ever did have one.

[dosxuk]

I wonder how much of the money you pay for a license to watch TV goes into policing it. Paying for the detection vans and their crews, and all the other people sending out summons etc. We don't pay TV licenses, just suffer 30% commercial breaks every hour. Thank you for the BBC material we get on Public TV for free, and commercial free except when they're touting for our donations.

 

About 8% of the BBC's budget is spent on collecting and administering the Licence Fee. Capita are currently contracted to do most of this work, in the same way that SIS Live are contracted to provided outside broadcast facilities, and Red Bee are contracted to play out their programmes. Many people like to think the Capita link is part of a massive conspiracy and a way of avoiding the fee, but it's not, it's just the way that companies work.

 

Because it is on you tube, the usual Mr wonderfuls on here will say its fake.They are told by the authorities,its illegal and you MUST pay it,then they will,because they have been told to.Evidence is there,even a warrant signed,UNLWFULLY under their oath?? by a magistrate.The cops are only there to keep the peace,same as when bailiffs turn up for non payment of a loan etc,its a civil matter.

 

The video seems to be completely based on the usual FMoTL wibble about acts requiring consent, along with the normal add ons of 'only constables can read someone their rights', and the police/judges are breaking their oath if they get involved in civil cases. All of which is nonsense.

 

My favourite parts are when the police officer asks if they've ever tested any of these ideas in court, and they answer "no, but they know of many successes", it's a shame they haven't posted links to verifiable sources of these successes... That and when they start telling the TVL guy about how he's partly responsible a paedophile ring because he works for the BBC and they protected Jimmy Savile, but then go on to tell him to look on David Icke about it, without noticing the irony that David Icke also used to be a BBC employee at the time of Savile's crimes and he did nothing to expose them. If you're going to accuse TVL people of harbouring paedo's, then Icke is just as guilty.

 

Any way, once the magistrates get their way and stop TV license "Evaders" being sumoned to court, the BBC won't have a leg to stand on,if they ever did have one.

 

A number of magistrates are complaining that licence fee evasion should be a civil matter, not criminal, because it takes up too much court time to process the numbers of evaders. They're not complaining about the fee's existence, they're complaining that too many people are trying to avoid paying it. Besides, if you're going to bring that element into your arguments, doesn't it kind of blast your "it's a civil matter" arguments away, because if it was, the magistrates wouldn't be complaining?

 

 

Unless you have any hard, legally proven, evidence that licence fee evasion is a recommended course of action for anyone, please stop posting your nonsense. Several people have ended up in court getting much bigger fines than normal, criminal records and even jail terms because they have followed similar advice from FMoTLers.