Frankly I am amazed that the UK still persists with TV licensing and all the BS that comes with it. Australia abolished TV licensing in 1974 it’s about time the UK follows suit.
And it was NEVER anything like the insane cost in the UK. Australia abolished it because no one ever paid it but it was a pittance compared to UK fees.
Because TV licensing isn't a company, it's a government body, much like the DVLA or tax office. "Pay us or we'll send the boys around" is absolutely natural when it comes to government bodies, and that won't ever not be normal.
I never engage with them, but if I ever do I am definitely telling them that I would never give my money to a company that protects child preds like they do...
The vast majority of TV License letters are littered throughout with threats. They should have a class action made against them. Forward all to your local MP
MPs are now a complete waste of time Just ignore all attempts to contact including door knocks get a hd camera for your front door they hate them and make sure your door is very secure ie. very difficult to kick in up grade and double up on all frame fixings bigger screws on the hinges and steel plates where you can get away with them and multi point locks.
When you look up the word "extortion" in the dictionary it reads "the act of demanding money through menace" which is exactly what every letter from tv licensing is. Pay us, or else. No wonder it's only the elderly and the mentally enfeebled that still pay it. You should be able to sue capita for harassment and intimidation.
When I was a uni student and living on my own for the first time, I was wondering whether I should get one because of how intimidating the letters were, despite not owning a TV.
Nice try. Shop-owner to would-be thief: “you either pay for the stuff or I’ll call the police and I am standing menacingly in the doorway to the outside” Would-be thief: “You are demanding money through menace, that is extortion!!” I do not think this would work in court for the would-be thief!
I had a TV licensing lady turn up at my door. I told her I don't have a TV and if you look at my house you will see there is no TV Ariel. She was polite and not threatening and ended the visit by saying "I don't blame you there is nothing worth watching anyway"
These day less & less U.K. TV is supplied through areal or dish. Many smart TVs won’t fully work without an internet connection. A U.K. friend says that. According the the sales people in a nearby shopping centre Sky Glass is totally internet. It appears that U.K. ISPs have to keep a log of their customers usage for five years. So anyone in the U.K. using an internet connection for TV could one day find they are in trouble.
TV Aerial? Surprised that worked considering it's not 2005 anymore and most people watch via online streaming services. They say it's needed to watch "any live broadcast".
@@KrasszTV No other way with Sky Glass. Plus as you say live TV is becoming even more dependent on broadband. It may or may not be important but. Our ISPs are required by law. ( Something to do with anti terror laws. ) to keep our usage logs for five years. How long before the TV licence people get access to that data.
Removing 'their' implied right of access just encourages them. "Say nothing, sign nothing, SHUT the DOOR". The END! There is NO obligation legal or otherwise to accept the BBC's 'offer' for their Tv-licence service!! SHUT the DOOR--they are just cold-calling and harrasing for business
@@taras6806 Yes there does. The legislation supports the contract, just as the Sales of Goods Act (or whatever its current equivalent is) supports the contracting between two parties in a sales transaction. It does not and cannot require you to contract with a private company and does not impose any obligation outside of what is present in law. If you don't need a license by law then you don't need it. On that basis you are under ZERO obligation. You do NOT need to have ANY contact with the BBC, Capita or any other private company. That only changes when a person's circumstances meet the legal requirement to do so. Otherwise, no.
Part of me thinks that even writing the letter to them in the first place was ill advised. Every time you engage with them in any way, it raises the risk of further harassment.
Engaging with them at all let's them know the property is occupied and if you provide them with your name when you contact them they know who to harrass.
Yes, the rule with this is no contact at all. It is the same with Jury Service letters that you ignore, Census letters that you ignore and Register of Electors letters that you ignore. You ain't gonna get prosecuted if you have no contact at all with them.
I just moved into my flat literally that minute, a TV licence waller showed me a reading on his electronic metre, which he claimed proved that I was using a TV without a license. He was lying, as my TV was still in the van. What does that tell you? Answers on a postcard... lol.
their a gov agency that pretends to be private “Oh we no longer gov funded we have private 8nvestors aswell now” Look uo their private investors its abunch of giverment offices 8ncluding canadas nati9nal afairs , america, the eu bunch gov foraign offices fund its private funding while it usses gov to strong arm people
I’ve had so many threatening letters, it’s damn right harassment. I don’t own a tv or watch their peado programs. It’s criminal what they are getting away with.
Fun little side story: My Dad used to drive the TV Detector vans every now and then as part of his job at the Royal Mail, they are a real thing, and would take me along. Literally, it couldn't detect anything, he didn't stop to do any detecting, his job was literally drive around and be seen - it had a big TV Licensing sign on the side and was completely branded. All that was in this standard size van was a unit in the back that had a chair in front of it which you could use to watch TV. So when I was out with my dad, I would sit in the back and watch TV as he drove around aimlessly for several hours.
@@dizzy530 Think this may have something to do with the Communications Act, certainly in the older days, like when BT was previously known as Post Office Telephones, and thus was part of the remit of Royal Mail.
Ignore all TV licensing letters! They have no legal standing, ignore any "agents" who may knock on your door! If you don't open the door to speak to them, they can't do anything!
Some argue that is it better to open the door ask who they, then simply shut the door, rather than ignore them. This is because they may think no one is in and may return again, but slamming the door in their faces will have them avoiding your property.
Don't ignore it as they can & will knock your door down to force access which is still highly unlawfull send the envelope back un opened but right on it Legal fiction, no contract, no consent. No one can use your name but you the name they put on the letter in black all cap's stands for a dead entity therefore legal fiction.
Several years ago after I’d just returned from spending 2 years working abroad, I had a visit from a TV Licensing ‘representative’. I didn’t open the door as I was in the shower so he proceeded to clamp my car! It was only when a neighbour text me to ask if I was home and did I realise my car was in the process of being clamped that I went outside to challenge it. He demanded I pay the license fee and a £300 fine immediately or my car would be towed. Absolutely no authority or justification in what he was demanding (with menace, in my opinion). I didn’t own a TV as no reason to whilst working abroad but he insisted I pay or he’d hold my car hostage. That was pure extortion but paid to get my car released. I later (much later) got my money back but only as a gesture of their goodwill and was told it was my fault this had happened as I didn’t tell them I didn’t own a TV and was out of the country. I was aware I needed to report my whereabouts to TV Licensing so my bad!!! Beyond belief!
Whilst I have ignored this scam for the last 16 years and realise they have as much power as someone selling dusters at your doorstep, it still angers me that a lot of my fellow humans who may be more vulnerable are still being harassed. It’s like DVLA giving your grief over a SORN vehicle or as one of your commenters previously mentioned an ex continuously trying to restart a relationship.
My mum was scared into paying when the tyrants removed the free license for over 75s. I told her what would happen. But she capitulated thinking she'd go to jail. She was 84 at the time.
If I am not mistaken it was only in the past decade where the law was changed regarding TV license. Originally it was a criminal offence to not pay TV license but now if you don't pay it, it is only a potential fine.
@@navi2710 It is still technically a criminal offence but it is classified as non-disclosable. In other words it won't necessarily show up in a DBS check but may show up for certain job application checks.
@navi2710 then , they had it a criminal offence to own a tuner capable of receiving tv signal , as the times moved along & there were many things to use a tv for like consoles, the law changed to enable owning a tv screen legally. The power shifted for them to prove your watching live tv , rather than just having a signal capable equipment
I get these letters once a week and recently they sent me a lovely surprise - they’d started using red envelopes 😂😂😂 I thought that was a cute touch. Anyway, I wish them the best with their “investigation” that’s been going on for 10 years. Still haven’t figured out my name.
I remember in the early 00’s a tv licensing inspector visited my older brother’s home, didn’t know his rights and let him in, he had tv’s but used them for playing computer games and watching dvds non of them were hooked up to the main aerial to receive tv but there was a really old tv in a spare room that had its own built in aerial, the inspector then went on to tune the tv and because he eventually got a channel he fined him. Never let them in they are notorious for dirty tricks and tangling your words into a self confession
100% TV detector vans have always been guilt trips only and it is NOT possible to detect your TV and the channel you are watching. The only way would be to use listening devices to breach your privacy to hear the audio from your TV. I feel the Licensing company are the lowest of the low who make their money from threatening old people.
Well...a basic camera (or a more specialised photosensor) could monitor light levels coming from your windows for a minute, and see if the fluctuations correlate with the brightness of current live broadcasts. Unless you have some serious blackout curtains this isn't technologically very challenging. I suspect this would be much less legally problematic than eavesdropping on your audio, but idk - where's a lawyer when you need one?
@@S.Trades I smell a licensing "enforcer", get a decent job my friend. Those who watch the BBC should pay, the rest of us, who don't enjoy state sponsored brainwashing, should not have to deal with the waste of trees that is licensing junk threat mail.
The RF receivers on old analogue TV's didn't just receive signals. There was an inherent feedback on them that could easily be detected. I knew a guy who operated one and he even identified a fault in my TV's circuitry from said van.
It was possible to receive the feedback from a tuned circuit in the past, in pre-digital TV days, but the tech (its called RAFTER, its in the SpyCatcher book) was fan more useful keeping a eye on various embassies in London, you could sit outside and figure out what frequencies they were listening to and when
I used to know a chap who genuinely didn't own a TV. He was often pestered by people about him having no license. He always invited them in and had great pleasure watching them looking for a non existant TV set.
Imagine that being your job - literally a government Brown Shirt. That's one thing I think the West has lost in it's society these days (to it's detriment): Shame.
One might probably own a smart phone? I personally look to minimise having strangers looking around my home for security reasons. These bell ends feel entitled to try to overrule that red line of mine against my will. So they can do one.
The BBC has had "TV detecting" radar systems the military could only dream of since the 50s. If only they'd share this ground-breaking technology, we could be living in the year 3000 already!
Regarding that there is an amusing side story: When the Allies were more and more successful using plane-based radar to find U-boats, Germany of course tried to counter the threat, amongst others by having radar detectors. One shot down aviator told the Germans “naah, we do not use radar, we now just home in on the emissions of the radar detector.” Pulling a massive leg there, of course. But then there was the fact that the warners did not warn a lot of the time. They had to check … and found to their horror that the radar warner *did* in fact emit a fairly strong signal. So they hastily redesigned all the radar detection equipment to do that much less or not at all. Of course the reasons the radar detectors did not work properly any more was that the Allies started using much higher frequencies which the radar detector could not detect. But thanks to that misdirection work was concentrated on this problem and likely delayed the detection of the centimetric radar used by the sub hunter planes. So there is a possible way to detect a receiver that has an amplifier if someone did not take care with the design.
I am every time surprised about the TV licence system in the UK, as an outsider, this sounds and looks like a scam. We're bullies make money by legal BS. Consumer groups need to take them to the court to legally stop this practice.
Then who pays of the tv programmes and films and everything else? It's like you going into a shop and filling your pockets and then resenting the fact that you must pay!!!!!
im a brit who lived in Germany for a few years.. it blew my mind that they pay for a TV in Germany also.. but they have TV adverts + a license. in the UK the BBC dont run ad's either way its all BS
@@peterevenhuis2663 Personally I'd rather pay a tv license fee and have shows that aren't stuffed full of sponsored segments and adverts every 10 minutes. Most of it isn't that good, but as a British person I do have a fondness for the BBC and I'm quite happy to help support it.
I keep getting these videos in my feed, I myself haven't paid the license in years. Don't watch live TV at all, and am reminded why when I visit my parents, there's nothing on there for me. My advice; bin the letters without opening, Legal Occupier is not your name, put it out of your head and save yourself some stress. If they turn up at the door don't answer it. Breathe easy.
yeah unfortunately some people have or have family members living with them that have anxiety and/or mental health issues that can be triggered by having strangers randomly knocking at the door or getting passive agressive threatening letters in the post every few weeks, so I always say ignore it if you can deal with that type of BS, revoke their right of access or if you genuinely don't watch live TV and you don't care if some tosser wastes his time and the BBC's money to come check, just inform them of it, and if they say they want to come check, arrange to have a friend stay with you for the visit if you have anxiety or anything like that and just be careful of them trying to trip you up asking questions like "so you only watch on services like UA-cam, Netflix and BBC iplayer" a genuine question I was asked when I let them come verify that I didn't need one, I'm sure if I would've just nodded along and said yeah missing the tacked on "bbc iplayer" at the end of the question they would've used that to try demand I pay for a tv license, so just be careful what you say if you do let them in, I would probably just say I don't need one and revoke their access if I was faced with the same BS letters today, but at the time I figured, fine just let them check I know I didn't need one so it made no difference to me at the time, haven't received a single letter from them in over 8 years, so I assume they got the message.
@@mda5003 I occasionally get their letters, addressed to 'Mr P Occupier' which always gives me a smile; I got them to remove all personally identifiable data from their records years back now.
I went to my mums last night and the drivel that was on normal tv. I love streaming and could not stand having to put the tv on at a certain time to watch something and wait a week to see another in the series - so archaic and bizarre to me!
It's such a con - you don't have to write to DVLA and tell them that you still don't need a HGV licence, and keep sending every 2 years, so what gives Crapita the right to harrass like this? Do not engage. Do not answer. The goon that shows up on your doorstep is a salesman on commission, nothing more.
Actually, I was threatened with a fine from the DVLA, if I didn't renew my Provisional Driving Licence. I only got in in case I took driving lessons (and it's useful as ID), but I have never used it for driving purposes, but was still forced to renew it.
@@AzguardMike Waste of time as postage includes returning to sender if not delivered. Using a different envelope without postage would probably end up getting destroyed as I doubt they would pay to receive them.
The best way to deal with TV licensing is by NO CONTACT. Just do absolutely nothing and simply ignore all their correspondence and bin all their threatening letters. Best not to write to them removing their implied rights of access as they can use this to get a search warrant, it will simply flag you up in their system as someone whom they regard as " suspicious".
KInd of hard to not open the door when somebody knocks. They only knocked on my door once. That was enough for me to get turned off of TV forever. Making threats and attempting to invite yourself into my house for a "inspection" resulted in a big fuck you and get the fuck out of the foyer. Not watched TV since then. BBC is state sponsored propaganda anyway. TV is mind numbiung shit. Dont miss it. I watch movies, i play games, i surf the net but i dont wantch mindless made for TV crap that robs you of your time and will to think for yourself.
I'm under no obligation to communicate with TV licensing. I exercise that right every time a red letter drops through my letterbox by putting it straight into the recycling.
The funny thing about that. That's how they actually get warrants. "This person has refused all communications with us. So we have reason to suspect that they may be watching live broadcasts etc." and they DO get some of those warrants. That's how you end up with them in your home. Telling them to fuck off by mail is much easier than telling them to fuck off in person.
The TV licence letters are threatening only if you let them be threatening. I receive one every 15 days on average and because it's very easily recognisable, I don't even open it. It goes straight in the bin. I've been doing that for the last 4 years.
I've had no Sky package and no aerial is plugged into my TV. My TV is plugged into my PC and my Nintendo Switch. I've not watched any 'live' TV show since 2010. I pay for Shudder, Netflix, and Curiosity. Those are pre-pay services that don't require a TV license, so Capita and the BBC can feck off!
Our perpetual unelected, unaccountable, multi £$ trillionaire, global land pariah royal head of state, is an ominous behemoth clue that something went Pete Tong in Britain a looooonng time ago.
Just a short note on how this problem is handled in Denmark. 1: Electronic “track cars”, or “Pejlevogn”, as they were called here, were used until 1997. The national Danish broadcast (DR - Denmarks Radio) later revealed that they didn’t quite work. DR made it look like they were working, but what they did were looking at the light coming from someone’s windows, to guess if a TV was turned on, at an address registered not to pay a TV license. The Pejlevogn was only the excuse to get access to people’s homes. 2: The TV license was changed January 1st 2022. In previous years, you had to pay, if you owned any device capable of receiving live stream TV. In 2020 the Danish government realized that almost everybody had a smartphone, and decided to abolish the TV license. So now everyone in DK pays for TV via general tax. 3: In DK less than 50% of viewers watch flow TV today. So, moving the TV license to the tax bill is a smart move. When the viewers hits 0% DR can be closed, but I have a sneaking feeling that the tax will not be eased.
We have a situation in the UK where corporate entities who choose not to comply with their legal responsibilities are unchallenged by the legal system. Those who suffer consequences from this abuse of law are generally unable to respond because of prohibitive costs or an inability to understand their own rights.
Dear Black Belt Barrister You mention warrants on a few of your videos, especially those pertaining to TV Licensing. Will you kindly produce a video on how to recognise a valid warrant, which are the essential elements of a warrant and what rights of retention and access to the warrant does the servee have? Thank you.
Just curious, What evidence do TV licence have to supply to the court to obtain such a search warrant. If the evidence they provided to obtain the warrant was found to be false, Do the public have any recourse to to claim harassment or something?
The only evidence they have is what’s supplied to them by the house holder if they talk to them. If you keep receiving letters addressed to the occupier or the manager this means they haven’t linked a name to the address. So good luck getting a warrant. Give them nothing.
@@toshiroyamada2443this is exactly what I heard several years ago, and although this letter in the video doesn’t outright say it I suspect that obtaining a warrant could be used within other means of detection
They would need evidence that showed reasonable suspiscion you were breaking the law, enough that a Judge would grant that. This is where they have a huge problem. Saying you "have aTV, or simlar equipment *capable* of accessing live TV" is not evidence of a crime. What isn't nowadays? It would be like saying they want a warrant to search your home for knives in case you stabbed someone, or to look n your garage to see if you have acar because you could potentially speed. The only evidence they could realisticaly use is something like a recording of you watching live TV when you shouldn't be - like posting a public video of you watching a live sporting event that somehow shows your address clearly. Even them, it probably wouldn't work because if the evidence isn't enough to convict, searching your home wouldn't add anything because, again, it isn't an ofence to just own a TV. Detector vans and "other means" are utter nonsense. They are technologically incapable of doing what they tell you they are. When they were old EM waves going to antennas then you could use equipment to tell you an area was getting those signals - not watching TV, just that the signals were reacting with something. Nowadays they can't tell anything. They could *possibly* go to your ISP and ask if you were watching iPlayer I guess, but in the same theme they would ned a warrant to do that, and back to the start of this post... Easiest solution - Don't talk to them. Don't sign anything. Don't watch BBC anyway as it's utter rubbish now 😉
Like most propaganda from State entities, the 'detector Van' is indeed a con. In the old days, when we only had 3 or 4 channels, all that the van staff could do was watch the tv light flickering in your house, and tune their in-van telly to see if they could match the shifting light pattern. That was it, that was - and still is - the pinnacle of their 'detection equipment'.
I had a standard letter from TV license saying that 1 in 7 of the addresses they visit need a tv licence and that they might want to come check to make sure i dont need one. I wrote back enclosing a copy of their letter and their statistics.. and informed them that by their own numbers that meant 6 out of those 7 didnt need one.. told them i dont even own a tv... and that as i saw it they had as much right to come check 'just incase' i need a tv licence (odds 1 in 7), as the police do to 'come check' just incase a domestic abuse incident was happening (odds 1 in 4). i politely informed them that i had no business with them and that i would inform them should i move or my situation change.. and that since i had no business with them i would see any further contact by them as harassment. They politely wrote back and said they wouldnt contact me again... and they havent... and that was 7 years ago.
I was going to post a similar comment. I don't require a licence; I think it's an imposition to have a TV licensing employee turn up unexpectedly and request access to my home, and so I have politely informed TV Licensing of my situation (I know I don't have to) and have withdrawn their implied right of access. They ask me to verify my status every two years and otherwise I am not troubled. The root cause of all the trouble here is the antiquated and oppressive legislation that is the TV Licence. The people to attack are those in Parliament who won't get rid of the TV Licence, not TV Licensing who are simply paid to do the job of enforcing it.
Lmao, "it's ok that i have to sign a declaration every 2 years saying i don't have a thing", an MOT is something you need for a CAR, you don't get mail if you don't have a car asking you to confirm that you don't have a car! Ignore the shit and tell them to go pound sand when they call, people who just accept that "this is just part of life" are exactly whats wrong with society today giving these parasites legitimacy.
@@digidol52 I disagree, I do think it's a problem. For example, I provide certain services to my customers. Perhaps you would like to make use of those services? Tell you what, I'll send you letters every two years just to check that you don't need them. If you don't reply then I'll threaten to visit you at your home and ask if I can come inside to check that you don't need my services. That would be ridiculous and unacceptable, no? In the same way, Capita/BBC should just sod the hell off. If we need a license, we'll buy one. If not then there's not need to "just check". You are NOT required to confirm every two years. That is THEIR policy, NOT ours. They are a private company with whom you have zero contract and towards whom you have zero obligations. Don't do a single thing to play their game or make it easy for them. They are scum and they wouldn't think twice to shaft you if the opportunity arose
You're lucky. My experience was somewhat different to yours. I was paying by direct debit when I cancelled my licence around 4 years ago, I went online onto their website and filled in their 'refund & cancellation' request (regrettably I didn't apply for the refund which is what may have caused the following issues). I was advised NOT to cancel my DD as they would do it on their end yet one month later the DD fee was removed from my bank account on the normal date. At this point I thought sod it and cancelled the DD myself. Six months later (because DD payments keep you six months in advance) I received a letter from TV Licencing stating that THEY had cancelled my licence because I had cancelled the payments. In my opinion informing them was a complete waste of time and I have been receiving at least one letter per month from them since that initial letter. I won't be contacting them again, I have fallen into the realm of 'The Legal Occupier' and I'm quite happy to stay there. They don't need your name as it is the property that is covered by a licence, not the individual. They only reason they could want your name is because they can't take an address to court.
@@toshiroyamada2443on what planet was that even mentioned? Nothing alluding to the issue was brought up. Try sticking to matters in the real world. That's a typical simplistic rubbish I see from dumb gamers that think they know everything, yet have no clue.
Quite right! Its junk mail and I treat it the same as Pizza companies pamphlets or garden centre stuff, I just bung it in the bin if its addressed legal occupier or some such. I only ever open letters addressed to me by name.
I have ranted many times on social media about the heavy handed and overtly threatening notices that TV licensing send through your letterbox. I feel mostly for the elderly or clinically anxious who may cough up simply because the big red letters and cough cough wink wink legalese frightens them.
I have made videos about the letters, usually fun and silly because we don't watch TV live or even on legal catchup services. We simply do not watch it. One day, a wee while ago I received a letter, I had just lost my mother and it really pissed me off. I made a video about it. They had really caused me grief on top of the grief I was already suffering, so yes, to me these letters are harmful, they caused me stress, anger, rage, disgust when I am doing nothing wrong. I don't hate anyone but I am beginning to HATE these letters and the so called Scott Robson from Guildford that constantly sends them to me. They are pissing me off.
I watched a video on UA-cam some years ago, perhaps 2 where people were being told not to "Remove the right of Access" relating to Capita and the BBC because they will then use that to come and seek you out. An Alarm Bell for them and they will not let it go. It makes things worse in the long run. This appears to back that up. Just mentioning it because some people had worse issues after removing the implied right of access. It's all on UA-cam.
unfortunately once there's a tax established they never abolish it, it will more than likely be one of the options they're looking into of turning the licence into a levy added onto council tax so there's no escaping it.... everyone knows the government hasn't got the publics back and would tax every single penny from us if they could
@@DaveBeaven-tx2tpthe tax will never work. Do they do it on houses or when you get paid? How many are people are paying in the house to how many tvs. If they try I'm betting people will riot and storm the bbc.
6 years non payer here and never had a visit. They may well have snooped around while I've been out however. The way to deal with TV Licencing is to cancel any payment and ghost them. Do not, I repeat, do not send a letter like the person in this video has done. The best advantage you have of never hearing from them is if they don't know who you are, if you've just moved to a new property keep it that way, just bin all the letters and get on with your life. If you're unlucky enough to be visited, if you think it's one of their goons, don't open the door. If you're caught off guard, let them speak first then close the door. The letters by the way are in no way personal, they are like spam email, they send them out to catch you out. They start off warning you that the property isn't covered by a TV Licence and how much it costs to buy one etc. Then they move on to warning you that you could face fines etc. Then move on to sending red envelopes, threatening you that you need to have a TV Licence under UK law etc. Then they move on to threatening you with Enforcement Officers visiting and start giving you dates you have to purchase a TV Licence by etc. The hilarious thing is, once you are sent their most threatening letter and they've heard absolutely nothing. You're reset back to the beginning and they send you the least threatening letter again. I've seen the process happen many times.
I live in NZ and every station has adverts. Lots of them. The main news bulletin at 6 is an hour long - you would think a country like NZ would not need that long when in the UK it's 25 minutes. But there are 5 advert breaks of 4 minutes each - of utterly shit adverts - which eats away at 20 minutes.
I've been at my house for 14 years. I've never had a TV licence and I have never responded to any of their letters. I have never had a visit. In my opinion it's easier to ignore any communications and that is including any visits.
I have nothing to add except to say thank Mr Black belt barrister all your work is always appreciated and thank you for ALL your videos, please keep up the good work, blessings to you and loved ones.
Back in the 90's I had a VHS recorder that recorded in colour. I recorded off a black and white TV, therefore assumed I needed only a black and white license. An inspector visited and informed me I needed a colour license as the VHS recorder was able to record in colour. I took this to be a con trick, asked him to leave and removed the implied right of access. I haven't had a TV or watched live now for 10 years, I regularly get a letter stating they have 'Opened an Investigation', but since I'm on the Devon and Cornwall border and the letter comes from Surrey, plus in 10 years of investigation they still haven't worked out my name, I can't say I'm overly worried about it.
Way back then I bought a VHS recorder and we only had a black and white TV set but the recorder recorded directly from the aerial so the recording was in colour. Yes, it only played back in black and white but as the recording would have been in colour a colour TV licence would have been required.
Technically he was correct as the VHS recorder can record direct from the incoming signal even if you don't have a TV plugged in. You could take the tape and play the recorded program on a colour TV somewhere else.
Change your name on your door to Walji Parjbottam Rangoon. I did, and it works. ( Walji speaks NO english unfortunately) p.s. A pet shop supplied laminate photo of a now banned XL BULLY pooch with ," I LIVE HERE, MAKE MY DAY," stuck in your front door or front window, WILL also make these ex traffic wardens, jobsworths, and royalist lickspittles walk on by too. Strength in numbers.
I remember the old TV commercials here in the UK saying that they had equipment that could detect TVs receiving live broadcasts back in the 90’s and they “will find you, and take appropriate action”…. What a time to be alive in the age of VPN software….😂
These people have done nothing but harass me since 2020 when I moved in with my son ( healthcare reasons ) I will now draft a letter doing the same thing. Thank you, this has been a big help
Thanks for this B.B.B. We don't have a tv licence. We don't watch, or record, any live programmes, etc. However, it would appear that we too could well be intimidated and harassed by the Stasi licensing brigade at any time. It's good to know our legal rights!
Just threatened these people with charges relating too any contact from them & especially them visiting your home. Let's say £100 pound fine for every letter you receive after right of way is removed & £1000 fine for any visit.
@@DaviniaHillthe Stasi is a good comparison, hyperbolic obviously. I think there were plenty of people in East Germany who found the Stasi very intimidating.
I don't even open the letters anymore, I still save them and just today was showing them all to the family next door, straight away when they seen and held the bundle they agreed it was PURE Intimidation.
Electronics/radio engineer here. I can confirm that there is no way with modern TVs to detect if the TV is on, let alone whether it is being used to view in real time. In the old days of analogue TV it was theoretically possible to pick up the line timebase and/or local oscillator, which might make it possible to determine usage. Neither of these exist in modern TVs.
Is that from when TVs were CRT based? I’m pretty sure as you mention modern TVs being TFT or LCD or whatever couldn’t be scanned to see what channel they are on?
@@noelht1 Yes. CRT-based TVs had a line timebase oscillator which, especially in valve models could radiate quite a hefty signal. In theory it would be possible to pick this up. Back then the only use for a TV was to receive off-air transmissions, which would need a licence so the presence of a line timebase would be a bit of a giveaway. LCD/LED TVs don't have a line timebase oscillator. The other possibility could be to pick up the local oscillator which is part of the superhet receiver design. Again in the old days these were rather poorly screened and could re-radiate via the antenna. Modern TVs might, depending on the design, still have a local oscillator but they are far less powerful and much better screened. I think that it's highly unlikely that these techniques ever really worked and they certainly do not now.
Thier disgusting methods of scaring old and infirm people into buying a license needs to be addressed. Put yiuself in the shoes of an old lady getting a letter threatening a visit from enforcement officers. They just pay out of fear. This happened to.my relatives.
I informed TV Licensing that I had no TV and so had no need for a licence. They wrote back saying they would contact me again after a period of 18 months - though their monthly threatening letters continued. I had 7 years of threatening letters at my last address and 4 years at my current address. Surely this must class as harassment!
I did the same do not watch live tv or down load any thing. Letters saying they are coming around on such a date, and never come on that date ! Saying Im now under investigation. This has been going on for over 2 years now sometimes this in a weekly basis .I just ignore it all. But do licence payers realise this is where their money is being spent. Cause its certainly not the content they put out . Or biased reporting and over paying workers .They continually use their bullying tactics, and could really upset vulnerable, elderly, by continual threats.
BBC reporting is not biased, it is outright lies! Like in Iraq, when they reported the accidental bombing (by the Americans) of a village, which killed 45 civilians. So, why did the villagers dig 150 graves plus a large one for all the identified body parts?! In future, I shall send all the letters back 'no TV at this address'!@@lindakirk3739
Many years ago I had a TV sales and repair business. Back then there was a legal requirement for us to notify TV Licensing of the name and address of anyone who bought a TV from us. This was before the days of computers and video players, so the only use of a TV was to watch live TV programs. I don't know when this requirement ended.
25th June 2013. The Wireless Telegraphy Act 1967 was repealed by the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (c. 24), Sch. 21 para. 1. "The Wireless Telegraphy Act 1967 (the remaining provisions of which make provision for, and in connection with, the recording and notification of the sale or hire of televisions etc) is repealed."
You can have a DVD recorder in much the same way as you can have a VHS recorder. These contain a digital tuner that records directly to DVD, or to a hard drive with the option to copy to DVD later. They have fallen in popularity, as have DVDs generally.
Yep. I have one of these. They were briefly a thing in the mid-2000s, when cheap writeable DVD drives were available, but large hard disks weren't quite cheap enough yet to store lots of content without regularly deleting it. It has an analogue tuner and a DVD-RAM drive, and was capable of recording live analogue TV to writeable DVDs. If used for that, it would indeed have required licencing. Obviously as it is analogue only and there is no analogue signal any more, that's irrelevant now...
A DVD Player cannot view TV directly, however a DVD RECORDER usually has a TV Tuner in it. I certainly have never seen one without a Tuner, in fact some have dual tuners so you can record multiple channels at the same time! There is basically no other (legal) use for a DVD RECORDER if it isn't used for TV Timeshifting. EDIT: I mean "legal" in reference to the recording of copyrighted material using the TV Tuner. Of course you can freely use your DVD recorder for your own personal use, like recording CCTV, home movies, etc.
@@nicotoscani1707 - not sure what you mean by that, or if you are agreeing with what I already wrote or not. I haven't seen a "set top box" for probably 20-25 years, since they were only necessary when digital TV first started, and old TVs only had analogue tuners that couln't decode the new HD broadcasts. Even slightly modern TVs have digital tuners in them, so a set top box is pointless. Do you think that a DVD Recorder is the same as a Pace/Sky cable/satellite box? (Not being argumentative, just trying to work out the reason for your comment)
@@nicotoscani1707 - precisely! 🙄 However, you addressed your comment directly to me, and I cannot work out what you are trying to ask or refute or agree or what. In other words, you are perfectly welcome to comment, however there is no need to be facetious or sarcastic when asked for clarification about what you meant.
Last year I actually moved in to a new flat that had recently been built where I was literally its first occupier. The estate agent mentioned to me that there was some kind of law that required new builds to be left vacant for certain period to prove they're structurally sound so I assume it existed as a listed address for a while when it was unoccupied. When I check the mailbox after getting the keys I found nearly a years worth of letters from TV licencing highlighting the fact that the flat didn't have a licence which were clearly getting more passive aggressive overtime, starting from a polite reminder the way up to a notice of inspection and warrant having been issued (for an empty flat), then going back to a polite reminder the next month all over again. I very quickly registered the property as not requiring a license just to be on the safe side and haven't heard from them at all.
The best thing to do, if you do not have a TV licence is to never send them a letter and ignore every single letter they send you. If you have one then this video seems very helpful in those circumstances 👍🏻
For the item noting dvd/vhs recorder back in the late 90s and early 2000s there were a number of DVD recorders capable of recording television on a schedule, however most if not all of these died out after we went fully digital as most had only an analogue tuner in them (we had one back in the day)
I withdrew the Implied Right of Access to my property exactly 10 years ago. I have never heard from TV Licencing since. No letters, no visits. My letter stated that I would take legal action against TV Licencing if they trespassed or posted letters through my letterbox. Those instructions appear to have done the trick.
@H4WK6969 Congratulations. Imagine a World where every household who's stopped watching BBC content, decided to also Withdraw the implied right of access? No Goons, No old ladies being fined, BBC being forced into bankruptcy. "Heaven".
I remember during the 60's one of their so called inspectors called at the front door with the so called detector van outside. My father knew he was was lying about having detected a television transmission because at that time the old one had stopped working some time ago and it was taken to the tip, and my father couldn't afford to replace it (he was raising me on his own. When he mentioned it to a few other people, one neighbour said he used to do the job and the van was empty. It was a fraud. When my father was able to afford another tv he didn't bother with a licence. He never bought one again. Do you think I do? All the money we now know BBC nonces and ponces are paid? I would as soon see them locked up for whole life, along with their counterparts in the world of supposed entertainment. Only a few documentaries have been worth watching but now so many of those also are going woke, this one may as well go to the tip. I enjoy reading, listening to music, videos by independent channel owners such as this.
My son's just had a letter about no TV licence sent to the occupier telling him he is under investigation. He rang in a bit of a panic and he's not the only one that's had one. He's in student dorms at university and doesn't have a TV. I told him not to worry about it and put it in the bin. They are taking the micky.
Should have put on the letter than if you receive any letter from tv licensing or third party you will charge them £100 admin fee and if anybody knocks your door from tv licensing or third party on behalf of tv licensing you will charge them £1000 interaction fee.
Absolutely agree with you on the point on which you take issue. No requirement to respond to communication from them under such circumstances, I wonder, has anybody taken an injunction out against these people in such circumstances (being implied right of access removed and purported requirement to respond to future communication which if not so done said removal will be disregarded)?
I worked in brown goods sales (home entertainment electronics) for a large department store in the very early 2000s and this requirement always bothered me. So I would always put a fake name and address on the form before sending it in to TVL, and never once provided any real customer information 🤣
I was an admin person in the tv licence department. The detector vans had NO equipment in them to detect anything. It was just too expensive for a qualified engineer, which apparently was needed to operate the equipment, to drive around all day. They just hoped it intimidated people in buying a tv licence.
Telling you the equipment existed in the first place is just part of the facade. If you knew it didn't exist, the cat might get out of the bag if you spoke up.
I cancelled my tv licence using their own official form and on receipt of that they issued a refund, the counterfoil of which I still have. Since then I have received countless threatening letters. I phoned to explain that I don't watch tv, on any medium, nor do I use iPlayer etc and I would appreciate if they would remove my address from the system. When I refused to give my name and said the reference no. I had just provided was sufficient to remove me, he became abusive and hung up. I'm thoroughly tired of their bullying tactics.
Looking forward to the detection van science! On a side note, I had to get a TV Licence recently as I found my daughter had started watching iPlayer in her bedroom, she signed up herself, put our address down, and I subsequently got a letter saying I was watching TV without a licence for several weeks, even named what shows had been watched, and that I would be fined if I didn’t get one.
Be interesting to see the BBC try this in court if your daughter is over 18. Therefore an adult. If she is a minor why did they allow her to sign up to a service which has fees attached? That is their negligence. How can you be responsible for her actions? She should personally be contacted by the BBC. Had she commited a murder or a son had raped someone that is nothing to do with you. Yet the BBC are getting away with, "or anyone in your household" ! Woke BBC behaving very Victorian. The man is lord and master.
Here's the science! In the old days, when we only had 3 or 4 channels, all that the van staff could do was watch the tv light flickering in your house, and tune their in-van telly to see if they could match the shifting light pattern. That was it, that was - and still is - the pinnacle of their 'detection equipment'.
They don't use the vans for the science, that is just to scare people, but the internet is a whole different ball game and they can track everything you do online. ANY live broadcast or use of iPlayer and you owe them money. Sucks, cos I watch my football online, don't use any other live tv, but I have to pay just to be able to pay more to watch the football.
I worked for many years for Currys. When we sold a TV it was ALWAYS detailed on a form which went to TV Licencing. We were told by the company that it was LAW. I think we were lied to.
Currys would say they needed your details or you could not buy a TV so I said fine I will buy it elsewhere and then they backed down rather than loose a sale.
I worked for TV licensing for around 2 months after US based company Capita took over the contract to provide the 'service', during our week long training they specifically told us that the majority of the business is conducted by threatening customers into paying for a licence, this was also my impression during my brief period of employment with them. They also confirmed to us that they are unable to track TV signals, an idea that was propagated in TV adverts during the 80s, but they still actively promote this idea to keep people guessing.
@@Makalon102 it doesn't work that way anymore now we've all gone digital, those likely don't exist anymore or at least have been decommissioned. Back then (2005) they only had 5 vans to try to 'monitor' the entire UK and the technology was only a vague indicator in isolated situations when a property was standing alone, not when they were connected or grouped like terraced houses for instance.
Many years ago when I studied TV and Video servicing at college, my tutor was asked about TV Detector Vans and if they worked. The simple answer was yes. He then elaborated by saying the aerials on top of the vans were able to detect RF emissions from the IF (Intermediate Frequency) oscilator. As the IF frequency would change dependent upon the channel being watched, they could determine what channel you were watching and also by another oscilator if the TV is colour or monochrome. That being said, it was many years ago and tech has changed beyond all recognition. Modern TV's are digital and as you clearly state, detection is not possible in this manner. As for DVD recorders, they most certainly do exist, so do Blu-Ray recorders, I own the former. Execellent and informative video Sir, thank you.
I am not a Barrister, but I would call that Harrassment as well if they revisit after implied right of access has been removed. Would love to see that situation unravel in a UK court case.
It's harassment. Not harrassment. And the defences to harassment are: (a)that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime, (b)that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or (c)that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable
As a postman I get so mad that I have to deliver hundreds and hundreds of these letters every week on my same delivery route. I don't agree with them and it makes my blood boil when I see the wording on some of the envelopes, and as a none payer of the TV licence because I do to require one I also get one of these kind of letters every month. What I can say is more and more people are cancelling or just not renewing there licence, I know this because I have noticed the numbers increasing in TV licencing letters and it's not just my delivery route because all my colleagues are getting fed up with delivering them as well. But I would also say that TV licencing letters are getting more aggressive with the amount of various TV licencing letters they are sending out which I would assume they are now panicking that so many people are simply not renewing or cancelling so they are attempting to make these letters as intimidating as possible to scare people into paying even though they don't require one.
@@duncan1945 So do I laugh sometimes, but reason I get annoyed about them is because there intentionally trying to intimidate the vulnerable people who give up and just pay it out of fear.
i got sick of letting them in for a "tv check". as i dont have or use a tv i was happy doing so. but they just keep sending threats. you all know the sort of thing, fines, criminal records, job lose or even prison. so i wrote them setting out the rules for my private house, entry fees, £50. between 9am to 5pm, £100 for out of hours, plus £20 for a tour of the garden and out building (shed). coffee and tea can be supplied at a reasonable rate. now that i look forward to there visits, they post a note telling me i wasn't in, and run away before i can get hold of them and charge the fees.
I basically had the same letter when I removed their applied right of access, they told me if I didn't answer future letters they would revisit my property, I wrote to them and said if you ever visit my property again or send another letter I would see them in court for harrasssment, that was 5 years ago and have heard nothing since.
I love the adverts. I often need to make a cuppa or use the loo, so here is the perfect time without missing my programme. Not seen BBC for over 30 years and glad.
I’m fed to my back teeth with them, the number of “investigations” they have started must number well over 50, probably much more. For anybody intellectually challenged, these letters would seem very frightening, implying they are taking you to court, implying you will be criminally charges, I have no doubt whatsoever many people who don’t need a licence or don’t have a television will have been scared into buying one. The only reason I haven’t sent a letter back telling them where to go is that, then, effectively, I have informed them I haven’t got a television, which is my bone of contention, if I don’t have one, they have no business bullying me into telling them and bullying me into allowing them to hold information over me, a person that is nothing whatsoever to do with them. Do I get letters demanding that I tell whoever issues dog licences that I don’t have a dog? No, and quite rightly so, the same goes for firearms licences, radio transmitter licences, driving licences………..and the list goes on. How dare they, the sheer arrogance and entitlement, why on earth would I want to watch the drivel they show anyway? It’s bad enough having to put up with it at friends and families houses.🤬🧐😩😬🤷♂️
DVD/VHS combo recorders were a thing briefly, useful for archiving old VHS cassettes to DVD. Toshiba and Panasonic were the two manufacturers I particuarly remember. (Then there were the more common DVD players with VHS recorder, or regular DVD recorders)
DVDR/DVD-RAM recorders with integral TV tuners were used as PVRs to timeshift TV, with similar programming methods to VCRs at the time. VCR/DVD combos were relatively common for achiving as you point out. PVRs eventually moved to hard drives, as their capacities increased and prices and the standalone DVDR/DVD-RAM units gravitated to the CCTV market
Still have and use my Panasonic recorder which has VHS, DVD-R + RAM, and Hard Dive and it has some basic editing software which allows you to remove adverts etc. It also has SD card slot, USB, and Firewire. I believe Panasonic still make something similar but without the VHS.
I remember the days of the old TV Detector Vans, although I'm not aware they were ever effectively used to take people to court because the technology is so inexact (too many variables). Think they were more just stick waving.
I think you're confusing a DVD recorder with a DVD player, the DVD recorder has a built in TV tuner, which allows the recording of TV programs. Also I thought that the right to remove the implied right of access was a myth. Glad you clarified that. Keep up the good work, love your videos
Even if there was such a thing as a TV detector van then they wouldn't be allowed to use it anyway because that would breach article 8 of your human rights.
@@marcdraco2189 Was it really technically possible to detect the tiny signal (I assume it was the local oscillator) in a TV tuner ? I'd have thought it would be easier to detect the EMF from a line output transformer.
@@prscrystalized3706 Well that's bollocks because I knew a guy who drove one. He actually diagnosed a fault in my old CRT TV from _outside_ my house using it.
That absolute cheek. That made me laugh quite a bit. 'If you don't respond to me, I'll show up at your door'. Something a jealous ex-partner would say. 😂
It’s about time the BBC do the same as all the other channels and obtain their income from advertising. That may just prompt them to make some decent programming rather than sell almost everything off.
My grandfather was a justice of the Supreme Court, I have several family members who are either barristers or solicitors, and I studied law at university myself about 50+ years ago and so have a deep, abiding interest in the law, especially jurisprudence. However, I do not practice law and have never practised it directly. I also read mathematics and still tutor young people in that subject from Oxbridge A-level to undergraduate. My own career was as a global corporate executive in strategy (long-retired) where I was frequently indirectly involved in legal questions and my innate understanding of the subject was very useful in recognising where I needed to involve the lawyers. I strongly admire the logic and reason in applying their discipline which is the hallmark of most barristers and hence enjoy your UA-cam videos. We old guys are very self-indulgent! Keep up the channel: insufficient people understand the joy and debate engendered by law adequately which is their loss.
The thing about failing to respond to letters should worry us. Many people credibly report that they can get one letter a month from TV licencing. Are thry claiming that failing to respond to one of those negates the withdrawal of rights of access ? That would be ridiculous.
Got a sign saying "No cold callers / door salesmen". Had the rights of access removed with a copy of it on the porch window inside, along with the TV licensing letter saying im exempt. And one still came right up to the door, full suit and shades and started hammering the door yelling "TV Licensing OPEN THE DOOR NOW!" So I opened it on the chain latch and told him. "We have revoked the access right, we dont need a license, please leave." He put his boot in the door and ragged the door back and forth and broke the frame the chain was on. My partner whose a officer was in the shower, heard and came down when the goon shoved his way in. My partner instantly pulled out their badge and informed him "X constabulary. Trespassing. B&E & criminal damage." Our property has CCTV which caught it all. Goon made a threat about coming back with "the boys" covered his face with the suit jacket up and left. Took him to court over it. Long story short. My partner was encouraged to drop it by their boss because "the higher ups" wanted it "dealt with." He was found guilty and ordered to pay the damages to the property and our legal fee's. We also had to sign a gag order for 5 years which expired in 2022. Leading up to, and during the trial, we were constantly getting withheld numbers calling the house, black BMW's parking outside the house with suited men staring at the property and driving off whenever we went to approach them. Even with that, the Judge still refused harassment and, after the trial, told us "and for God's sake, buy a bloody license. Make all of our lives easier, its only a hundred quid!" Havent had a license for 16 years since i left home, never will. Live TV is depressing. I just game and watch UA-cam videos.
Government: "We're going green and forcing you with us!" ALSO Government: "Lets send out endless paper letters for absolutely every little thing! The Amazon won't deforest itself!"
I have 2 big dogs that bark when anyone knocks on the door . And my dogs love me more then anything ....Get yourself some protecting in these hard times . Stay safe out there people .
The most lawful neutral encounter I have ever had in real life - I wrote to the licensing company to explain we do not watch anything that requires a license and that the repeated letters through the letterbox were causing my autistic son a lot of distress. They immediately switched to sending the threats direct to my inbox instead.
I had a mate back in the early 1980s who's dad worked at Plessey (I think it was) as one of their "boffins", who told him that them old TV detector vans were for show, as such a device doesn't exist that can actually detect a TV that is on somewhere in your house. He said they may be able to detect the sound of a live program through a window pane (no proper double glazing in them days) or physically look through your window and see the TV on. The advert used to show a Commer van and on top where a pair of horizontal cone things with a man inside the van looking at a screen with a diamond pattern on it. He said it was all false to scare people in to buying a TV licence.
It was possible to remotely view an old CRT, technically its still possible with LCDs but with radiation shielding being a thing these days its incredibly unlikely. That is not me saying that they did use this technique to snoop but it was possible.
There are, or were DVD recorders with built in TV tuners. They are not very common these days, and appeared at the end of the VCR era. You could record onto a DVD-R or DVD-RW disc.
I used to use a TV tuner in conjunction with a VHS player to transfer VHS to DVD. Presumably it could have been used in some way to watch live broadcasts, but I never tried.
I received a letter saying that if I used a laptop or computer to watch ANY type of live broadcast (which UA-cam is full of) then I am legally required to buy a license. I think this is absolute nonsense. This has nothing to do with the BBC. I did not respond to the letter and last week they sent me one saying Warning! An investigation has been opened. This kind of thing would scare my elderly parents into buying one
@@lfcbpro Well they can get lost. They can't keep moving the goalposts. Which they have done because they know they are no longer 2 of the 4 channels available and many people refuse to watch the BBC now. So they try to extend their crooked finger into the world of the internet over which they have no authority whatsoever except via this corrupt legislation. I refuse to fund paedophiles so they are not getting a penny from me.
I had that sort of similar letter. If they want to visit, they're more than welcome, they will be wasting their time though. I don't even have a TV and no Netflix, no subscriptions to live TV programs and just broadband without TV channel.
Frankly I am amazed that the UK still persists with TV licensing and all the BS that comes with it. Australia abolished TV licensing in 1974 it’s about time the UK follows suit.
But "Big brother" still takes $1.1 BILLION in taxpayer funds to finance their propaganda broadcasts.
Most of us agree
All of us agree
And it was NEVER anything like the insane cost in the UK. Australia abolished it because no one ever paid it but it was a pittance compared to UK fees.
It will start charging, thanks to the millenial generation who don't buy a licence but watch iPlayer all the time.
How any company run on a basis of “pay us or we’ll send the boys around” is allowed to operate in this day and age is baffling.
Not really, bum
@@JestersDeadUKbootlicking ballbag, theres the attention u craved x
Because TV licensing isn't a company, it's a government body, much like the DVLA or tax office. "Pay us or we'll send the boys around" is absolutely natural when it comes to government bodies, and that won't ever not be normal.
I never engage with them, but if I ever do I am definitely telling them that I would never give my money to a company that protects child preds like they do...
@@JestersDeadUK keep being on all fours and slobbering on their hog, ig. 🤷
The vast majority of TV License letters are littered throughout with threats. They should have a class action made against them. Forward all to your local MP
They won't do anything.
Local MP doesn't care ... they will claim it as an expense for tax !
Group action in the UK.
MPs are now a complete waste of time Just ignore all attempts to contact including door knocks get a hd camera for your front door they hate them and make sure your door is very secure ie. very difficult to kick in up grade and double up on all frame fixings bigger screws on the hinges and steel plates where you can get away with them and multi point locks.
@@LeeGee Yep. That was a random notion from someone.
When you look up the word "extortion" in the dictionary it reads "the act of demanding money through menace" which is exactly what every letter from tv licensing is. Pay us, or else. No wonder it's only the elderly and the mentally enfeebled that still pay it.
You should be able to sue capita for harassment and intimidation.
EXACTLY! 100 % in agreement with you.
When I was a uni student and living on my own for the first time, I was wondering whether I should get one because of how intimidating the letters were, despite not owning a TV.
The BBC shouldn’t exist, just a bunch of PEDOS harassing the public and extorting them
I thought it was only the elderly and mentally enfeebled who enjoyed TV but I see your point, they're just too scared to challenge it.
Nice try.
Shop-owner to would-be thief: “you either pay for the stuff or I’ll call the police and I am standing menacingly in the doorway to the outside”
Would-be thief: “You are demanding money through menace, that is extortion!!”
I do not think this would work in court for the would-be thief!
I had a TV licensing lady turn up at my door.
I told her I don't have a TV and if you look at my house you will see there is no TV Ariel.
She was polite and not threatening and ended the visit by saying "I don't blame you there is nothing worth watching anyway"
These day less & less U.K. TV is supplied through areal or dish. Many smart TVs won’t fully work without an internet connection. A U.K. friend says that. According the the sales people in a nearby shopping centre Sky Glass is totally internet.
It appears that U.K. ISPs have to keep a log of their customers usage for five years. So anyone in the U.K. using an internet connection for TV could one day find they are in trouble.
Hahahaha
TV Aerial? Surprised that worked considering it's not 2005 anymore and most people watch via online streaming services. They say it's needed to watch "any live broadcast".
@@KrasszTV No other way with Sky Glass. Plus as you say live TV is becoming even more dependent on broadband. It may or may not be important but. Our ISPs are required by law. ( Something to do with anti terror laws. ) to keep our usage logs for five years. How long before the TV licence people get access to that data.
@@davecooper3238Such nonsense 😂
Removing 'their' implied right of access just encourages them. "Say nothing, sign nothing, SHUT the DOOR". The END! There is NO obligation legal or otherwise to accept the BBC's 'offer' for their Tv-licence service!! SHUT the DOOR--they are just cold-calling and harrasing for business
This!!
Exactly. No contact whatsoever and that includes informing them you do not require a license.
There doesn't need to be a contract when there is legislation imposing an obligation.
@@taras6806 Yes there does. The legislation supports the contract, just as the Sales of Goods Act (or whatever its current equivalent is) supports the contracting between two parties in a sales transaction. It does not and cannot require you to contract with a private company and does not impose any obligation outside of what is present in law. If you don't need a license by law then you don't need it. On that basis you are under ZERO obligation. You do NOT need to have ANY contact with the BBC, Capita or any other private company. That only changes when a person's circumstances meet the legal requirement to do so. Otherwise, no.
" SHUT the DOOR"...dont even. open the door in the first place
Part of me thinks that even writing the letter to them in the first place was ill advised. Every time you engage with them in any way, it raises the risk of further harassment.
Exactly, why stick your head above the parapet?
Yea we are not answerable to them , & i haven't answered to them in 12 years , i am known as - the occupier . Their letters make good 🔥 lighter 😍
Engaging with them at all let's them know the property is occupied and if you provide them with your name when you contact them they know who to harrass.
Yes, the rule with this is no contact at all.
It is the same with Jury Service letters that you ignore, Census letters that you ignore and Register of Electors letters that you ignore. You ain't gonna get prosecuted if you have no contact at all with them.
Identifying yourself allows them to seek a warrant for your arrest based on your “suspicious” behaviour.
I just moved into my flat literally that minute, a TV licence waller showed me a reading on his electronic metre, which he claimed proved that I was using a TV without a license. He was lying, as my TV was still in the van. What does that tell you? Answers on a postcard... lol.
Take down his details and call the cops.
Did you let him in to make a fool of himself?
It tells me they are full of BS. You should have asked to see his meter and for him to show you how it works.
How is any company allowed to bully and harass the public for revenue.
Absolutely disgraceful and criminal.
The BBC is effectively the government's mouthpiece.
their a gov agency that pretends to be private
“Oh we no longer gov funded we have private 8nvestors aswell now”
Look uo their private investors its abunch of giverment offices 8ncluding canadas nati9nal afairs , america, the eu bunch gov foraign offices fund its private funding while it usses gov to strong arm people
It's a subsidiary of the government I'm fairly sure, "not related to the BBC at all honest"
Government says hold my beer
I’ve had so many threatening letters, it’s damn right harassment. I don’t own a tv or watch their peado programs.
It’s criminal what they are getting away with.
Fun little side story: My Dad used to drive the TV Detector vans every now and then as part of his job at the Royal Mail, they are a real thing, and would take me along. Literally, it couldn't detect anything, he didn't stop to do any detecting, his job was literally drive around and be seen - it had a big TV Licensing sign on the side and was completely branded. All that was in this standard size van was a unit in the back that had a chair in front of it which you could use to watch TV. So when I was out with my dad, I would sit in the back and watch TV as he drove around aimlessly for several hours.
Please tell me your dad didn't have a TV Licence 🙏😂
😅😅 Fun job
What's that got to do with royal mail!?
@@dizzy530I have no idea they must have been outsourced to them
@@dizzy530 Think this may have something to do with the Communications Act, certainly in the older days, like when BT was previously known as Post Office Telephones, and thus was part of the remit of Royal Mail.
Dont waste your life responding. Life is too short. They obviously try to work us down when we do respond. Bullies.
Honestly it should be treated as junk mail.
@dougaldouglas8842 You told 'em!
I have a dvd/VHS recorder that I no longer use but was able to record live broadcasts on either dvd or VHS.
@@davidbrianwells2058 i think you posted in the wrong place
@@Lee_303 It is
Ignore all TV licensing letters! They have no legal standing, ignore any "agents" who may knock on your door!
If you don't open the door to speak to them, they can't do anything!
Some argue that is it better to open the door ask who they, then simply shut the door, rather than ignore them.
This is because they may think no one is in and may return again, but slamming the door in their faces will have them avoiding your property.
I remember one of their goons turned up in a Royal Mail uniform, pretending t be a postman.
@@AsakuraYukikoIt's like a cop turning up to your door in a firefighter's uniform to arrest you 🤣
Don't ignore it as they can & will knock your door down to force access which is still highly unlawfull send the envelope back un opened but right on it Legal fiction, no contract, no consent. No one can use your name but you the name they put on the letter in black all cap's stands for a dead entity therefore legal fiction.
Several years ago after I’d just returned from spending 2 years working abroad, I had a visit from a TV Licensing ‘representative’. I didn’t open the door as I was in the shower so he proceeded to clamp my car! It was only when a neighbour text me to ask if I was home and did I realise my car was in the process of being clamped that I went outside to challenge it. He demanded I pay the license fee and a £300 fine immediately or my car would be towed. Absolutely no authority or justification in what he was demanding (with menace, in my opinion). I didn’t own a TV as no reason to whilst working abroad but he insisted I pay or he’d hold my car hostage. That was pure extortion but paid to get my car released. I later (much later) got my money back but only as a gesture of their goodwill and was told it was my fault this had happened as I didn’t tell them I didn’t own a TV and was out of the country. I was aware I needed to report my whereabouts to TV Licensing so my bad!!! Beyond belief!
Whilst I have ignored this scam for the last 16 years and realise they have as much power as someone selling dusters at your doorstep, it still angers me that a lot of my fellow humans who may be more vulnerable are still being harassed. It’s like DVLA giving your grief over a SORN vehicle or as one of your commenters previously mentioned an ex continuously trying to restart a relationship.
My mum was scared into paying when the tyrants removed the free license for over 75s. I told her what would happen. But she capitulated thinking she'd go to jail. She was 84 at the time.
@@paulhank7967 Same with my mum and she was in her 90s! I told her not to pay it but she did without telling me....
If I am not mistaken it was only in the past decade where the law was changed regarding TV license. Originally it was a criminal offence to not pay TV license but now if you don't pay it, it is only a potential fine.
@@navi2710 It is still technically a criminal offence but it is classified as non-disclosable. In other words it won't necessarily show up in a DBS check but may show up for certain job application checks.
@navi2710 then , they had it a criminal offence to own a tuner capable of receiving tv signal , as the times moved along & there were many things to use a tv for like consoles, the law changed to enable owning a tv screen legally. The power shifted for them to prove your watching live tv , rather than just having a signal capable equipment
I get these letters once a week and recently they sent me a lovely surprise - they’d started using red envelopes 😂😂😂 I thought that was a cute touch. Anyway, I wish them the best with their “investigation” that’s been going on for 10 years. Still haven’t figured out my name.
" WE KNOW YOU KNOW ! " ( yep those red letter days were a gas) BBC Comedy at its finest.
Have you had the gold envelope yet? 😂
@@mogden2803 funnily enough they sent me a letter today but they’ve reverted back to the usual white one! Boo!
heehee!!! same here!
I used them to make name tags for chinese new year gifts😊
I remember in the early 00’s a tv licensing inspector visited my older brother’s home, didn’t know his rights and let him in, he had tv’s but used them for playing computer games and watching dvds non of them were hooked up to the main aerial to receive tv but there was a really old tv in a spare room that had its own built in aerial, the inspector then went on to tune the tv and because he eventually got a channel he fined him.
Never let them in they are notorious for dirty tricks and tangling your words into a self confession
Surely the fact it took him so long to tune the thing in proves they didn't watch it.
100% TV detector vans have always been guilt trips only and it is NOT possible to detect your TV and the channel you are watching. The only way would be to use listening devices to breach your privacy to hear the audio from your TV. I feel the Licensing company are the lowest of the low who make their money from threatening old people.
Well...a basic camera (or a more specialised photosensor) could monitor light levels coming from your windows for a minute, and see if the fluctuations correlate with the brightness of current live broadcasts. Unless you have some serious blackout curtains this isn't technologically very challenging. I suspect this would be much less legally problematic than eavesdropping on your audio, but idk - where's a lawyer when you need one?
So you think some people should be paying for a licence, but others not?
@@S.Trades I smell a licensing "enforcer", get a decent job my friend. Those who watch the BBC should pay, the rest of us, who don't enjoy state sponsored brainwashing, should not have to deal with the waste of trees that is licensing junk threat mail.
The RF receivers on old analogue TV's didn't just receive signals. There was an inherent feedback on them that could easily be detected. I knew a guy who operated one and he even identified a fault in my TV's circuitry from said van.
It was possible to receive the feedback from a tuned circuit in the past, in pre-digital TV days, but the tech (its called RAFTER, its in the SpyCatcher book) was fan more useful keeping a eye on various embassies in London, you could sit outside and figure out what frequencies they were listening to and when
I used to know a chap who genuinely didn't own a TV. He was often pestered by people about him having no license. He always invited them in and had great pleasure watching them looking for a non existant TV set.
Imagine that being your job - literally a government Brown Shirt. That's one thing I think the West has lost in it's society these days (to it's detriment): Shame.
One might probably own a smart phone?
I personally look to minimise having strangers looking around my home for security reasons. These bell ends feel entitled to try to overrule that red line of mine against my will. So they can do one.
AGAIN TELL THEM TO PISS OFF!
He doesn't have to prove he doesn't, THEY Have to prove he does. Don't let them in ....ever.
Been there, done that.
Imagine if a crazed ex tried sending you letters like this and this frequently. One would be in for stalking rather swiftly
No they would wait till you we're asulted
Not if you worked for the BBC !
@@noelward8047 Yeah, ask Alex Belfield!
Exactly. If they keep trying to sell you their product and won't leave you alone when asked to, then it is harassment.
@@christracy2144it's not actually anything like that though. Some proper loons about these days 🙄
The BBC has had "TV detecting" radar systems the military could only dream of since the 50s. If only they'd share this ground-breaking technology, we could be living in the year 3000 already!
Regarding that there is an amusing side story:
When the Allies were more and more successful using plane-based radar to find U-boats, Germany of course tried to counter the threat, amongst others by having radar detectors.
One shot down aviator told the Germans “naah, we do not use radar, we now just home in on the emissions of the radar detector.” Pulling a massive leg there, of course. But then there was the fact that the warners did not warn a lot of the time.
They had to check … and found to their horror that the radar warner *did* in fact emit a fairly strong signal. So they hastily redesigned all the radar detection equipment to do that much less or not at all.
Of course the reasons the radar detectors did not work properly any more was that the Allies started using much higher frequencies which the radar detector could not detect.
But thanks to that misdirection work was concentrated on this problem and likely delayed the detection of the centimetric radar used by the sub hunter planes.
So there is a possible way to detect a receiver that has an amplifier if someone did not take care with the design.
If the BBC recalibrated them to "Nonce detecting" radar systems they would never have to leave HQ!
I am every time surprised about the TV licence system in the UK, as an outsider, this sounds and looks like a scam. We're bullies make money by legal BS. Consumer groups need to take them to the court to legally stop this practice.
Then who pays of the tv programmes and films and everything else? It's like you going into a shop and filling your pockets and then resenting the fact that you must pay!!!!!
@@Omnicient. That's the reason you have commercial brake
im a brit who lived in Germany for a few years.. it blew my mind that they pay for a TV in Germany also.. but they have TV adverts + a license. in the UK the BBC dont run ad's either way its all BS
@@peterevenhuis2663 Personally I'd rather pay a tv license fee and have shows that aren't stuffed full of sponsored segments and adverts every 10 minutes.
Most of it isn't that good, but as a British person I do have a fondness for the BBC and I'm quite happy to help support it.
@blindmown So, why not pay a subscription? That way, you get far more choices without adverts. Are you mad?
I keep getting these videos in my feed, I myself haven't paid the license in years. Don't watch live TV at all, and am reminded why when I visit my parents, there's nothing on there for me. My advice; bin the letters without opening, Legal Occupier is not your name, put it out of your head and save yourself some stress. If they turn up at the door don't answer it. Breathe easy.
But what if your name really is Theo Ccupier..............
@@mda5003 lol...🤣🤣🤣
yeah unfortunately some people have or have family members living with them that have anxiety and/or mental health issues that can be triggered by having strangers randomly knocking at the door or getting passive agressive threatening letters in the post every few weeks, so I always say ignore it if you can deal with that type of BS, revoke their right of access or if you genuinely don't watch live TV and you don't care if some tosser wastes his time and the BBC's money to come check, just inform them of it, and if they say they want to come check, arrange to have a friend stay with you for the visit if you have anxiety or anything like that and just be careful of them trying to trip you up asking questions like "so you only watch on services like UA-cam, Netflix and BBC iplayer" a genuine question I was asked when I let them come verify that I didn't need one, I'm sure if I would've just nodded along and said yeah missing the tacked on "bbc iplayer" at the end of the question they would've used that to try demand I pay for a tv license, so just be careful what you say if you do let them in, I would probably just say I don't need one and revoke their access if I was faced with the same BS letters today, but at the time I figured, fine just let them check I know I didn't need one so it made no difference to me at the time, haven't received a single letter from them in over 8 years, so I assume they got the message.
@@mda5003 I occasionally get their letters, addressed to 'Mr P Occupier' which always gives me a smile; I got them to remove all personally identifiable data from their records years back now.
I went to my mums last night and the drivel that was on normal tv. I love streaming and could not stand having to put the tv on at a certain time to watch something and wait a week to see another in the series - so archaic and bizarre to me!
It's such a con - you don't have to write to DVLA and tell them that you still don't need a HGV licence, and keep sending every 2 years, so what gives Crapita the right to harrass like this?
Do not engage. Do not answer. The goon that shows up on your doorstep is a salesman on commission, nothing more.
I'm 47 and never had a driving license... I'd better get writing those letters to DVLA 🤔
Excellent point though 👍
Just send the letters back in a envelope. Dont afix a stanp. The license people will get charged to receive them.
Actually, I was threatened with a fine from the DVLA, if I didn't renew my Provisional Driving Licence. I only got in in case I took driving lessons (and it's useful as ID), but I have never used it for driving purposes, but was still forced to renew it.
@@AzguardMike Waste of time as postage includes returning to sender if not delivered. Using a different envelope without postage would probably end up getting destroyed as I doubt they would pay to receive them.
@@ar50000I don’t see that they have the power to force you to have a licence if you don’t even drive.
The best way to deal with TV licensing is by NO CONTACT. Just do absolutely nothing and simply ignore all their correspondence and bin all their threatening letters. Best not to write to them removing their implied rights of access as they can use this to get a search warrant, it will simply flag you up in their system as someone whom they regard as " suspicious".
Just don’t engage with them whatsoever! Don’t even open the door to them!
KInd of hard to not open the door when somebody knocks. They only knocked on my door once. That was enough for me to get turned off of TV forever. Making threats and attempting to invite yourself into my house for a "inspection" resulted in a big fuck you and get the fuck out of the foyer. Not watched TV since then. BBC is state sponsored propaganda anyway. TV is mind numbiung shit. Dont miss it. I watch movies, i play games, i surf the net but i dont wantch mindless made for TV crap that robs you of your time and will to think for yourself.
I'm under no obligation to communicate with TV licensing. I exercise that right every time a red letter drops through my letterbox by putting it straight into the recycling.
It's very simple, don't communicate with them, put their unopened letters in the bin and get on with your day.
Agreed
The funny thing about that. That's how they actually get warrants. "This person has refused all communications with us. So we have reason to suspect that they may be watching live broadcasts etc." and they DO get some of those warrants. That's how you end up with them in your home.
Telling them to fuck off by mail is much easier than telling them to fuck off in person.
The TV licence letters are threatening only if you let them be threatening. I receive one every 15 days on average and because it's very easily recognisable, I don't even open it. It goes straight in the bin. I've been doing that for the last 4 years.
I've had no Sky package and no aerial is plugged into my TV. My TV is plugged into my PC and my Nintendo Switch. I've not watched any 'live' TV show since 2010. I pay for Shudder, Netflix, and Curiosity. Those are pre-pay services that don't require a TV license, so Capita and the BBC can feck off!
Capita is a shit company anyway
I think the UK needs more people like you, pointing out the backsliding in government organizations, its a cleptocratic captive state that is failing.
Our perpetual unelected, unaccountable, multi £$ trillionaire, global land pariah royal head of state, is an ominous behemoth clue that something went Pete Tong in Britain a looooonng time ago.
Just a short note on how this problem is handled in Denmark.
1: Electronic “track cars”, or “Pejlevogn”, as they were called here, were used until 1997. The national Danish broadcast (DR - Denmarks Radio) later revealed that they didn’t quite work. DR made it look like they were working, but what they did were looking at the light coming from someone’s windows, to guess if a TV was turned on, at an address registered not to pay a TV license. The Pejlevogn was only the excuse to get access to people’s homes.
2: The TV license was changed January 1st 2022. In previous years, you had to pay, if you owned any device capable of receiving live stream TV. In 2020 the Danish government realized that almost everybody had a smartphone, and decided to abolish the TV license. So now everyone in DK pays for TV via general tax.
3: In DK less than 50% of viewers watch flow TV today. So, moving the TV license to the tax bill is a smart move. When the viewers hits 0% DR can be closed, but I have a sneaking feeling that the tax will not be eased.
We have a situation in the UK where corporate entities who choose not to comply with their legal responsibilities are unchallenged by the legal system. Those who suffer consequences from this abuse of law are generally unable to respond because of prohibitive costs or an inability to understand their own rights.
Agreed!
Dear Black Belt Barrister
You mention warrants on a few of your videos, especially those pertaining to TV Licensing.
Will you kindly produce a video on how to recognise a valid warrant, which are the essential elements of a warrant and what rights of retention and access to the warrant does the servee have?
Thank you.
It’ll be interesting if he does considering he’s a mahoosive shill.
Just curious, What evidence do TV licence have to supply to the court to obtain such a search warrant.
If the evidence they provided to obtain the warrant was found to be false, Do the public have any recourse to to claim harassment or something?
The only evidence they have is what’s supplied to them by the house holder if they talk to them. If you keep receiving letters addressed to the occupier or the manager this means they haven’t linked a name to the address. So good luck getting a warrant. Give them nothing.
Usually the removal of implied rights of access is enough, so really you shouldn't even bother evoking the right.
@@toshiroyamada2443this is exactly what I heard several years ago, and although this letter in the video doesn’t outright say it I suspect that obtaining a warrant could be used within other means of detection
They would need evidence that showed reasonable suspiscion you were breaking the law, enough that a Judge would grant that. This is where they have a huge problem. Saying you "have aTV, or simlar equipment *capable* of accessing live TV" is not evidence of a crime. What isn't nowadays? It would be like saying they want a warrant to search your home for knives in case you stabbed someone, or to look n your garage to see if you have acar because you could potentially speed.
The only evidence they could realisticaly use is something like a recording of you watching live TV when you shouldn't be - like posting a public video of you watching a live sporting event that somehow shows your address clearly. Even them, it probably wouldn't work because if the evidence isn't enough to convict, searching your home wouldn't add anything because, again, it isn't an ofence to just own a TV.
Detector vans and "other means" are utter nonsense. They are technologically incapable of doing what they tell you they are. When they were old EM waves going to antennas then you could use equipment to tell you an area was getting those signals - not watching TV, just that the signals were reacting with something. Nowadays they can't tell anything. They could *possibly* go to your ISP and ask if you were watching iPlayer I guess, but in the same theme they would ned a warrant to do that, and back to the start of this post...
Easiest solution - Don't talk to them. Don't sign anything. Don't watch BBC anyway as it's utter rubbish now 😉
@@7200932 it can only be obtained by one of two ways: information the householder gives or lies from Capita. There are no other "detection methods".
Like most propaganda from State entities, the 'detector Van' is indeed a con. In the old days, when we only had 3 or 4 channels, all that the van staff could do was watch the tv light flickering in your house, and tune their in-van telly to see if they could match the shifting light pattern. That was it, that was - and still is - the pinnacle of their 'detection equipment'.
I think you may be mistaken. In the 70s they sat outside our house for 3 days and whatever they were doing in there was interfering with our lights.
Time for a cease and desist letter. And a complaint of unwanted communication to the police.
I had a standard letter from TV license saying that 1 in 7 of the addresses they visit need a tv licence and that they might want to come check to make sure i dont need one. I wrote back enclosing a copy of their letter and their statistics.. and informed them that by their own numbers that meant 6 out of those 7 didnt need one.. told them i dont even own a tv... and that as i saw it they had as much right to come check 'just incase' i need a tv licence (odds 1 in 7), as the police do to 'come check' just incase a domestic abuse incident was happening (odds 1 in 4). i politely informed them that i had no business with them and that i would inform them should i move or my situation change.. and that since i had no business with them i would see any further contact by them as harassment. They politely wrote back and said they wouldnt contact me again... and they havent... and that was 7 years ago.
I have been TV & TV licence free since 2018, I concur that I have been required to renew/resubmit this declaration every two years since, no dramas.
I was going to post a similar comment. I don't require a licence; I think it's an imposition to have a TV licensing employee turn up unexpectedly and request access to my home, and so I have politely informed TV Licensing of my situation (I know I don't have to) and have withdrawn their implied right of access. They ask me to verify my status every two years and otherwise I am not troubled.
The root cause of all the trouble here is the antiquated and oppressive legislation that is the TV Licence. The people to attack are those in Parliament who won't get rid of the TV Licence, not TV Licensing who are simply paid to do the job of enforcing it.
Lmao, "it's ok that i have to sign a declaration every 2 years saying i don't have a thing", an MOT is something you need for a CAR, you don't get mail if you don't have a car asking you to confirm that you don't have a car! Ignore the shit and tell them to go pound sand when they call, people who just accept that "this is just part of life" are exactly whats wrong with society today giving these parasites legitimacy.
Exactly the same as us. We only watch on demand content and none of it produced by the bbc at all.
@@digidol52 I disagree, I do think it's a problem. For example, I provide certain services to my customers. Perhaps you would like to make use of those services? Tell you what, I'll send you letters every two years just to check that you don't need them. If you don't reply then I'll threaten to visit you at your home and ask if I can come inside to check that you don't need my services. That would be ridiculous and unacceptable, no? In the same way, Capita/BBC should just sod the hell off. If we need a license, we'll buy one. If not then there's not need to "just check". You are NOT required to confirm every two years. That is THEIR policy, NOT ours. They are a private company with whom you have zero contract and towards whom you have zero obligations. Don't do a single thing to play their game or make it easy for them. They are scum and they wouldn't think twice to shaft you if the opportunity arose
You're lucky. My experience was somewhat different to yours.
I was paying by direct debit when I cancelled my licence around 4 years ago, I went online onto their website and filled in their 'refund & cancellation' request (regrettably I didn't apply for the refund which is what may have caused the following issues). I was advised NOT to cancel my DD as they would do it on their end yet one month later the DD fee was removed from my bank account on the normal date. At this point I thought sod it and cancelled the DD myself. Six months later (because DD payments keep you six months in advance) I received a letter from TV Licencing stating that THEY had cancelled my licence because I had cancelled the payments.
In my opinion informing them was a complete waste of time and I have been receiving at least one letter per month from them since that initial letter.
I won't be contacting them again, I have fallen into the realm of 'The Legal Occupier' and I'm quite happy to stay there. They don't need your name as it is the property that is covered by a licence, not the individual. They only reason they could want your name is because they can't take an address to court.
Just ignore the letters, they are meaningless. Bin them, do nothing and get on with your life. Nothing is easier than doing nothing.
Shouldn't really even be opening post if it's not addressed to you.
@@toshiroyamada2443on what planet was that even mentioned?
Nothing alluding to the issue was brought up.
Try sticking to matters in the real world.
That's a typical simplistic rubbish I see from dumb gamers that think they know everything, yet have no clue.
Post their crap back to them.
true thats actually illegal.@@toshiroyamada2443
Quite right! Its junk mail and I treat it the same as Pizza companies pamphlets or garden centre stuff, I just bung it in the bin if its addressed legal occupier or some such. I only ever open letters addressed to me by name.
I have ranted many times on social media about the heavy handed and overtly threatening notices that TV licensing send through your letterbox. I feel mostly for the elderly or clinically anxious who may cough up simply because the big red letters and cough cough wink wink legalese frightens them.
OUR POSTIE SAID SHE HAD BEEN DELIVERING DOZENS OF THOSE RED LETTERS RECENTLY . YOU WOULD THINK THEY HAD GOT THE MESSAGE BY NOW HA HA HA
I have made videos about the letters, usually fun and silly because we don't watch TV live or even on legal catchup services. We simply do not watch it.
One day, a wee while ago I received a letter, I had just lost my mother and it really pissed me off. I made a video about it. They had really caused me grief on top of the grief I was already suffering, so yes, to me these letters are harmful, they caused me stress, anger, rage, disgust when I am doing nothing wrong. I don't hate anyone but I am beginning to HATE these letters and the so called Scott Robson from Guildford that constantly sends them to me. They are pissing me off.
I watched a video on UA-cam some years ago, perhaps 2 where people were being told not to "Remove the right of Access" relating to Capita and the BBC because they will then use that to come and seek you out. An Alarm Bell for them and they will not let it go. It makes things worse in the long run. This appears to back that up. Just mentioning it because some people had worse issues after removing the implied right of access. It's all on UA-cam.
Chat to your MP to ask why they allow the BBC to do this - the BBC have an exception to permit them!
The BBC is closer to defunding now than it's ever been.After all,it;s not as if we need them.
They need us though. To "program" us
unfortunately once there's a tax established they never abolish it, it will more than likely be one of the options they're looking into of turning the licence into a levy added onto council tax so there's no escaping it.... everyone knows the government hasn't got the publics back and would tax every single penny from us if they could
If Labour get in they will fund it though Council Tax. The BBC will get more funding that way. More funding more woke bill sh.t.
We don't need the BBC, but the Government does, so it can spread its propaganda!
@@DaveBeaven-tx2tpthe tax will never work. Do they do it on houses or when you get paid? How many are people are paying in the house to how many tvs.
If they try I'm betting people will riot and storm the bbc.
They have a bloody cheek asking everyone for a license fee
6 years non payer here and never had a visit. They may well have snooped around while I've been out however. The way to deal with TV Licencing is to cancel any payment and ghost them. Do not, I repeat, do not send a letter like the person in this video has done. The best advantage you have of never hearing from them is if they don't know who you are, if you've just moved to a new property keep it that way, just bin all the letters and get on with your life. If you're unlucky enough to be visited, if you think it's one of their goons, don't open the door. If you're caught off guard, let them speak first then close the door. The letters by the way are in no way personal, they are like spam email, they send them out to catch you out. They start off warning you that the property isn't covered by a TV Licence and how much it costs to buy one etc. Then they move on to warning you that you could face fines etc. Then move on to sending red envelopes, threatening you that you need to have a TV Licence under UK law etc. Then they move on to threatening you with Enforcement Officers visiting and start giving you dates you have to purchase a TV Licence by etc. The hilarious thing is, once you are sent their most threatening letter and they've heard absolutely nothing. You're reset back to the beginning and they send you the least threatening letter again. I've seen the process happen many times.
We haven’t had TV licensing in NZ for decades. The cost was somehow included into road tax and seems to have been accepted.
I live in NZ and every station has adverts. Lots of them. The main news bulletin at 6 is an hour long - you would think a country like NZ would not need that long when in the UK it's 25 minutes. But there are 5 advert breaks of 4 minutes each - of utterly shit adverts - which eats away at 20 minutes.
I've been at my house for 14 years. I've never had a TV licence and I have never responded to any of their letters. I have never had a visit. In my opinion it's easier to ignore any communications and that is including any visits.
I have nothing to add except to say thank Mr Black belt barrister all your work is always appreciated and thank you for ALL your videos, please keep up the good work, blessings to you and loved ones.
Back in the 90's I had a VHS recorder that recorded in colour. I recorded off a black and white TV, therefore assumed I needed only a black and white license. An inspector visited and informed me I needed a colour license as the VHS recorder was able to record in colour. I took this to be a con trick, asked him to leave and removed the implied right of access. I haven't had a TV or watched live now for 10 years, I regularly get a letter stating they have 'Opened an Investigation', but since I'm on the Devon and Cornwall border and the letter comes from Surrey, plus in 10 years of investigation they still haven't worked out my name, I can't say I'm overly worried about it.
Way back then I bought a VHS recorder and we only had a black and white TV set but the recorder recorded directly from the aerial so the recording was in colour. Yes, it only played back in black and white but as the recording would have been in colour a colour TV licence would have been required.
Technically he was correct as the VHS recorder can record direct from the incoming signal even if you don't have a TV plugged in. You could take the tape and play the recorded program on a colour TV somewhere else.
Change your name on your door to Walji Parjbottam Rangoon. I did, and it works. ( Walji speaks NO english unfortunately) p.s. A pet shop supplied laminate photo of a now banned XL BULLY pooch with ," I LIVE HERE, MAKE MY DAY," stuck in your front door or front window, WILL also make these ex traffic wardens, jobsworths, and royalist lickspittles walk on by too. Strength in numbers.
I remember the old TV commercials here in the UK saying that they had equipment that could detect TVs receiving live broadcasts back in the 90’s and they “will find you, and take appropriate action”…. What a time to be alive in the age of VPN software….😂
Don’t understand VPN will have to look it up
These people have done nothing but harass me since 2020 when I moved in with my son ( healthcare reasons ) I will now draft a letter doing the same thing. Thank you, this has been a big help
the license is for the property not the individual. So the property only requires 1 license, which should be for your son if he so requires one.
Thanks for this B.B.B. We don't have a tv licence. We don't watch, or record, any live programmes, etc. However, it would appear that we too could well be intimidated and harassed by the Stasi licensing brigade at any time. It's good to know our legal rights!
The Statsi were secret, they didn't intimidate any one.
Just threatened these people with charges relating too any contact from them & especially them visiting your home. Let's say £100 pound fine for every letter you receive after right of way is removed & £1000 fine for any visit.
@@DaviniaHillthe Stasi is a good comparison, hyperbolic obviously. I think there were plenty of people in East Germany who found the Stasi very intimidating.
Imagine thinking getting a letter ia the same as dealing with secret police. What a fairy.
I don't even open the letters anymore, I still save them and just today was showing them all to the family next door, straight away when they seen and held the bundle they agreed it was PURE Intimidation.
Electronics/radio engineer here. I can confirm that there is no way with modern TVs to detect if the TV is on, let alone whether it is being used to view in real time. In the old days of analogue TV it was theoretically possible to pick up the line timebase and/or local oscillator, which might make it possible to determine usage. Neither of these exist in modern TVs.
I believe it was operating the differential receiver (if memory serves) which was the aspect a license was needed for.
@johnL. Back in the 70s, they knowingly lied with these so called detector vans. Why didn’t the advertising standards agency step in to stop this bs?
Is that from when TVs were CRT based? I’m pretty sure as you mention modern TVs being TFT or LCD or whatever couldn’t be scanned to see what channel they are on?
@@noelht1 Yes. CRT-based TVs had a line timebase oscillator which, especially in valve models could radiate quite a hefty signal. In theory it would be possible to pick this up. Back then the only use for a TV was to receive off-air transmissions, which would need a licence so the presence of a line timebase would be a bit of a giveaway. LCD/LED TVs don't have a line timebase oscillator.
The other possibility could be to pick up the local oscillator which is part of the superhet receiver design. Again in the old days these were rather poorly screened and could re-radiate via the antenna. Modern TVs might, depending on the design, still have a local oscillator but they are far less powerful and much better screened.
I think that it's highly unlikely that these techniques ever really worked and they certainly do not now.
@@John_L Thank you John
Thier disgusting methods of scaring old and infirm people into buying a license needs to be addressed. Put yiuself in the shoes of an old lady getting a letter threatening a visit from enforcement officers. They just pay out of fear. This happened to.my relatives.
I've not had a TV licence in like 5 years. Got one letter about 4 years ago and nothing since. It's just posturing
I informed TV Licensing that I had no TV and so had no need for a licence. They wrote back saying they would contact me again after a period of 18 months - though their monthly threatening letters continued. I had 7 years of threatening letters at my last address and 4 years at my current address.
Surely this must class as harassment!
I did the same do not watch live tv or down load any thing. Letters saying they are coming around on such a date, and never come on that date ! Saying Im now under investigation. This has been going on for over 2 years now sometimes this in a weekly basis .I just ignore it all. But do licence payers realise this is where their money is being spent. Cause its certainly not the content they put out . Or biased reporting and over paying workers .They continually use their bullying tactics, and could really upset vulnerable, elderly, by continual threats.
BBC reporting is not biased, it is outright lies! Like in Iraq, when they reported the accidental bombing (by the Americans) of a village, which killed 45 civilians. So, why did the villagers dig 150 graves plus a large one for all the identified body parts?!
In future, I shall send all the letters back 'no TV at this address'!@@lindakirk3739
That would, yes. You'd have a case.
Many years ago I had a TV sales and repair business. Back then there was a legal requirement for us to notify TV Licensing of the name and address of anyone who bought a TV from us. This was before the days of computers and video players, so the only use of a TV was to watch live TV programs.
I don't know when this requirement ended.
Not too long ago, some time in the early 2000s I think
I always told them I lived in a camper van.
25th June 2013. The Wireless Telegraphy Act 1967 was repealed by the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (c. 24), Sch. 21 para. 1.
"The Wireless Telegraphy Act 1967 (the remaining provisions of which make provision for, and in connection with, the recording and notification of the sale or hire of televisions etc) is repealed."
@@katrinabryce thanks Katrina. Interesting!
I simply said I'd bought the set for someone else.
You can have a DVD recorder in much the same way as you can have a VHS recorder. These contain a digital tuner that records directly to DVD, or to a hard drive with the option to copy to DVD later. They have fallen in popularity, as have DVDs generally.
Yep. I have one of these. They were briefly a thing in the mid-2000s, when cheap writeable DVD drives were available, but large hard disks weren't quite cheap enough yet to store lots of content without regularly deleting it.
It has an analogue tuner and a DVD-RAM drive, and was capable of recording live analogue TV to writeable DVDs. If used for that, it would indeed have required licencing. Obviously as it is analogue only and there is no analogue signal any more, that's irrelevant now...
A DVD Player cannot view TV directly, however a DVD RECORDER usually has a TV Tuner in it.
I certainly have never seen one without a Tuner, in fact some have dual tuners so you can record multiple channels at the same time!
There is basically no other (legal) use for a DVD RECORDER if it isn't used for TV Timeshifting.
EDIT: I mean "legal" in reference to the recording of copyrighted material using the TV Tuner. Of course you can freely use your DVD recorder for your own personal use, like recording CCTV, home movies, etc.
@@nicotoscani1707 - not sure what you mean by that, or if you are agreeing with what I already wrote or not.
I haven't seen a "set top box" for probably 20-25 years, since they were only necessary when digital TV first started, and old TVs only had analogue tuners that couln't decode the new HD broadcasts.
Even slightly modern TVs have digital tuners in them, so a set top box is pointless.
Do you think that a DVD Recorder is the same as a Pace/Sky cable/satellite box?
(Not being argumentative, just trying to work out the reason for your comment)
@@nicotoscani1707 - precisely! 🙄
However, you addressed your comment directly to me, and I cannot work out what you are trying to ask or refute or agree or what.
In other words, you are perfectly welcome to comment, however there is no need to be facetious or sarcastic when asked for clarification about what you meant.
You also have one with a blue ray hd recorder
Last year I actually moved in to a new flat that had recently been built where I was literally its first occupier. The estate agent mentioned to me that there was some kind of law that required new builds to be left vacant for certain period to prove they're structurally sound so I assume it existed as a listed address for a while when it was unoccupied. When I check the mailbox after getting the keys I found nearly a years worth of letters from TV licencing highlighting the fact that the flat didn't have a licence which were clearly getting more passive aggressive overtime, starting from a polite reminder the way up to a notice of inspection and warrant having been issued (for an empty flat), then going back to a polite reminder the next month all over again. I very quickly registered the property as not requiring a license just to be on the safe side and haven't heard from them at all.
The best thing to do, if you do not have a TV licence is to never send them a letter and ignore every single letter they send you.
If you have one then this video seems very helpful in those circumstances 👍🏻
For the item noting dvd/vhs recorder back in the late 90s and early 2000s there were a number of DVD recorders capable of recording television on a schedule, however most if not all of these died out after we went fully digital as most had only an analogue tuner in them (we had one back in the day)
I withdrew the Implied Right of Access to my property exactly 10 years ago. I have never heard from TV Licencing since. No letters, no visits.
My letter stated that I would take legal action against TV Licencing if they trespassed or posted letters through my letterbox. Those instructions appear to have done the trick.
I also removed their implied right of access 10 years ago, never heard a peep since.
@H4WK6969 Congratulations. Imagine a World where every household who's stopped watching BBC content, decided to also Withdraw the implied right of access? No Goons, No old ladies being fined, BBC being forced into bankruptcy. "Heaven".
It's a "permission" not a "right".
You can't remove a right.
It was full of veiled threats.Shame on them.I hardly watch any TV in any case.
I remember during the 60's one of their so called inspectors called at the front door with the so called detector van outside. My father knew he was was lying about having detected a television transmission because at that time the old one had stopped working some time ago and it was taken to the tip, and my father couldn't afford to replace it (he was raising me on his own. When he mentioned it to a few other people, one neighbour said he used to do the job and the van was empty. It was a fraud. When my father was able to afford another tv he didn't bother with a licence. He never bought one again. Do you think I do? All the money we now know BBC nonces and ponces are paid? I would as soon see them locked up for whole life, along with their counterparts in the world of supposed entertainment. Only a few documentaries have been worth watching but now so many of those also are going woke, this one may as well go to the tip. I enjoy reading, listening to music, videos by independent channel owners such as this.
My son's just had a letter about no TV licence sent to the occupier telling him he is under investigation. He rang in a bit of a panic and he's not the only one that's had one. He's in student dorms at university and doesn't have a TV. I told him not to worry about it and put it in the bin. They are taking the micky.
Should have put on the letter than if you receive any letter from tv licensing or third party you will charge them £100 admin fee and if anybody knocks your door from tv licensing or third party on behalf of tv licensing you will charge them £1000 interaction fee.
Ha ha ha ha Brilliant !!!!!!!!!
Absolutely agree with you on the point on which you take issue. No requirement to respond to communication from them under such circumstances, I wonder, has anybody taken an injunction out against these people in such circumstances (being implied right of access removed and purported requirement to respond to future communication which if not so done said removal will be disregarded)?
A few years ago, it used to be a legal requirement for retailers to inform the Licensing Authority of who they sold a new TV to.
I worked in brown goods sales (home entertainment electronics) for a large department store in the very early 2000s and this requirement always bothered me. So I would always put a fake name and address on the form before sending it in to TVL, and never once provided any real customer information 🤣
I was an admin person in the tv licence department. The detector vans had NO equipment in them to detect anything. It was just too expensive for a qualified engineer, which apparently was needed to operate the equipment, to drive around all day. They just hoped it intimidated people in buying a tv licence.
Telling you the equipment existed in the first place is just part of the facade. If you knew it didn't exist, the cat might get out of the bag if you spoke up.
I cancelled my tv licence using their own official form and on receipt of that they issued a refund, the counterfoil of which I still have. Since then I have received countless threatening letters. I phoned to explain that I don't watch tv, on any medium, nor do I use iPlayer etc and I would appreciate if they would remove my address from the system. When I refused to give my name and said the reference no. I had just provided was sufficient to remove me, he became abusive and hung up. I'm thoroughly tired of their bullying tactics.
Looking forward to the detection van science!
On a side note, I had to get a TV Licence recently as I found my daughter had started watching iPlayer in her bedroom, she signed up herself, put our address down, and I subsequently got a letter saying I was watching TV without a licence for several weeks, even named what shows had been watched, and that I would be fined if I didn’t get one.
Be interesting to see the BBC try this in court if your daughter is over 18. Therefore an adult. If she is a minor why did they allow her to sign up to a service which has fees attached? That is their negligence. How can you be responsible for her actions? She should personally be contacted by the BBC.
Had she commited a murder or a son had raped someone that is nothing to do with you. Yet the BBC are getting away with, "or anyone in your household" ! Woke BBC behaving very Victorian. The man is lord and master.
so cancel the service and block iplayer on her pc. or better yet, kiddo wants tv, she pays the tv licence fee
Here's the science! In the old days, when we only had 3 or 4 channels, all that the van staff could do was watch the tv light flickering in your house, and tune their in-van telly to see if they could match the shifting light pattern. That was it, that was - and still is - the pinnacle of their 'detection equipment'.
@@goldeneddieThat makes a lot more sense than some attempt to detect radio emissions from the set.
They don't use the vans for the science, that is just to scare people, but the internet is a whole different ball game and they can track everything you do online.
ANY live broadcast or use of iPlayer and you owe them money.
Sucks, cos I watch my football online, don't use any other live tv, but I have to pay just to be able to pay more to watch the football.
I worked for many years for Currys. When we sold a TV it was ALWAYS detailed on a form which went to TV Licencing. We were told by the company that it was LAW. I think we were lied to.
Currys would say they needed your details or you could not buy a TV so I said fine I will buy it elsewhere and then they backed down rather than loose a sale.
You were not lied too. It was Law and only repealed recently
bought a tv few years ago at currys and they asked for address so i gave fake address
I believe if you pay by credit card your address will go automatically. You won't get told this is happening.
@@zmalevo2126no it doesnt thats why they ask for your address. but law has changed i believe they no longer forward details on tvla
I worked for TV licensing for around 2 months after US based company Capita took over the contract to provide the 'service', during our week long training they specifically told us that the majority of the business is conducted by threatening customers into paying for a licence, this was also my impression during my brief period of employment with them. They also confirmed to us that they are unable to track TV signals, an idea that was propagated in TV adverts during the 80s, but they still actively promote this idea to keep people guessing.
The TV van detector thing is so embedded into the older generations, my mum swears by it and nothing could convince her otherwise
@@Makalon102 it doesn't work that way anymore now we've all gone digital, those likely don't exist anymore or at least have been decommissioned. Back then (2005) they only had 5 vans to try to 'monitor' the entire UK and the technology was only a vague indicator in isolated situations when a property was standing alone, not when they were connected or grouped like terraced houses for instance.
Many years ago when I studied TV and Video servicing at college, my tutor was asked about TV Detector Vans and if they worked.
The simple answer was yes. He then elaborated by saying the aerials on top of the vans were able to detect RF emissions from the IF (Intermediate Frequency) oscilator.
As the IF frequency would change dependent upon the channel being watched, they could determine what channel you were watching and also by another oscilator if the TV is colour or monochrome.
That being said, it was many years ago and tech has changed beyond all recognition. Modern TV's are digital and as you clearly state, detection is not possible in this manner.
As for DVD recorders, they most certainly do exist, so do Blu-Ray recorders, I own the former.
Execellent and informative video Sir, thank you.
i withdrew the bbc right of access 10 years ago and received this letter also. it was the best thing i ever did.
I am not a Barrister, but I would call that Harrassment as well if they revisit after implied right of access has been removed. Would love to see that situation unravel in a UK court case.
It's harassment.
Not harrassment.
And the defences to harassment are:
(a)that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,
(b)that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or
(c)that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable
Good luck fighting a multi billion pound corporation
As a postman I get so mad that I have to deliver hundreds and hundreds of these letters every week on my same delivery route.
I don't agree with them and it makes my blood boil when I see the wording on some of the envelopes, and as a none payer of the TV licence because I do to require one I also get one of these kind of letters every month.
What I can say is more and more people are cancelling or just not renewing there licence, I know this because I have noticed the numbers increasing in TV licencing letters and it's not just my delivery route because all my colleagues are getting fed up with delivering them as well.
But I would also say that TV licencing letters are getting more aggressive with the amount of various TV licencing letters they are sending out which I would assume they are now panicking that so many people are simply not renewing or cancelling so they are attempting to make these letters as intimidating as possible to scare people into paying even though they don't require one.
OUR POSTIE ROLLS UP LAUGHING WHEN HE SAYS HERE IS ANOTHER RED ONE FOR YOU,
@@duncan1945 So do I laugh sometimes, but reason I get annoyed about them is because there intentionally trying to intimidate the vulnerable people who give up and just pay it out of fear.
i got sick of letting them in for a "tv check". as i dont have or use a tv i was happy doing so. but they just keep sending threats. you all know the sort of thing, fines, criminal records, job lose or even prison. so i wrote them setting out the rules for my private house, entry fees, £50. between 9am to 5pm, £100 for out of hours, plus £20 for a tour of the garden and out building (shed). coffee and tea can be supplied at a reasonable rate.
now that i look forward to there visits, they post a note telling me i wasn't in, and run away before i can get hold of them and charge the fees.
HA HA HA HA BRILLIANT !!!!!!!
I basically had the same letter when I removed their applied right of access, they told me if I didn't answer future letters they would revisit my property, I wrote to them and said if you ever visit my property again or send another letter I would see them in court for harrasssment, that was 5 years ago and have heard nothing since.
I love the adverts. I often need to make a cuppa or use the loo, so here is the perfect time without missing my programme. Not seen BBC for over 30 years and glad.
I’m fed to my back teeth with them, the number of “investigations” they have started must number well over 50, probably much more. For anybody intellectually challenged, these letters would seem very frightening, implying they are taking you to court, implying you will be criminally charges, I have no doubt whatsoever many people who don’t need a licence or don’t have a television will have been scared into buying one. The only reason I haven’t sent a letter back telling them where to go is that, then, effectively, I have informed them I haven’t got a television, which is my bone of contention, if I don’t have one, they have no business bullying me into telling them and bullying me into allowing them to hold information over me, a person that is nothing whatsoever to do with them. Do I get letters demanding that I tell whoever issues dog licences that I don’t have a dog? No, and quite rightly so, the same goes for firearms licences, radio transmitter licences, driving licences………..and the list goes on. How dare they, the sheer arrogance and entitlement, why on earth would I want to watch the drivel they show anyway? It’s bad enough having to put up with it at friends and families houses.🤬🧐😩😬🤷♂️
Brilliant ,
DVD/VHS combo recorders were a thing briefly, useful for archiving old VHS cassettes to DVD. Toshiba and Panasonic were the two manufacturers I particuarly remember.
(Then there were the more common DVD players with VHS recorder, or regular DVD recorders)
Aye, never had one of them though. A normal VHS run into the signal input of a DVD recorder's more than good enough.
We had one and they were that complicated we never used it😂😂🎉
DVDR/DVD-RAM recorders with integral TV tuners were used as PVRs to timeshift TV, with similar programming methods to VCRs at the time. VCR/DVD combos were relatively common for achiving as you point out. PVRs eventually moved to hard drives, as their capacities increased and prices and the standalone DVDR/DVD-RAM units gravitated to the CCTV market
@@tennysonfordblackbird2087 Only eight-year-olds knew how to work them! I've still got mine but is now covered in dust....
Still have and use my Panasonic recorder which has VHS, DVD-R + RAM, and Hard Dive and it has some basic editing software which allows you to remove adverts etc. It also has SD card slot, USB, and Firewire. I believe Panasonic still make something similar but without the VHS.
DVD recorder - I did have a DVD recorder in the 2000's which had a TV tuner inside, which would record on DVD-R discs similar to a VHS recorder
I remember the days of the old TV Detector Vans, although I'm not aware they were ever effectively used to take people to court because the technology is so inexact (too many variables). Think they were more just stick waving.
I think you're confusing a DVD recorder with a DVD player, the DVD recorder has a built in TV tuner, which allows the recording of TV programs. Also I thought that the right to remove the implied right of access was a myth. Glad you clarified that. Keep up the good work, love your videos
Even if there was such a thing as a TV detector van then they wouldn't be allowed to use it anyway because that would breach article 8 of your human rights.
@@marcdraco2189 Was it really technically possible to detect the tiny signal (I assume it was the local oscillator) in a TV tuner ? I'd have thought it would be easier to detect the EMF from a line output transformer.
@@marcdraco2189😂😂😂😂 what a load of tosh
@@ProffAndy In an apartment building I doubt they could ever get a reading accurate enough. It was BS all along.
Have you ever seen such a van on the roads...No you haven’t as they are a fiction of the BBC’s imagination 🤬🤬🤬
@@prscrystalized3706 Well that's bollocks because I knew a guy who drove one. He actually diagnosed a fault in my old CRT TV from _outside_ my house using it.
That absolute cheek. That made me laugh quite a bit.
'If you don't respond to me, I'll show up at your door'. Something a jealous ex-partner would say. 😂
What is the GDPR position to request and hold personal information on a database if the person has clearly stated they do not require your service?
It’s about time the BBC do the same as all the other channels and obtain their income from advertising. That may just prompt them to make some decent programming rather than sell almost everything off.
My grandfather was a justice of the Supreme Court, I have several family members who are either barristers or solicitors, and I studied law at university myself about 50+ years ago and so have a deep, abiding interest in the law, especially jurisprudence. However, I do not practice law and have never practised it directly. I also read mathematics and still tutor young people in that subject from Oxbridge A-level to undergraduate. My own career was as a global corporate executive in strategy (long-retired) where I was frequently indirectly involved in legal questions and my innate understanding of the subject was very useful in recognising where I needed to involve the lawyers. I strongly admire the logic and reason in applying their discipline which is the hallmark of most barristers and hence enjoy your UA-cam videos. We old guys are very self-indulgent! Keep up the channel: insufficient people understand the joy and debate engendered by law adequately which is their loss.
The thing about failing to respond to letters should worry us. Many people credibly report that they can get one letter a month from TV licencing. Are thry claiming that failing to respond to one of those negates the withdrawal of rights of access ?
That would be ridiculous.
Got a sign saying "No cold callers / door salesmen". Had the rights of access removed with a copy of it on the porch window inside, along with the TV licensing letter saying im exempt. And one still came right up to the door, full suit and shades and started hammering the door yelling "TV Licensing OPEN THE DOOR NOW!" So I opened it on the chain latch and told him. "We have revoked the access right, we dont need a license, please leave." He put his boot in the door and ragged the door back and forth and broke the frame the chain was on. My partner whose a officer was in the shower, heard and came down when the goon shoved his way in. My partner instantly pulled out their badge and informed him "X constabulary. Trespassing. B&E & criminal damage." Our property has CCTV which caught it all. Goon made a threat about coming back with "the boys" covered his face with the suit jacket up and left. Took him to court over it.
Long story short. My partner was encouraged to drop it by their boss because "the higher ups" wanted it "dealt with." He was found guilty and ordered to pay the damages to the property and our legal fee's. We also had to sign a gag order for 5 years which expired in 2022. Leading up to, and during the trial, we were constantly getting withheld numbers calling the house, black BMW's parking outside the house with suited men staring at the property and driving off whenever we went to approach them. Even with that, the Judge still refused harassment and, after the trial, told us "and for God's sake, buy a bloody license. Make all of our lives easier, its only a hundred quid!" Havent had a license for 16 years since i left home, never will. Live TV is depressing. I just game and watch UA-cam videos.
Wow, that's crazy. What was the name of the company he worked for?
Government: "We're going green and forcing you with us!"
ALSO Government: "Lets send out endless paper letters for absolutely every little thing! The Amazon won't deforest itself!"
Paper is a renewable resource.
The letters aren't sent by the government, they are from the BBC.
Timber is grown like crops in the UK
I have 2 big dogs that bark when anyone knocks on the door .
And my dogs love me more then anything ....Get yourself some protecting in these hard times .
Stay safe out there people .
The most lawful neutral encounter I have ever had in real life - I wrote to the licensing company to explain we do not watch anything that requires a license and that the repeated letters through the letterbox were causing my autistic son a lot of distress. They immediately switched to sending the threats direct to my inbox instead.
I used to have two DVD recorders (early 2000's) and they would have inbuilt TV tuners to record live television.
you're a liar
I had a mate back in the early 1980s who's dad worked at Plessey (I think it was) as one of their "boffins", who told him that them old TV detector vans were for show, as such a device doesn't exist that can actually detect a TV that is on somewhere in your house.
He said they may be able to detect the sound of a live program through a window pane (no proper double glazing in them days) or physically look through your window and see the TV on. The advert used to show a Commer van and on top where a pair of horizontal cone things with a man inside the van looking at a screen with a diamond pattern on it. He said it was all false to scare people in to buying a TV licence.
Laughable isn’t it
It was possible to remotely view an old CRT, technically its still possible with LCDs but with radiation shielding being a thing these days its incredibly unlikely.
That is not me saying that they did use this technique to snoop but it was possible.
There are, or were DVD recorders with built in TV tuners. They are not very common these days, and appeared at the end of the VCR era. You could record onto a DVD-R or DVD-RW disc.
still have mine in the cuboard somewhere
Me too 🙂@@KemPeck1701
I used to use a TV tuner in conjunction with a VHS player to transfer VHS to DVD. Presumably it could have been used in some way to watch live broadcasts, but I never tried.
I received a letter saying that if I used a laptop or computer to watch ANY type of live broadcast (which UA-cam is full of) then I am legally required to buy a license. I think this is absolute nonsense. This has nothing to do with the BBC. I did not respond to the letter and last week they sent me one saying Warning! An investigation has been opened. This kind of thing would scare my elderly parents into buying one
Because it is the law that if you watch ANY live broadcast, you have to have a license.
I don't like it, but that is the law.
@@lfcbpro Well they can get lost. They can't keep moving the goalposts. Which they have done because they know they are no longer 2 of the 4 channels available and many people refuse to watch the BBC now. So they try to extend their crooked finger into the world of the internet over which they have no authority whatsoever except via this corrupt legislation. I refuse to fund paedophiles so they are not getting a penny from me.
Keep up the great work - WE DO appreciate your time with us BBB !!!!
I had that sort of similar letter. If they want to visit, they're more than welcome, they will be wasting their time though. I don't even have a TV and no Netflix, no subscriptions to live TV programs and just broadband without TV channel.
I only have PC monitors so good luck getting a TV signal on those.
Then they have the cheek to ask for feedback!
@@toshiroyamada2443