OT : TV licensing - must I compy?

[asdfasdf]

You can find this on the tv licence website. Straight from the horse's mouth:

If you don't use any equipment to receive or record TV programmes, you do not need a licence. But we still need to hear from you. This is also the case if you use TV sets for closed circuit monitoring, as a computer monitor or watching pre-recorded videos only - for example, for training purposes.

You must let us know so that we can update our records to reflect your status. This will ensure that we do not continue to contact you unnecessarily.

We may need to confirm your situation by visiting your premises.

begin 666 white.gif K1TE&.#EA`@`"`( ``/___P```"'Y! ``````+ `````"``(```("A%$`.P`` ` end

[Grunff]

How has this been established, and by whom?

[Harvey Van Sickle]

On 22 Dec 2004, Grunff wrote

I said "I think" it's been established. ;)

My reason for thinking that, is that if it *had* been established that a simple declaration of intent satisfied the legal requirement for "non-receipt of broadcasts", one of two things would have happened: either it would be a fairly widely-known and simple way of getting around the licence fee; or (more likely) the law would have been changed to require evidence.

Like I've said elsethread, I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I don't think (there's that word again) that a simple "Take my word for it -- I never use the thing" would be sufficient to carry the day if one was prosecuted for not having a licence.

[Kalico]

Not what the guy at TV licensing told me although you are right that just 'stating' that you do not use it for broadcasts is not enough.

BUT, he did say that the TV/VCR did not have to have all the appropriate circuitry removed.

Rob

Replace 'spam' with 'org' to reply

[Kalico]

[snip]

I did not know that - thank you.

This is NOT the case. It is not like a class A drug where just possession is the offence. I could have 100 TVs in the house and I would not 'need' a TV license.

Rob

Replace 'spam' with 'org' to reply

[Harvey Van Sickle]

On 22 Dec 2004, Kalico wrote

I don't think that's what either of us were saying -- it doesn't have to be removed, but the equipment's receiving capability *does* have to be shown to be "disabled" in some way.

Further, I suspect -- although I can't say for certain -- that one would need to show that the "disablement" was permanent or virtually permanent, rather than easily re-enabled.

[Grunff]

Look at it this way. Say I want to buy a TV to use with my PS2. That's all I ever want to use it for. Why on earth should I be penalised for this, by being forced to 'prove' that this is all I want to use it for? That's like saying that when I buy a kitchen knife I have to prove that I'm not going to use it to kill anyone!

[Harvey Van Sickle]

On 22 Dec 2004, Grunff wrote

I agree entirely with you that the "PS2" situation seems unfair; but as I understand it, the sorry fact of life is that your statement of intent simply isn't enough to satisfy the legal niceties.

Whether it's fair or not, I think it's been established that one has to provide some sort of evidence that this is all you are using it for. And the accepted way of providing that evidence is to show that the equipment is incapable of being used to view broadcast programmes.

[Rob Morley]

"to receive television programme services" - if the aerial isn't hooked up, and the TV isn't tuned in to available broadcast channels, then it's not "installed" and it can't be used to receive broadcasts.

[Harvey Van Sickle]

On 22 Dec 2004, Rob Morley wrote

Yup -- that's what I said in my first post (it was snipped further down the thread, so you may not have seen the comment): that the only exemptions I've heard of have been where people have shown that it "can't be used to receive broadcasts".

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Think a reasonable question would be 'why would you have a TV in a room in your house if you *never* used it?'

I think in the end the individual magistrate will decide whether you genuinely *never* watch off air progs, and only videos. And the presence of an aerial or not doesn't mean much - an indoor type could just be unplugged and put away.

The chances of someone owning a TV and *never* watching off air are remote.

[John Rumm]

Given that our legal system still loosly clings to the ideal of "innocent until proven guilty", one might expect that it would be up to the authorities to prove that you were using it in violation of the licensing terms, not that you could if you wanted. cf. You have a car that can exceed 70 mph, therefore you are nicked for speeding.

[Kalico]

Actually, it seems that this is not a myth. Take a look at

>>> You do however need a licence, just for having

Yep, that's a myth.

Rob

Replace 'spam' with 'org' to reply

[Kalico]

snip]

But that does not say it is a criminal offence not to let them know.

Replace 'spam' with 'org' to reply

[Dave Plowman (News)]

It *can* be done. But it's cheaper just to assume every household has a TV and get them to 'prove' they haven't rather than use expensive detecting equipment.

[Andy Hall]

Fine, but if they are saying on their own web site that simply not having the tuner tuned to any channels or with no antenna is a way of demonstrating that, then they can hardly say that more needs to be done afterwards.

[Kalico]

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 17:26:11 GMT, Harvey Van Sickle wrote: [snip]

Yes, that's what the TV licensing chap said. Hence why he said he had put half a reel of PVC tape over the antenna input on his TV and VCR.

Seems that using a detector van can pick out which channel is being viewed. They can pick it up from the aerial on the roof, though I cannot see it being so accurate as to be able to discern my aerial from my neighbour's, three storeys up.

But there is virtually no chance of detecting a TV that does not have the aerial lead connected.

Rob

Replace 'spam' with 'org' to reply

[Rob Morley]

That's not true. A TV license guy came to a house I was sharing, there was a TV in plain view of the front window, but it wasn't plugged in and it wasn't within reach of the aerial cable - I told him we didn't use it and he was happy when I pointed out that it wasn't hooked up.

[Kalico]

But if you don't have to let the inspector in without a warrant .......

Replace 'spam' with 'org' to reply

[Rob Morley]

Cable counts as broadcast reception, so you're liable to pay.