TJC1 Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 Why do we actually pay tv licence i pay for my sky ..... i think tv license should be included when paying for sky/virgin telly .... You don't. They will only prosecute you if they have evidence. They only get evidence if you let them in. If you 'remove implied rights of access' they never will get evidence because they never get access to your property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsoncross Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 Came back when? The same day? If so, I dont believe you http://www.yourrights.org.uk/faqs/privacy/i-dont-have-a-television-but-i-keep-getting-letters-from-tv-licensing-do-th.html no wasnt same day was about 2/3 weeks i think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJC1 Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 Surely the opposite proof would be required, with the principle of UK law being innocent until proven guilty... The prosecution would have to establish that you were watching broadcast TV. They would. Absolutely no way they can prove anything without an 'officer' seeing a working tele or taking a statement based on what you say. They can't do it by vans or any other way, the technology doesn't exist to pinpoint exactly where that signal is coming from, despite what the nasty literature says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No User Name Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 They would. Absolutely no way they can prove anything without an 'officer' seeing a working tele or taking a statement based on what you say. They can't do it by vans or any other way, the technology doesn't exist to pinpoint exactly where that signal is coming from, despite what the nasty literature says. Indeed. Especially if you are on a shared aerial in a block of flats, good luck trying to find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HbroChris Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 Getting back to the OP's original point, as it stands, you need a TV licence even if you only ever watch/record Sky TV. That's correct. The licence is required by the Communications Act 2003 and the rate is set by Statutory Instrument. Is the second poster's opinion: Dont pay it. Despite what people think there is no law to say you need one. Do some research. Youll be amazed at what you find out. based on not needing one in certain circumstances (like not watching programming as it is broadcast), or not needing one when paying for Sky, or is it to do with this odd idea that if you don't agree that the Act applies to you then it doesn't? As Vague_Boy says, there are circumstances where you don't need a licence, but to watch live programming via antenna, Sky, (arguably) the iPlayer's live stream etc then you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No User Name Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 And in actual fact, the BBC and/or Capita have dodged numerous Freedom of Information Requests asking how the technology works and how many "detector vans" there are, therefore proving that either: a) the technology no longer exists or b) it is as much use as a chocolate teapot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dromedary Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 And in actual fact, the BBC and/or Capita have dodged numerous Freedom of Information Requests asking how the technology works and how many "detector vans" there are, therefore proving that either: a) the technology no longer exists or b) it is as much use as a chocolate teapot. The old technology did work and exist but they have no technology that can pick up on the new LCD flat TV's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 You don't. They will only prosecute you if they have evidence. They only get evidence if you let them in. If you 'remove implied rights of access' they never will get evidence because they never get access to your property. What are these "implied rights" that you think you need to remove? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HbroChris Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 What are these "implied rights" that you think you need to remove? The poster is talking about the implied right of access to your property, which (AFAIK, and a lawyer can feel free to correct me here) only covers the postman (to deliver your mail) and people asking for directions. I believe (again, I am not a lawyer) that you can exclude anyone else from accessing your property. This is why debt advice suggests telling a debt collection agency that they have no right of access to your property. However, that's not relevant to the thread. It certianly doesn't affect the Police, and may well not affect other officials who are carrying out their legislative duties (eg, council officers, social services, enforcement officers for TVL). In short, I don't think it's relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No User Name Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 The old technology did work and exist but they have no technology that can pick up on the new LCD flat TV's. Indeed, not many people have CRT tellies these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.