I think the TV Licence Questionnaire is misleading!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- Vote on my poll: what do you think?
• Post
SUPPORT ME:
buy.stripe.com...
Media/Business enquiries: contact@blackbeltbarrister.com
Support me by becoming a member or joining www.blackbeltb... for more exclusive content!
£50 Free for switching Energy suppliers:share.octopus.... Sponsored!)
Join for exclusive content at blackbeltbarri...
Become a Channel member: / @blackbeltbarrister
Support the channel: buy.stripe.com...
or one-off: buy.stripe.com...
TO CONTACT ME: Follow & Message on Instagram:
/ blackbeltbarrister
Media/Advertising requests: contact@blackbeltbarrister.com
For FORMAL ADVICE Requests ONLY:
clerks@ShenSmith.com
(other emails to this address will not receive a reply)
Disclaimer: Neither this nor any other video, may be taken as legal advice. I accept no liability whatever for any reliance placed upon it, as there is no contract between us and I am not instructed by you.
For formal advice, please contact clerks@ShenSmith.com.
💌 Become a channel member to access stripes and perks!
/ @blackbeltbarrister
LAW FAQS
• Common Law
CONSUMER LAW PLAYLIST:
• Consumer Law
TREE LAW PLAYLIST:
• Tree Law Miniseries
ROAD TRAFFIC LAW PLAYLIST:
• Road Traffic Law
FAMILY LAW PLAYLIST:
• Family Law
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein.
#blackbeltbarrister #lawyer #barrister
Description contains affiliate links; I will occasionally earn commissions from qualifying purchases or leads generated. Description may contain affiliate or sponsored links, for which we may receive commissions or payment.
I'm very convinced that TV Licensing have worded this very carefully to make sure people all think they need a licence even when they don't.
Obviously. They do it with the letters too. They list games Consoles and DVD players. How can you watch live TV on a DVD player? It's deliberately misleading.
Taking 'historical common understanding' into account, TV = tele-vision = ability to see 'remotely' through technological means. Used to be one option, then technology advanced, but so did greed. The concept doesn't live up to current technology and is beginning to resemble license to BREATHE. After all, by using Whatsapp group video call you are technically a broadcaster!
Correct
True.👍
@@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24 Some players have built in smart apps, which you would need a license for (BBC iPlayer and any other apps where you can stream live channels). That being said, it's an edge case, and in this case I think it's to convince more people they need one.
I don’t have a fishing licence, pilots licence, no Class1 driving licence, am not licensed to practice medicine nor law, I have no kind of firearms licence and no TV licence. Only one of those has pestered me to find out why I do not have one of their licences.
Exactly
Just reply by saying you don't need a shotgun licence as if you misheard and cut them off.
Because we all know you probably watch live TV.😏
@@philipslighting8240 haven’t had a tv for decades, used to watch iPlayer, on iPad, before they made it a requirement to have a licence but since then deleted the app.
@@philipslighting8240 I haven't watched TV in 18 years, but you probably know I do.
I’ve been paying for a license for years, I don’t watch live tv at all, have it because I thought I needed it to watch UA-cam. Definitely cancelling my license now. Thanks BBB 👍
This is the most egregious thing TV Licencing does, its crazy that one of the things that determines if you have to pay is not defined at all
I've not watched it 6 yrs n never will unless they change their ways, they really aren't a good company
@amandamorgan7626 You should be able to declare when you stopped watching/recording live TV and receive a refund. I did not realise my refund was a fairly substantial amount as they take 6 months up front when you first get a licence, which in effect NEVER gets used as your next payment is for the following month. I found this in and of itself to be misleading… and I never realised I was misled until no longer needing (and no longer wanting) a licence!
They’ve been sending me red letters warning about investigations and knocks on the door for probably about two years now, since I moved into my grandfathers old house. I have a good laugh at them then chuck them in the bin, knowing Capita probably charges the BBC £20 a letter. Once I even got a hand delivered letter. I know I could just tell them I don’t need a licence, but I don’t see why I should. I don’t have to write to Amazon or Netflix to tell them I don’t want their services. They’d probably think I was bloody weird if I did. I can see how these red letters could be very scary for elderly people or people with cognitive impairments - they are very threatening… some mention ‘officers’ and ‘interviews under cautionI’ etc etc. Not a single one tells the truth which is that as long as you do not invite the goons into your house there is absolutely nothing they can do to you. Should be illegal the way they intimidate people.
Their questionnaire could have been so much clearer if they had specified whether the TV was live or on demand, instead of just TV. They must be aware of the importance of this difference, so I can only think they left it out deliberately. Things like this make me more determined never to get a licence again.
Of course they want it misleading so they can tell you you need a licence.
Deliberately confusing to encourage people to buy a license they might not need.
It won't be long before the BBC get the Government to make ALL TV channels that are being Broadcast live, on-demand or recorded will need a tv license, no matter what the channel, service provider or God Himself.
They are learning be these mistakes and correcting them to their benefit and Ludacris profits and put even more misery on to people like pensioners and low income family's etc.
They either don't want to, or can't. Last time I dived into this, it was very difficult to find a clear definition of a TV Program or live. I think this is because parts of the legislation are updated via Statutory Instruments. I remember finding one definition that included text and moving graphics that according to the explantory notes was added to catch Teletext services, and some live services used by betting shops that were also broadcast services. I think this is also why there'd be a struggle to get any definitive list of services that require a licence given the number of live TV channels that stream from around the globe. I also think there is reluctance to update legislation to provide a better definition of live TV, because an obvious alternative would be to simply make it a requirement to have a licence if you watch the BBC.
When last invited to complete the "no TV licence required" questionnaire, I also spotted the ambiguities, probably deliberate, in the questions asked. So, rather than risk misinterpretation or, worse, misrepresentation of the answers I consider I provided honestly, I did not submit them. This, of course, will result in a deluge of threatening letters from TV licence which I will deposit, unread, in my recycling bin.
I think it's time the BBC was tested in court to see if it is legal to hound and effectively mislead people. I would go licence free (legally) but because I'm a vulnerable person I cannot face the knock on the door and possible threat letters. I believe it's time for the BBC to do advertising like every other channel!
Is it “badly worded “ or is it done on purpose to scare people?
Just check out some of the old menacing TV licensing adverts, its always scare tactics.
On purpose. Much like debt collection agencies lie.
That questionnaire deems to be designed to trap because of the ambiguity of the language...
This is very interesting......I'm just wondering if there would be a case for prosecuting the BBC for providing false and or misleading information for the sake of monetary gain , and in the process causing unnecessary stress/anxiety for the person or persons involved ( pensioners for example) .......just a thought?
Misrepresentation for financial gain. Harassment. Demanding money with menaces.
TV Licensing and the BBC are separate for a reason.
If you're going to test this in court then TV Licensing is who you deal with
I would love to hear of someone successfully suing the BBC.
@@davidross6574 that's because they're unaware that you don't deal with the BBC, you have to deal with TV Licencing as they are the ones who collect the money, hand it over to the government, and the government pass a portion over to the BBC.
TV Licencing contract out to Capata who are responsible for sending out letters and enforcement officers.
The BBC has the government batting for them - they are both Fully Woke, so they are singing from the same hymn sheet.
This is why its so important not to talk to anyone from TV licencing as you can so easily convict yourself quite innocently and find that TV licencing have a warrant to enter your house. The is NO obligation to fill out any form or to engage with anyone who knocks on your door, just so "No thanks" and close the door , like you would with any other door to door salesman.
Yep be polite say no thank you and shut the door. Don't sign or say anything else you are not obliged to. If they do not identify them selves jus shut the door.
Thank you for your recent email.
A TV Licence is required to watch or record any live TV (this is TV being shown on the device being used, at the same time as being shown to everyone else) from any device or BBC iplayer.
It would be easier to advise what you can watch without a licence, as to name every channel in the World would take a long time and so, the following don’t require a licence:
Netflix
UA-cam (provided it’s not a live link)
Amazon Prime (provided it’s not a live link)
Pre recorded DVD’s or videos
Catchup TV excluding BBC iplayer and so this is ITVHub, Channel four on demand
@@mpol701 UA-cam Live is a bit misleading, I'm assuming this means what? What happens if I watch the odd live stream of user content these are not main stream media organizations but jus individuals (or groups of individuals) who might make a living from UA-cam.
I had netflix and I cancelled my contract, they didn’t keep contacting me, trying to sell me their service, unlike TV licencing who are just a sales organisation set up to hound and bludgeon innocent people into paying for something they may not need.
Have you ever cancelled a Sky contract? 🤣
@@matthewcooke4011, 😂, try cancelling virgin media.
@@grahamwalker9193 oh that's easy, just cancel the DD.
A couple of years ago you could go straight to the declaration page and fill it out. This "Questionnaire" is so misleading and manipulative that it's right up there with being asked "Are you sure you're not lying?" Also these "Licence Enforcement Officers" are nothing more than door-to-door subscription salesmen and should be treated as such.
It seems to me that you shouldn't have to go out of your way to tell them you don't need one to avoid being harassed. It seems they understand that people feel harassed, which is the point of the declaration you don't need one. Given this, it is unconcionable to make you jump any hurdles to fill it out.
Of course it's misleading, its how they steal from the public with their threats and lies..
I hate the BBC to me it's full of corruption
This has been a deliberate ploy by TV Licensing (who by the way can't even spell licence correctly in their name) to intimidate people into getting a licence they don't need. I spotted their little scam straight away when I filled in the questionnaire, and answered No to all, although now they don't say No they say "Never" to confuse people into thinking that they should now have a licence if they watched live TV in the past. Why do they need six questions when two will suffice? Q1: Do you ever watch live TV on any channel? Yes/No. Q2: Do you ever watch programmes on BBC iPlayer? Yes/No. If you answer Yes to either question you need a TV licence, if you answer No to both questions you do not need a TV licence.
You're not entirely correct about the misspelling of 'Licensing'. "License" is a verb - it is the act of providing a licence. "Licence" is a noun - in the UK's case, the slip of paper/letter which allows and records/proves the allowance to watch LIVE TV and/or BBC IPlayer. It's probably the only thing they HAVE got right.
This is why I have refused to declare I don't need one
Same for a firearms licence and fishing licence
The entire way it is worded is to frighten you into getting a license. I haven't had a TV license for 6 years, haven't watched Iplayer or live TV in that period, and still get the, we will conduct and investigation, letter. Its a bullying way to make money they aren't entitled to, anyone else who did this it would could be classed as extortion.
If this was any other company trading standards would have wiped the floor with them, not including the threatening letters. But hey it's the beeb... it's fine..
Since it’s not a requirement to make a declaration best avoid the stupid misleading site
absolutely
Are they not committing "Fraud by false representation" when they tell you that you need a TV Licence when you don't need one?
Yes, but as anything run by a government entity, they don't care. Fear of prosecution will get more people buying a license out of fear regardless of whether or not they need one or not.
There will be a time, when, I'm not sure, but they will want you to buy one just for having internet. Over time their claws are reaching further and further outwards.
Weasel words. "Video On Demand" is not a "Channel" or a "TV Service".
@@mrcbeee ah so if i do "Fraud by false representation", I get locked up for 10 years. But when they do it nothing happens. I heard they are trying to charge tv license as a tax. Madness.
@@Beanie1984 You are indeed correct. It doesn't make it right, but it happens. Look at a lot of videos on this channel. There is one rule for me and another for thee, unfortunately.
@@timlong7289 A lot of people would say that video on demand is a TV service, in fact sometimes it's even called on demand TV.
Well of course it's deliberately misleading. Can't believe you asked!
BBB, you’ve finally seen the light. The questions are loaded to mean whatever BBC say they mean.
We all hail Big Brother. Big Brother is truth. Big Brother is great. All hail Big Brother.
Big Brother is infallible and all-powerful.
George Orwell - 1984
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
George Orwell - Animal Farm
Can't help thinking they've left out the "live" accidently on purpose.
It is confusing for many as many think of live as The World Cup not Coronation Street.
What needs to happen is someone needs to bring a test case to court, at the very least it could make them clarify the law!
I wonder how many people have paid for a TV licence when they didn't need one, "JUST IN CASE" 🤔
To me the cost of a tv licence is negligible compared with my monthly council tax where I am forced to pay for things I don’t use such as schools and social care. Trouble is this is rarely mentioned.
@@andrewlong6438 Did you not go to school then.
my elderly mother did ...
@@andrewlong6438 , it feels even worse when the council tax we pay around here doesn't even amount to enough to pay off the bad debts that the council themselves accrued through bad investments!!
@@andrewlong6438 Comparing the BBC to schools and social care is quite a stretch.
In over 10 years of not having TV licence I have had hundreds of letters threatening me, but only once had anyone come to my door. I opened a window and when they told me who they were I told them to leave and not to come back.
They've never been back. I know it's different for others. I think it's time to remove it as the young don't watch it and even older people dislike it. They're just trying to grab that money while they can.
No room in the modern era for a state tv broadcaster, what is this soviet russia
@kipp kipper well look at channel 4, thats owned by the state. Why can’t they use adverts
The saddest thing is that the ones that end up in court are the kind-hearted ones who don't want to offend. A neighbour brought one in for a cup of tea and ended up in court with a fine the other one told them to (really bad version of the Feck word!) off through a window and never heard from them again, it's a terrible system that betrays the gullible.
@@michaeldent1684 Easier to mug the public and the elderly to get your six-figure salary than try to sell advertising.
@@edwinlkenny6373 that's a good point. Basically they prey on the vulnerable.
I looked at the form a couple of days ago, and I'm pretty sure it also asked if you possess a TV or means of receiving TV transmissions! I felt the whole thing was just an attempt to manipulate me into purchasing an un-needed licence, so I declined to fill it in, and will simply continue to ignore their intimidating and manipulative letters. It one of their salesman calls at my door, I will simply say 'No thank you' as I would with any other cold-caller.
Its misleading, no question. The question is, is it deliberately misleading. I think the only possible analysis is that either the writer of the questionnaire is not competent and on-demand content is omitted without intent or its deliberate. Some evidence for the latter is that the site does this kind of thing repeatedly.
"Have you ever walked or driven past any property that may be watching TV on any service?"
"Yes."
"You need a TV Licence."
"Have you ever watched live TV at work"
"Yes"
"You need a TV licence"
I don't like Q1 for the same reason. In my household, I sometimes watch BBC, ITV Sky live. Like if I'm visiting family or friends, or the pub. They are presumably correctly licensed, I am not, so I don't watch any services that require a licence when I'm at home, in my household.
@@brolohalflemming7042 tbf you should know that you only need a licence if you watch Live TV services at the property you are paying the licence for (or trying to tell them you don't need it) now that is not to say that they aren't miswording this to try and confuse people because they blatantly are and trying to get people to pay for a TV Licence when they don't need one
@@4TheRecord "or in a pub?"
"You need a TV licence"
Do you know what a TV is?
No.
You need a TV license.
I watch live TV at my mother in law's as she has it on when I arrive. According to their multiple choice con questionnaire I now need a licence.
I was just about to write this very argument. Nowhere does it seem to qualify the questions that you need to be watching this at home or on a TV you own. Somebody in my household could watch TV in the pub, or at a friends.
WOW, thanks for that excuse!!!!! I will use it next weekend !! And every other.
So they have a fraudulent misrepresentation for the purpose of financial gain?
I think it is deliberately written to omit the word LIVE on those questions
We moved into a new house and the TV licence people were there in a flash, standing, smirking while we struggled to find our TV licence among the boxes and bags. They said we would still be fined if it had the wrong address on it, luckily we got the address changed before we moved. They said you couldn't go into a Post Office and get the address changed. We found the licence and they had to admit defeat. Horrible people.
You should have shut the door on them, they have no authority.
Just do not fill the form in. Why tell someone you do not need something ? Do you call the Dr and tell them you do not need anything ? do call Asda and tell them you do not need to shop there today ? If the answer is NO then why would you tell anyone you do not need anything ? Wee edit. My Polish mate got done as he said he only watched the Polish News and as it was live they did him over.
It keeps them off your back. I fill in the form every 2 years, for about a decade now. They never bother me outside of reminders when the 2 years is up. For vulnerable people, it's best to just do it to avoid any unexpected predatory visits and anxiety. In an ideal world, these bullies wouldn't be permitted to do what they do. But we live in an unfair world ruled by sociopaths, so we just have to do what we can to limit the pain and suffering they can inflict upon us.
I never reply just the same as I never reply to new boiler, solar panels, new insulation, etc
@@EgoChip me too, 4years on. I also got an email telling me I hadn’t used iPlayer for over a year and they were going to delete my account, which I have kept. 👍
@@EgoChip I am classed as venerable as I have many medical problems including 3 heart attacks and those scum can send as many letters as they wish and come to my door and get sent packing with a flea in their ear. I never go on their web site and never will. I get letters monthly and they go in the bin or the words "return to sender and ram your investigation where the sun don't shine" in big black letters on the front and posted back but I will look at the next one and see if they omitted the word Live from their usual sh1te.
@@EgoChip you are foolish for doing it. I have never paid tv license at any address I lived at in over 20 years I've never contact them or responded to them in any shape or fashion they don't know my name I get a letter about twice per year that's the correct way of dealing with them. IGNORE ALL FORMS OF COMNNUNICATON - if they come to your door don't even say hello (SAY NOTHING) and close the door that is all that is required!
I think maybe this is deliberately ambiguous in order to force people into buying a TV licence, even though they may actually not really need one.
Common sense tells us it is deliberately misleading. They are door to door sales after all. The old bait and switch con.
It needs challenging in court.
It’s not badly worded, it is deliberately and intentionally deceptive.
Image the the elderly and the vulnerable,filling in this form and then having some stranger knocking on their door scaring the hell out of them.Its insidious and wrong.☹
Why we pay a license fee anymore is beyond me when the bbc make millions from selling their shows and services around the world, all of which is funded by us in the first place. It's like we invest in the BBC, it makes profit, we get zero dividends.
And they branch out so much. For example, "BBC Gardener's World" magazine has been sold to a private company.
The way they leave a lot of wiggle room is that they do not define what TV is and yet use TV in all questions and declarations. They also do not define "channel"
I was waiting for BBB to request a volunteer to test the liability for a BBC Licence in court on a pro bono basis.
Hey BBB: Can't people who legitimately do not have nor need a license get a restraining order against (or even sue) the BBC for their harrassing letters and tactics if they persist?
Thanks for covering this. It's no doubt deliberate in my opinion as this is a sophisticated system that's taken time and money to develop. It will intimidate people into buying a licence when they don't need one according to the legislation. I.e. business as usual by the Goon Office and BBC propaganda department.
Come on people....let's all try to get a NO LICENSE REQUIRE
I cancelled the direct debit in 2021 and didn't apply for a refund for the few months remaining, as I was very dubious of this questionnaire - justly, as it turns out! (I didn't want to lie, which would appear necessary for them to concede I don't need a licence). Thanks to Chilli Jon Carne I am not intimidated by the continual menacing letters.
I can't help but wonder if the purpose of the no-license-needed declaration is to make it easier to prosecute you, i.e. you can't claim ignorance etc.
Why even bother telling them you don't need a licence, would you inform Tesco that you no longer want their food because you are now shopping at ASDA ? And all correspondence from TV licensing is designed to be misleading. I'm up to 45 threat-o-grams so far sent over the past 3yrs as well as a TVL goon telling me that I need a TV licence if I have a TV.
I can legitimately answer “no” to all of those questions. All I have is UA-cam, Blu-rays, DVDs, and some VHS. Yes, still have tapes 😊 and access to over 4000 movies. I saw someone mention not having the antenna cable plugged in to their set. The fixed cable where I live is coiled up and has a cable tie on it from before I moved in.
Curiosity now: what if one were to open iPlayer on their phone to read what shows were on, to see if it might actually be worthwhile getting the license? Not actually watching anything, just browsing. (There isn’t anything worthwhile, by the way)
I have 3 old video recorders , 2 of them other people wanted to throw out and a lot of blank tapes . Many people think seem to think its weird using VHS tapes in this day and age but I would rather wear them out first rather than throw them out 😀
I block the bbc IP from my router so nobody can accidentally visit their site (i realise you don’t need a license to visit bbc news webpage, just being cautious.), and i have uninstalled live TV apps when possible. It is easier to block, than argue that a visitor or you accidentally clicked on BBC.
Thank you for your recent email.
A TV Licence is required to watch or record any live TV (this is TV being shown on the device being used, at the same time as being shown to everyone else) from any device or BBC iplayer.
It would be easier to advise what you can watch without a licence, as to name every channel in the World would take a long time and so, the following don’t require a licence:
Netflix
UA-cam (provided it’s not a live link)
Amazon Prime (provided it’s not a live link)
Pre recorded DVD’s or videos
Catchup TV excluding BBC iplayer and so this is ITVHub, Channel four on demand
Even the headline on the first page (Think you don't need a TV licence?) is written in such a way that it implies you probably do need one, even if that's not the case!.
This is the problem that people are going to court and geting fines or going to prison when they really don't need a TV license it's like entrapment from the BBC
It's not badly worded, in fact they deliberately did it to get your fees.
If you fill the form in, with the situation where you do not watch live TV at home, but do down the pub, at a friends house, at work etc. (where that property is licenced) it will also tell you you need a licence, when you do not. - It's fraudulent in my mind.
It's a pity they are allowed to willfully cause harm and distress for years. I withdrew my support of bully's years ago and gave my TV to charity. Its about time they stopped the outrageous harassment of good folk.
As a tv licence payer who thinks you should pay for BBC radio if you consume it - I totally agree with the video. The questions are open to interpretation and likely to trip you up. You would have thought tv licensing would have run this past their lawyers before publishing but nothing surprises me anymore. It’s about time this was reformed.
BBC want this to be deliberately vague. They think they are above the law.
They likely did run it past the lawyers, but with the question "could this wording land us in trouble? Or is it vague enough for us to get away with it?"
I knew someone that never had a TV license and he never got letters, it was because the flat he lived in had never had a license before and he never gave his address when he bought any TV equipment. His flat wasn't on their database so they didn't know him or his flat existed.
We get letters intimidation letters regularly here for an address that doesn't exist. It used to exist - when I lived in the downstairs flat, that flat just had the bare number whereas the upstairs flat was (and still is) B. When I moved upstairs so someone else could have the downstairs, for some reason between that new tenant and the landlord, the downstairs flat became flat A. TV licencing are fine with the idea that there are now flats A and B - flat A has a license, for flat B I do the declaration - but for several years now they just keep these intimidation letters coming to the invalid no-letter address as well. They've been repeatedly informed and in particular been told to confirm with the council - the always say "yes, that's fine" then keep sending letters again. TBH I think it's because they profit from their premium phone line, which is why I stopped trying to call them (I personally never got through to a person - only a robot, a queue, then the line disconnected). There was one attempted visit to check for TVs in the address that doesn't exist, about a year ago I think, but no-one was in at the time (including both the flats that exist - not just the one that doesn't exist).
Thankfully you don’t have to give your details when buying a tv anymore
I moved into a new build last year, the day I moved in there was a letter from tv licensing on the floor.
As that haggered postman would say, they're wasting their time!
Just give the Black Barristers chambers address and he will be able to handle it! (just kidding BBB!) lol
I would like someone to look into (legally) the warning letters they send, they are not informative but worded to be threatening and to get people to pay for a license under threat of prosecution that they should not do but yet they get away with it when any other company would have a slap on the wrist and fined.
ITVX, All4, MY5 are the on demand channels - ITV, C4 and C5 are the LIVE channels.
I would answer NO to them all.
Agree that it is confusing and done deliberately to get more revenue for the BBC.
Almost fraudulent ?
The problem I have is it that encourages normally moral people to break the law rather than respect it. Bad laws damage the whole system.
you are not breaking the law by not paying for a tv license. so no one is being encouraged to break the law.
The sly bathplugs only want slip up and hey presto Crapita turns up..Strange that..😎
It's almost like they want you to pay for a licence...
The best way to deal with the no declaration of a TV license is NOT to fill it out. They will want your personal information which they will keep and then use to harass you even more. There is no law saying you have to reply to these bullies or answer any questions they ask you either by letter or at your door
To be honest... I tried that, it isn't worth the blood pressure change. At least it isn't as difficult to do any more. It used to say "send letter or use our Web form"... the Web form? Yeah, you had to print it out and fill it in, then post it to them. Both methods required you to pay to send the letter. Option three was to call them in a non-free phone number. At that time I just ignored them. I got nastier and nastier letters until the missus got fed up with me ranting about it and contacted to tell them we didn't have a TV.
@@phipli i get those letters, I file them straight under B. If they do come round they will only get a door in the face without me confirming any details
@Colin Sizer Just a slight warning, they are normal people doing their job, so I'd suggest politely letting them know that you don't have a TV, possibly record it. They once lost their record of my parents' licence. They turned up at the door and my dad told them to call back, he had a licence, but not to hand. My parents' got a summons which claimed that my dad had freely admitted he watched TV without a licence... the guy had jumped to assumptions and then lied about the interaction. Note through all this my parents had a licence and proof of it.
They then asked my parents to post them the only evidence of the licence after having lost their record already... my parents declined and suggested they could come and have a look. Long and short - record the interaction just in case someone likes telling fibs, but no need to be rude to them. Some people have jobs that suck.
@@phipli nope, I just don't answer any questions at all and close the door. Plus recording them means they can't lie
Every time they change the wording it is always intentionally obscured to infer you need one.. if they have no list of licence covered content and dom or identify this to the consumer at the time the surely you cannot be held responsible. The contract is not defined.
It's ridiculous of them not to provide a list, there must be such a list since they would have to be bbc services. Unless they're planning on profiting off other service providers who have nothing to do with the bbc. That would be like Asda charging Argos because their customers aren't shopping in Asda! Sadly I wouldn't put it past them to try such an underhand thing to avoid having to really work for their money, like all the other channels do.
"they're planning on profiting off other service providers who have nothing to do with the bbc. "they have done that ever since ITV started broadcasting.
This is not complicated at all - TV explicitly is NOT on demand - that is the point of it - television is by it's nature live (or "near live"). On demand is not live and does not need a licence in any circumstance (apart from IPlayer which is exlpicitly mentioned in the legislation - for exactly the reason I just gave - before that legislation was made iplayer did not require a licence). Live streamed television over internet is still considered a broadcast because it is NOT on demand - you cannot have a live on-demand service - it is either live or it is on-demand! Just because a program has been broadcast on television at some point in it's history doesn't mean you need a licence to watch it - .e.g you might have bought a DVD of the programme - this does not require a license to view! The use of all other on-demand services such as ITV Player etc does not require a licence (unless you use them to watch live TV). What is missing here is where things such as live streams on UA-cam (and premieres) fit as technically they are broadcast live - i.e. everyone watching sees them at (or near) the same time - it could easily be argued that they are a TV service covered under the legislation. (but this was almost certainly not considered when the legislation was framed).
What is the legal definition of "television" to back your statement up?
@@Sparks0001 I’m not aware of any definition in a legal sense. The word itself means remote vision, there are many definitions but “a system of broadcasting images and sound using electrical signals” covers the sense in which the word is used in this context. Key concept here is “broadcast”, this gives us the real-time nature of television. Even though the content that is broadcast might not be happening “live”, the broadcast itself is.
#BlackBeltBarrister can you get tv licence salesman and the bbc done for harassment like as if it was police officers that kept coming around knocking on the door and just sitting out side your property or if they sent out threating letters when no crime is been broken by you or anyone in the household if would be a harassment claim but tv licence does the all the above so wouldn't that be classed as harassment
It really annoys me when official websites use language so poorly for serious legal issues. I think the TV licence thing will one day get challenged and destroyed in court and open the floodgates if a big legacy media runs with the story. But we know they won't let their BBC chums who pay for the parties go to the wall
Don't do it online.
I phoned them and stated I only use Netflix and they said I didn't need a licence.
They then asked for my name, I asked why they needed my name and the guy said 'We don't need your name'.
He then said he would send a letter to my address stating that for the next 12 months no license was required.
A good video & well explained on the TV licence subject. I haven't had a licence for since early 2010. I also don't watch any *live TV on any device. BBB TV is a great watch on demand though. Thanks for the video, appreciated.
My sister buys my TV licence as I refuse to pay for such garbage and she does not want me to get into trouble . I keep getting threatening letters saying I do not have one and I KNOW that I do .... I'm going to let them take me court and try and claim damages for 'distress caused' . 😜🏴
be very careful, Over 90% of prosecutions succeed in magistrates courts.
@Robert Oh what a big , brave man you are . Do you usualy hit women ? Not only would I batter ya , she would too . 😅🤣🏴
Tell them your cancelling it since they harass anyway and demand a refund ( give it to your sister, she sounds nice).
@@robburrows2737 My sister is a STAR . 👍👍👍👍👍
BBB - With regards to the BBC licencing and my experience a few years back, I got sick of the threatening letters - "Dear householder" so I called the number on the letter - I was forced to give them my full name and address before they would accept that I had no requirement of a licence, I pointed out that I had no contract with them and didn't want a contract with them, I also pointed out that I have a right to privacy and that the data protection act says you must delete my personal information on request as I do not have an ongoing or in fact any contract with them, they point blank refused to accept that and hung up on me, what rights (legally) do thay have to hold my personal information when I have no contract with them?
In my opinion this has been written like that on purpose to confuse people in order for them to get a tv license.
I have always assumed that they have deliberately left the word "live" out of the questions so as to trap people into paying their tax. We are also now partly trapped as Smart TVs come with iPlayer pre-installed. The first thing I do is delete iPlayer, ITV, C4, BBC etc. However, the place you buy they TV from will report your address to TVL and you get a letter from them. Not "entrapment" but certainly dishonest.
Hopefully this will all be over in a few years when the licence fee is withdrawn.
It may be but if they replace it with a propaganda tax added to general or council tax everyone pays. It's like Russia, the TV is bollocks and the only thing to watch is on UA-cam or similar and they see this as anarchy.
Its misleading because it's a marketing campaign. They have cleverly used the technique of "thinking past the sale", They have you all stressed about making a declaration about not needing a license and whether it is fair or misleading, but you never stopped to ask whether you even needed to make the declaration. They got you to just accept that - that is "thinking past the sale". You do not need to make any sort of declaration or even talk to TV Licensing in any way for any reason. The ideal situation is that they don't know who you are and have to write letters to "the occupier".
@@boostar155 And removing iPlayer is getting harder on some devices. I want to know how much the BBC pays Samsung, LG etc to include iPlayer on their TVs. I don't know if that information can be got by an FoI request.
@@boostar155 I was going to say something similar. I have never been asked for my address when I’ve bought replacement tvs.
U don't need to delete anything If u don't watch the bbc iPlayer on your device or smart TV and dobt watch UA-cam or amazon prime live just regular streaming u don't need a licence, the issue is watching Iive having a device capable is not why u Nedd a license but whether u watch live
It's ment to be misleading. Its ment to confuse.
The thing that gets me is that you don't need to declare anything to these people just ignore them and they won't know who lives in your property
Its like they’ve purposefully engineered this site to make somebody who is confused Think that they would need a licence in almost every case.
If it wasn’t for like yourself who are very knowledgable about this subject I think even more people would be mis-lead!
IMHO its a BAD IDEA to tell them you don't need a license. You don't have to, there's no obligation, and they require you to give your email address, which they can then use to check whether you've logged into iPlayer. The ideal situation is they don't know who you are and are writing letters to "The Occupier".
I got letters saying they were going to visit me so I phoned them.
They asked for my name I asked why they needed it and they said 'they didn't need my name'.
I rarely watch TV and when I do I use Netflix.
They said I didn't need a licence and sent a letter to my address saying no licence required.
@@Bridget410 If you make the declaration online, it requires an email address. At least it did the last time I tried, which was some time ago now. I think the safest course is to just never say anything at all to TV licensing. You are under no obligation to talk to them or give them any information at all, and there is no up-side that I can see in doing so.
It's my understanding, based on the advice of the type of experts that BBB references that there is NO statutory obligation to respond AT ALL to this and all other questionnaires and letters they promulgate. No other statutory licenseable activity requires one to declare non-applicability. e.g. DVLA doesn't send every adult in the country a form asking if they need a licence to drive. They simply require drivers to apply for the relevant licence. It's called trust. As more and more people are deserting legacy media, it's time to stop this legalised bullying.
@@iggle6448 One could argue that the need to make a SORN declaration in lieu of road tax is one example of being required to declare non-applicability, although agreed it is not a license. Agree 100% regarding TV Licensing. Just. Don't. Talk. To. Them. Never voluntarily give any information you are not legally obligated to give.
You can use a non-existent or spare email address. I also didn't give them my name. Received a few letters addressed to Mr Fu Ck Off.
If you have DOUBT...you MIGHT PAY...Kerching! (daft to miss out on a few bob from the gullible (or inherently honest) eh. Auntie?)
“Do you, or anyone in your household watch [live](sic) TV?”
… irrespective of where or how, or from whom.
To me the failing is not only in the missing detail of “live”, but also the continual use of the word “TV”, and what specifically is the definition of a “TV programme “?
They are attempting to tax the consumption of live media content, even if delayed (e.g. paused whilst you were interrupted). What if all I watch are livestreams of SpaceX launches, ad-hoc broadcasts from UA-camrs going about their day… it’s ridiculous, outdated, unfair and preys on the vulnerable in society.
My fear is this will morph into a tax on viewing any form of media from anywhere external to your home.
The way around then may be if you have your own “home theatre PC”, accessible only to you and your household, you can then watch your own content and purchased media on the go or at home using your device of choice.
That message doesn't simply happen to be misleading. It's DESIGNED to be misleading. As far as I'm aware, if you genuinely do not need a TV licence, you need answer no questions whatever.
Why can't they use a TV Licence Logo, that has to be Displayed alongside shows that require a TVL . This could be displayed next to all listings weather on a menu screen, or printed listings ie; TV Times , newspapers . This would clear up the Confusion . Of course they will never do this because they, the BBC/Gov Don't want you to know the Truth . They want to Scare you into Buying a License
How does the BBC own or control any live broadcast from foreign countries and not commit them to be viewed in the UK without a TV licence also does any money from the BBC go to foreign TV live broadcast or they classifying this world news as some BBC News segments can be by satellite broadcast from different countries just my thoughts on foreign Broadcasting live TV.
BBB Thank you very much for all your work on this I believe the TV licence needs to change as technology has advanced to the point where this law is not relevant but of course the BBC brings in £3.8 billion in 2022 so plenty of our money to step on us individually in the law system, and the BBC sent out approximately 25m letters between 2021- 22 that's over one-third of the population of the UK.
When last invited to complete the "no TV licence required" questionnaire, I also spotted the ambiguities, probably deliberate, in the questions asked. So, rather than risk misinterpretation or, worse, misrepresentation of the answers I consider I provided honestly, I did not submit them. This, of course, will result in a deluge of threatening letters from TV licence which I will deposit, unread, in my recycling bin.
I think it is wholly unfair that they changed the law to include watching live TV on other tv channels other than BBC.
It's a BBC TV Licence, not an ITV licence or a Dave Tv Licence. It was put in place to help pay for the cost of the BBC channels. ~ITV and other channels get nothing from the BBC from the tv licence~.
Also, why is it that if we have paid for our TV license, they have now put a large chunk of the BBC library behind a paywall making you pay twice for something you have already paid for???
Key point in the question is "ever". As before I cancelled I used to do most of those. So answers would have to be yes I had, even though not going to anymore.
They love their weasel words over at the BBC!!
Very misleading. If you are savvy to their tricks and phraseologies, you know what to click, but many won't be. I did this a couple of weeks ago and knew what to click straight away but I could see they were trying to mislead me. If they differentiated "live TV broadcast" from "on demand TV programmes" it would be too clear, they want it to be muddy. They even use the same term for the physical equipment. If you're going in to this blind you have no hope.
Sorry but your face going through that survey is funny.
I think the BBC has made it as confusing as possible and made it difficult to get the site to say that you don't need a licence.
The licence fee is a joke especially when you think about all the BBC news channels in all the different countries around the world for their viewing yet paid for by the British public...
Also with how much technology has advanced and opened up streaming services to the world, waiting to a program to start is something from the stone age.
The BBC should put adverts on in the breaks in program's and stop threatening us with a criminal record for watching TV!
Your face though 🤣🤣🤣
Funny 😁
We all know why it's so confusing!!!
This is clearly a 'covert' tax.
If a tv licence covers only BBC costs and we dont watch BBC, we should not require it.
It is a particularly high - and unnecessary - penalty for the poorest.
The government clearly states no licence for ONDEMAND stuff like All4, but, they twist the wordings. Another tactic they tried, not sure if covered on this channel, about having the BBC iPLayer app installed on devices that you can't/couldn't/wouldn't be able to uninstall, this way they can then claim you need a TV licence just by the app being there. I believe these things can be "setting up to fail" which I believe legally, is frowned upon. Has the tactic gone through? I don't know.
Has anyone ever brought up that only in the UK you need a TV licence to watch live TV even from the Beeb? yet, others watching the Beeb live in other parts of the world don't? different rules for........ One Rule to bind them isn't it? therefore, like some places in other countries, outside of that country and you can't get access, but, the Beeb obviously get their money form somewhere to compensate. If someone in the US can watch Beeb channel that is streaming live with no TV licence, then why shouldn't we? ain't no answer for that.
Think about it, expats for instance, they don't live here, but, can easily get access to those sites and watch those channels live with no TV licence. If it covers UK Citizens then that would include others working abroad or living abroad, but? nope. Just saying as an example.
IF there is no list for TV Programme services, then since there is no list, the TV licence which is for TV Programme services is a scam as, there is no list and to be one you need to be on the list, right? ergo, there are no actual TV programme services because they can't define or whatever, ergo, they don't exist. At least ONE has to be on such a list for that to be enforced, but, since the list is blank, the list doesn't exist, you must always minimum ONE thing on a list for it to exist.
It's basic boolean logic and anyone who works with Lists in programming that uses List knows that IF the List (where T = type or object) the list returns a null meaning, the list doesn't techncially exist till the minimum of one object is added to that List.
Boolean logic:
true + false = false
false + true = false
false + false = false
true + true = true
List + no objects = no List or null
no List + objects = no List List wasn't created
No List + no objects = no List
List + minimum ONE object = List
Maybe people in the United Kingdom would want their "service" if they communicated in English?
I've gone through the questionaire, defaulting to "No" on each question.
I signed the declaration, and have heard nothing since; this was after i ahd recieved several letters reminding me that my property was unlicensed.
I think it helps that I'm not a TV Service customer, and that I live in the middle of rural Wales.
I filled in the first one online then cancelled my DD, never replied to them since you don't have to buy law. Not a requirement, only requirements is follow the do not watch live TV or BBC iPlayer or capable of doing so. So I don't
States "ever" but I did watch live TV at home when I did have a license, not any more. Also I can watch if at a friend's house who has a license. These are "when did you stop beating your wife" trick question.
Only one word describes their questionnaire appropriately - "Scammy". It seems to be deliberately written to force people to say they don't watch any TV . Answering no to all the questions is the only way to declare you don't need a license. No wonder people have had enough of them.
I am a holder of, and supporter of the TV Licence, but not the enforcement bullying!
Cynical me says that the form has been "doctored" to produce the favoured results!
just goes to show this is going to mislead so many people into paying the BBC Subscription. This coupled with the rediculously threatening and fear mongering letters from capita would, in any other context be illegal.
The questionnaire is DELIBERATELY misleading.
It is very misleading. I'd go as far as to call it a scam! Preying on the most vulnerable. That's what scammers do. It's absolute scumbaggery and if it's not illegal it should be.
I can't believe you're having this conversation, in this day and age. The TV licence should be abolished why aren't you calling for it?
asking for a definitive list of TV is really unrealistic. What should be possible, and necessary would be a definitive definition of what is a tv programme for the purpose of the legislation
This is a ridiculous situation. I don't have a pilots license, and I don't have to explain to the Civil Aviation Authority why I don't need one. Don't communicate with any organisation demanding you to explain a negative. It is up to them to prove if you do need a TV license.
I received this questionnaire for our factory (their term, household), where, technically someone could watch TV content on the computers, but they don't. However, there is nothing to stop employees watching live TV etc. on their own mobile phones during work breaks. The individuals may or may not have their own TV license for their 'household'. In the past it was a simple declaration that we don't require a TV license. I answered 'NO' to everything.
When it's internet based, live tv means something with a delay less than 5 minutes. So unless it's actually coming through live they have no basis for prosecution. So what you do with live performances is pause it. Then start 5 minutes in and it's not live anymore. Screw the BBC goons.
Be safer to block the sites to live TV and iplayer on the company computers. Could still get caught if stuff plug their devices in and watch.
@@tehf00n The definition of live TV is a programme that is being broadcast and that could be a repeat created 20 years ago. In addition my understanding is that putting in a 5 min or longer delay would not change the characterisation of a live broadcast.