What if TV Licensing Officers Have a Warrant?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 вер 2024
- Understanding the law on Tv Licensing:
• TV Licensing
Free £50, bonuses, and more:
linktr.ee/blac...
Exclusive content: www.blackbeltb...
)
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein.
#blackbeltbarrister #lawyer #barrister
Description contains affiliate links; I will occasionally earn commissions from qualifying purchases or leads generated. Description may contain affiliate or sponsored links, for which we may receive commissions or payment.
Lol, imagine DVLA knocking on your door complaining you don't have a driving license, even though you don't drive. 🤷🤦
And then requesting every two years that you prove that you’re not driving.
@@muddyshoes2939 Please don't give the UK Gov any idea's - remember all future EV's will keep a record of your driving (roads, times, speed, driving style and weight of the vehicle in case you have passengers)
Don't give them ideas.
Or Tesco knocking on your door complaining that you haven't bought anything from them for a while, and based on that they want to check your fridge as you must be a shoplifter.
Post office HMRC etc all you the same unlawful legislation or there own internal prosecution. The law needs to change & fast, because the government & TV licencing are going to get sued big time just like the Post Office, Blood transfusion scandals & police, I'm fed up with paying taxes for thus government
Answer, get rid of the License!
Many of us already have done.
Exactly. A TV licence is ONLY needed because of the BBC. Cancel the licence and ditch the TV, start talking and watch UA-cam instead.
You only get crap from the BBC, ITN, SKY, Channel 4. Ditch the licence and put them out of business.
I have not had a licence for the best part of 10 years now. What is broadcast is NOT what I call entertainment anyway.
'Licence'!
@@davidperry2306 I am the same canceled my tv licence about 8 years ago , because BBC is rubbish and so is a lot of itv and channel 4.
I got a quite a few calls to see my TV (don't have one )in the end i told them if i got one more visit I would goto the police and have the visitors charged with illegal harassment, the visits stopped.
I see. Then how do you see the BBC being financed? Adverts? Not very nice especially when the BBC is expected to set the standard for the commercial channels to follow. If you don''t believe me I suggest you go to the US and see for yourself the utter tripe that passes for TV over there.
15yrs not paid a penny.
It's very easy folks...
Ignore...ignore...ignore..
Thank you 😁
Same.
@Leidolfr You guess wrong sweet pants.
@Leidolfr I haven't watched anything requiring a TV licence for years. They send me a letter every month.
@@graphicmaths7677 "I haven't watched anything requiring a TV licence for years. They send me a letter every month."
You can get that reduced to once every two years. No need to tell them who you are or anything else.
MSM is an insult to my intelligence & I will not pay to see biased information!
I wouldn't call it a reasonable excuse, I would call having access to confidential information a very reasonable reason to refuse.
Yes, I do all my finances online, and would not let capita criminals look at it.
people talking authoritatively never need to rely on the word "very".. they assume it is unnecessary..
@@etiennedevignolles7538 I agree with what you say, but do you know that the government are working on a plan to look into your pensioners Bank Account to see how much you earn and spend. And they may get round to you and every one else.
Tomatoes, tomatoes.
Where does this leave Banks who have been told by the present Government that they have every right to check pensioners bank accounts if they suspect them of being over the tax threshold in earnings? This erosion of private rights seems ever more tenuous.
Which is more "tenuous": (a) the erosion, or (b) private rights?
The new law for the checking of bank accounts for anyone on benefits only applies, Section 35, to a bank account used by a person getting benefits paid into it. If you get a DWP benefit paid into account A, then get your other money's paid into a completely unassociated account B. They have neither the time or resources to go to every single bank for every person.
@@johnc2438Correct-Wrong word-should have said' pressing'not tenuous!
@@johnc2438 Not just pensioners, any person on benefits. Uno because anyone in need of assistance an old, disabled family ect.... Is a criminal by proxy of claiming
@@jimbrown2688 Thank you for that information.
One of the laptops I use is owned by the MOD, with two other laptops owned by companies which also contain restricted data. When I answer the door, I always lock the laptop I am using. It would be a far more serious offence if I unlocked and handed either of those over to anyone from TV licensing.
I suppose you count blankets in the stores
I would imagine not even the courts have the power to issue a warrant to search mod laptop, that would have to come from someone higher up!
@@geordiewishart1683 I am not employed by the MOD, so the answer would be a no to that one.
@@kevlarkmany people I am friends with work on contracts which supply equipment to the MOD amongst other companies, for example BAE. I suppose that if the TV Licensing asked to examine their laptop or home computer they would be told that allowing access would be a violation of the Official Secrets Act in exactly the same way as it would be to ask a MOD person to allow access to a work device as chances are the licensing staff lack the required clearance.
@@cuddlybear_uk Yes, they would have to contact their security controller for guidance. The answer I'm fairly certain would be no.
I don't suppose it's restricted to those working for a defence company, as I can't see why any company would give permission for someone from another company to have access to their IT equipment.
A few years back when they visited my step daughter they told her she needed a TV license because she had a mobile phone, even though she showed them that her TV wasnt able to pick up any TV signal as she didnt have an indoor ariel. This is the problem, once you let these people in you are leaving yourself open to them stitching you up as even if you dont watch live TV they can quite easily find a way of making it look like you do
It is a really high % of women who get prosecuted, probably because they are too polite to just shut the door in their faces when they come to investigate.
The TV licence has mutated to become a communication licence as almost any communication could be used to watch live broadcasts or access iplayer.
Just tell them they have had the right to enter your property has been removed. NEVER let them in. That's it.
@@LlamasOnMySofa
Nope, don’t do that.
Say nothing and close the door if you’ve opened it to them.
Ignore them and DO NOT engage with them at all.
@@LlamasOnMySofaA warrant would override this.
It's got to be 12 years since I had a TV licence or watched TV - I initially registered as no licence needed, but once it became obvious they thought I was in some kind of contract to reassess that decision every two years I just ignore all contact. I advised them when I cancelled the license there won't be another second of my life spent in front of a propaganda box, if they think I need to reassess that decision every two years they are free to think it to themselves for the rest of their lives. I save all the letters they send me and once a year I pay to send them back to Darlington so they can re-used them instead of wasting a tree or 3 and I am yet to receive a thank you.
😂😂😂😂
Absolutely! The presumption I watch mainstream *programming* is deeply offensive.
How fucking dare they!
I just put RTS on the envelope then put it in the post box.
Why pay to send them back. ?
Save them till MARCH then send them back to arrive for the first of APRIL
Mark them "RETURN TO SENDER"
blank out YOUR address box then POP into a post box when out and about. JOB DONE.😊
You are missing out on a lot of excellent BBC programmes then. GB News is clearly and unashamedly a propaganda box.
You missing some very big points 1.they have a policy of not breaking in.
2. You do not have to stay in the property you can walk away
3. They have no power to ask for your identity. No identity no interview no summons.
You really need to think a bit wider over the warrant situation
So if they turn up just go to the pub and don't talk to them?
Not quite; just go up to your bedroom and sit there. No access to the upper floor of my home BY ANYONE. If they can't get any picture on the downstairs TV then they've no right to go fishing upstairs.
@@chrisstephens6194just don't talk to them. You have a right to remain silent and that cannot be used against you.
Don't open the door. And when you for some reason do... the guy has to identify himself, when he does you say:No thank you, good bye and slam the door in their faces. Let them come back with the police and fine you... I think paying a fine every three years is cheaper than getting the licence....
@@dannytangier2944Having a criminal record is costlier.
How would you know they had a warrant, if you don’t answer the door to them?
How would you know the warrant is not fake? Best to assume it is.
@@grrinc just get a spy hole on your door & don’t answer the door to them, don’t engage with them, don’t look at any paperwork or B.S. warrants from them,
Biggest mistake people make is opening the door & engaging in a conversation with them..
You'll be able to look at the warrant once the door has been broken down.
Lol
@@petersmart2894 Warrants for TV licensing are never enforced by breaking down the door. Peaceable entry only. The PR would be too bad for the BBC.
Remember if they ever turn up at your home with a warrant just keep the door shut.
They won't force entry and the police can not assist they are only there to make sure that no breach of the peace takes place.
The BBC attitude is one of “guilty until proven innocent.”
Sums up the police too to be honest.
@@fus149hammer5 And the Post Office
Same attitude as the British Post Office.
It's Capita, not BBC. Training lasts about 15 minutes!
Thats there policy employment law jurisdiction which you dont need to comply with
I don't let anyone in. My family and I live like hermits with the last visitor being many years ago.
hmmmm sounds a bit weird.
@@beeceuk you're right. Life can go in a weird direction of you're not careful.
I'd do the dame , in Blackpool .
@@beeceuk Nothing wrong with being weird, especially after all the sheep in the last 4 years.
@@normanpearson8753 there is nothing like a dame
Answer to this is ...give them no reason for a warrant if they are at your door don't have the tv on show or blaring out. Have tv facing away from the window. Answer door with who are you.. TVL... No thanks and shut the door do not sign anything do not answer questions do not let them in 😊
The local oscillator will still transmit through the Ae.
My property has a sky Dish outside the building. I don't use.it but it's still installed
I am under the understanding that, to obtain warrant, the person requesting said warrant must have reasonable proof of wrongdoing.
Same here. They can’t waltz up to a judge asking for a warrant with absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing. Maybe I’m wrong .
@theskidmarkoforion4829 I think you will find that the BBC can do it... remember they get the thumbs up from every government to basically demand money with menace.. which I thought was illegal
In the USA- they bypass normal laws and do whatever they please.
@@theskidmarkoforion4829Exactly, otherwise magistrates would be giving them out more often.
Communications Act 2003:
366
Powers to enforce TV licensing
(1)If a justice of the peace, a sheriff in Scotland or a lay magistrate in Northern Ireland is satisfied by information on oath that there are reasonable grounds for believing-
(a)that an offence under section 363 has been or is being committed,
(b)that evidence of the commission of the offence is likely to be on premises specified in the information, or in a vehicle so specified, and
(c)that one or more of the conditions set out in subsection (3) is satisfied,he may grant a warrant under this section.
So the standard is REASONABLE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE.
This is the common standard for warrants.
This differs from the standard which allows police to stop and search you on the street, looking for prohibited articles, which is REASONABLE GROUNDS TO SUSPECT.
So you would expect there to be a good argument if the magistrate is convinced that there are reasonable grounds to believe, but again, these are very subjective.
This is the first time I have considered that you are open via a back door to search your devices which now contain for many people their banking details legal and professional client confidentiality etc etc via a Warrant from a Judge or Magistrate for TVL. I think this needs some kind of investigation by Parliament because of Data Protection. Very good film by the BBB.
You've covered situations with professional people which is all fine and well, but many 'normal' couples send each other saucy pictures as well, and why the heck should some cop or the BBC have the right to see it?
That be just what the bbc want 😉😉🤣🤣🤣
Why would they want to look at your photos if they are only trying to see if you watch the TV live?
@@mytwopennorth7216 this is the BBC we all know what they get up to Huw Edwards , Jimmy Saville need I say more
@@mytwopennorth7216 As you can watch TV on your smart phone, just like any laptop or PC.
@@mytwopennorth7216 Did you not watch the video? They want access to your device! Daniel's protected content is hardly likely to be iplayer. Get back under your rock!
For many people with work computers it would be a breach of the Computer Misuse Act 1990. As said, it opens up potential Data Protection breaches, too.
As soon as they show up to my door I will be telling them I am officially removing their right to access !!!
They take that as a reason to apply more pressure. Your best bet is to say nothing and gently close the door if you've accidentally opened the door to them. Even better, don't answer at all. I could be wrong, but I believe they need to know who you are before they can get a warrant. In any case, even if they get a warrant, they need evidence to get it and you should always film the proceedings.
Removing their right to access doesn't help you in the case of them having a warrant.
@@eIucidate they don't have warrants.
@@ameliagfawkes512no they don't. You made that up.
They would not even get in my home, I have CCTV and know who is outside and simply wouldn't answer the door.
I get harassed by TV licencing all the time and have even had the goons at my door in the past, I have not watched TV in years but TV licensing just wont take no for an answer, I even wrote to them to demand they ceased harassing me and they wrote back and basically refused and said they were enforcing the law!
You can fit a postbox no one needs access through your property's boundary by locking gates
@@marklittler784 I dont have fences or gates, the land at the front of my home borders the car park where I live on one side and the public footpath on the other.
My CCTV does the trick though, I have a 7 camera system and know exactly who's outside long before I think about answering a knock at the door.
If they have a warrant , they have probably lied to get it. Personally, I would tell them to go away
Whilst I don't disagree with you, the law is grossly unfair, and you will be deemed guilty by default. You will then have a criminal record.
I've already got one.
@@samuelburnett6811 I'm pretty sure you can challenge a falsely acquired warrant in court.
If you do not let one of these sales people into your home then they cannot acquire evidence that you're doing anything wrong, even if you are not.
They cannot force their way into your home.
You cannot snoop through your windows.
If you never let one of them into your home, and your TV cannot be seen from your front window, yet they show up with a warrant then they will have acquired it illegally and you should be able to challenge it in court.
if they have lied to get a Warrant, then that is Perjury. And that means shower time with Bubba for them.......enjoy.
They dont have my name at my address and when they have got an answer I've just told them that l don't require a licence thanks. In the past I've said that if you dont drive you don't need to let the DVLA know that you dont require a driving license do you? It's really that ridiculous isnt it 😂.
If you have no option but to unlock your phone & hand it over . Go to battery settings and enable maintenance mode. No private content will be accessible only the default apps will be visible. That setting can't be deactivated without your phones pin.
What possible use is there in examining a phone or laptop or other portable device. They may have legally been used to receive TV broadcasts from a home that has a TV licence.
It will be a great day indeed for this country when the TV licence is abolished. I have hope that one day we will get this much needed justice, it would solve ALL the immorality involved around the entire sham.
All this could be avoided by forcing the BBC to raise its own funds through adverts.
Yes well the BBC is trying to get the TV License to be part of everyone's Council Tax now because so many are refusing to purchase the TV License because so many just don't watch LIVE TV broadcasts so the BBC is trying to move the goalposts - you breathe air in the UK you must pay as part of your council tax a BBC License to do so and there will only dead people who will be exempt but if the BBC can prove that they are consuming UK air then they might force them to pay as well, just think of all that back pay they could claim !
They wouldn't know where to start, having never been obliged to make any effort to earn their revenue
@@GEOFF0906but they’ve had no problem selling off their media to private companies around the world before. 😂
@@GEOFF0906 The bbc owns several companies, who make programmes on their behalf and sell those, with adverts, to other countries. The bbc actually builds advert spaces into its programmes but for the UK audiences, only advertises its own programmes, at this point. They have had decades of experience in advertising now, so could easily bring them in.
Just never let them in they won't force entry.
I'm pleased you brought this up, BBB. How can we possibly know if the warrant is correct, to even let them into our property. What do we look for in reading the alleged warrant? Does it have to have the judge's name on it, and or a signature of the judge and printed name at the bottom of the warrant, for instance? Most people have never seen or looked at a warrant. This cannot be as classed legal advice, more of a public service for law-abiding people, who are legally licence free. Some fraudsters are turning up with alleged warrants. Only to find later the homeowner has been duped and then been robbed.
Most people have a device capable of viewing live broadcasts, so, that argument goes straight out of the window. All they could look for were recordings ... and they can still sod off !
It's important to note that the duty to provide assistance, only applies to the *examination and testing* , and not to the searching.
please elaborate - Because giving up one's pin or password so that a person unknown to you can peruse you digital device's for as long as they believe is necessary - remember I have 2 phones, 1 tablet, 2 laptops, 2 Desktops, 2 SFF PC's and 2 mini PC's. Yes Computers have been my Hobby and work since the 1980's ! Maybe I am the exception but that's the point, as time goes on we have more and more digital devices and are they allowed to peruse your cloud accounts ? Where does it end !
@@mrtuk4282 What I'm pointing out is, there's no duty to assist them in searching for receiving equipment.
If they miss something, that's their bad luck.
@@mrtuk4282 "and are they allowed to peruse your cloud accounts ?"
Not without a Section 49 notice.
@@BedsitBob But most peoples desktop computers are pretty obvious in any room especially if also a gaming PC with multiple monitors !
@@mrtuk4282 Yes, and they can't access them (assuming they're password protected) without a Section 49 notice, which they aren't going to get, over a TV Licence.
That was great info, i love learning my about my rights. I may never use the information, but i feel better knowing it.
If your information is “stored on a cloud” it is stored on someone else’s computer. Ergo ‘they’ have access to it.
Yes, but with an SLA with Google/Microsoft as to the security of the data.
Black Belt Barrister:
A 'Television Receiver' is for receiving radiated broadcasts.
This is NOT the same technology as receiving data-packets over the internet. An end-node like a laptop is NOT a 'receiver' (unless you are using it with a USB ariel).
Can we please understand this distinction once and for all. Tks.
Television receiver is defined within the legislation (regulation 9 of the Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations 2004): "any apparatus installed or used for the purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy or otherwise): (a) any television programme service, or (b) any on-demand programme service which is provided by the BBC; whether or not the apparatus is installed or used for any other purpose." That being the case I'm afraid your understanding of what it means is incorrect.
@@magistratesblog7928 No, I'm afraid it is nt. (Network engineer - some 20 years) Good day.
@@magistratesblog7928No. Receivers are for RF transmissions, Not the Internet. Your clause is mistaken.
@@lynnecromack4933 You are entirely missing the point. The legislation specifically defines what a television receiver is. It doesn't matter what you think it is. It doesn't matter that the definition might not chime with your opinion. It is there in black and white. Good day.
@@wingaard What I said to her. I've given you the legal definition. I've referenced it. I'll even link to it for you: www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/692/regulation/9
Stopped in the street to search your device. Can't wait for that one 😁
The police are already at it !
to enter your phone i believe they have to have reasonable grounds to search you and your belongings,
U got a permit for that licence mate?
@@davidlewis2377 There wouldn't be any point at all in them searching a phone. TV licences cover physical addresses, not devices. For that reason any evidence of TV reception on a mobile phone proves absolutely nothing at all.
@@magistratesblog7928 From TV licencing web site: "If you’re using a mobile device powered solely by its own internal batteries - like a smartphone, tablet or laptop - you will be covered by your home’s TV Licence, wherever you’re using it in the UK and Channel Islands."
I would imagine having a MOD laptop which is covered under the OSA would be reasonable excuse given that the inspector won’t have the necessary clearance to view it
Yes. If they wanted to view a government or what ever Organizations piece of property they would have to apply to thedept that person works for as it's government/private property not yours and holding government,mod,.NHs or what ever private, confidentual, sensitive and/or restricted data.
@@KevandPerry2what about if like my friend who works for BAE it had credentials and information pertaining to a MOD contract but is his own device that he uses Cisco software to create a secure connection?
Private information whether it be business or Government or other people personal information should mean that they should not get access to, but it seems that Business and Government and other peoples private information is out of bounds except ones own personal information ?
@@cuddlybear_uk it would be an offense to allow anyone to access that device (disclosing protected information). The person accessing the device would also commit the offense or obtaining protected information. They may also both commit a further offense (working for BAE) or disclosing and obtaining trade secrets. BAE would likely pursue gross misconduct, and he would almost certainly never obtain even BPSS again.
dont answer the door it is as simple as that,he is an admiralty law lawyer and is under their spell
You’re not obliged to open the door, especially, if you’ve not flouted the law! 🚪Islamically, or under shariah, if implemented and enacted properly, if there’s no answer at the door after three knocks (thrice attempts), the person knocking or ringing rather has to leave so as not to cause the inhabitants or residents trouble or inconvenience (them)!!! And to think, Islam is deemed “backwards!” Islam, takes care of the small or minor issues such as knocking, before entering another’s territory as well as focussing on the macro (macro and micro) are taken care of in Islam…
Never let them in. Ever.
You don't have a lot of choice if they have a warrant.
@@eadweard. Yes you do. You can ignore them.
@@MikeEves A warrant entitles them to force entry.
@@eadweard. Then you defend yourself and your home and treat them as home invaders with the use of force.
@@imsoreetodddid9007 So? They can still come in whether you ignore them or not.
Very, very worried about this escalating aggressive intrusion by the TV Licencing lot. Are there any exceptions made for disabilities? We do not need or want a Licence. I am a carer to my autistic son who lives with me. He has been suicidal and suffers from extreme anxiety. To have anyone 'invade' our home, or touch his computer would be shattering. There is no accounting for what could happen, someone is likely to get hurt. I WILL NOT BE LETTING THEM IN.
Thanks a lot, enjoyed that - I'm the guy who emailed in
As a former member of the UK armed forces - sharing information on that may see me liable for prosecution by way of the additional part of the official secrets act I had signed.
This may have very serious and damaging effects on UK government safety and security.
Just get a door cam and if it doesnt look like someone you aren't expecting then don't answer the door. You can get battery operated ones that charge via usb and you can stick to the door with 3M sticky pads and no wiring.
@Utopian_Turtletop-vn1iu ROFL whatever works for ya
The most IMPORTANT thing here is, a TV licence sales person cannot get a warrant without evidence.
They cannot get evidence if they do not enter your home.
They cannot falsify evidence.
If you do not require a TV licence and one of these sales people knock on your door, politely tell them you are not interested and close the door.
They cannot attempt to stop you from closing your door.
If you're lucky enough that the room which your TV is in doesn't face the street, no one can tell if you even have a TV.
Even so, if your living room faces the street/your front garden, the sales person cannot start snooping through your windows.
The only way they can get a warrant is if you somehow incriminate yourself when talking to them on your doorstep, or you let them in to your property.
Take myself as an example. I do not watch or record live TV or watch anything on any BBC service.
My TV is used exclusively for gaming and watching DVDs/blu-rays.
If one of these sales people knocked on my door I'd tell them I do not require a licence and I'm not interested, and then I'd close the door.
End of.
They cannot attempt to enter my property.
They have no right to go peering through my windows.
They will not have any evidence to get a warrant whatsoever.
I personally have no fear of TV licensing turning up to my property with a warrant, and if they somehow did acquire a warrant it would be under false pretences and I would challenge it in court.
I presume if you Bank online via your laptop and mobile phone then that would be sensitive data
Thanks. Another conversation that has been very helpful.
What's the warrant got to do with anything, if you don't answer the door
Exactly, how can they say you obstructed them if you don't appear to be in ?
TOP TIPS:
1) Don't leave keys in your door or on view . Keys in the door suggests someone may be in .
2) Don't leave letters or parcels with name and address on in view of a window or glazed door .
3) Don't answer the door to strangers
4) ALWAYS keep doors and windows locked .
If the goon squad turn up with the police then they most likely have a warrant. Hopefully , you will see them coming towards your property . If this is the case act fast and hide/keep out of sight . You CANNOT be prosecuted for obstruction if they have not engaged with you .
live by the golden "NO CONTACT " rule .
Yep, it's meaningless
…was the letter signed? “Yours nervously, Gaz Glitter
My gang application below”
A follow on question. If a warrent was got using false information, what can you do about it ?
You can contest and escalate this because evidence is required for everything! The innocent can get implicated in the scenario you’ve mentioned which results in loss of time, not to mention other aspects like the emotional, mental and psychological ramifications that result in such a situation!
An interesting question. You wouldn't know that at the time they executed the warrant, so you'd be legally obliged to cooperate at the time. You can later obtain the information laid in relation to the warrant. If that information contained something that was deliberately misleading or blatantly dishonest then it would be a matter for the police to investigate.
@@magistratesblog7928 cooperate at the time! Make your point, however, if they don’t listen, record everything. This way you can back track as you’ll have substance for your words. Legally, you don’t have to open the door, if you’re not guilty!?!
I had the situation whereby I was asked to see my tv license. I said I didn't have one. I didn't have a tv.. They were incredulous so I invited them in to look and they didn't find one.
the idea of not wanting people to see sensitive stuff as a concept should stand, I have more concern with the idea of a tv licence esc warrant what are they testing for here? any device that connects to the internet can receive TV broadcasts even if u don't use it there is no real concrete way to prove you don't because its connected to the internet u can, I wouldn't give up my information to have them verify I don't need their scam service that I don't need
On phone they can check what apps are installed (such as bbc, itv etc). On a laptop they can open a browser and see the history. It would reveal whether you've gone to iplayer website for example.
From experience when a nieighbour had done some dodgy stuff, all the evidence of his dealings were on his laptop but his solicitor refused anyone to access it due to their being data not related to the case. The police never really pushed it and the laptop was held for months then returned. The case dragged out much longer due to this. So in this regards, I'd just tell them simply that there is important secure personal private data that is not related to this matter and therefore they cannot access my devices.
Not sure why that would be.
Police are under no obligation to take the word of anyone as to what might be on the device. Even a solicitor. Or else everyone would say that.
There are legislative safeguards which provide for the potential discovery of sensitive information which is not covered in the warrant.
But Police can go ahead and check, invoking those safeguards as required, if privileged material is found.
Let's not forget, police have previously got authority to bug a solicitors consultation with a suspect in a police station. This was in Northern Ireland where the solicitor was later convicted of inciting murder.
The point here is that the work of the TV licensing inspectors is much less intrusive.
Yes and then you are deprived of that device for 1 year or more and if it was a gaming PC as well as a banking, shopping PC in 1 year it has now become worthless also how could a PC Gamer go without their PC for 1 year, they should in all reasonableness loan you an identical PC within 7 days or return the PC - its not exactly rocket science to be able to image the drives onto a server to peruse at their leisure at some later point ! But they want to make it as inconvenient and lengthy as possible for not giving them unfettered access exactly when they demand it.
Unbelievable that all this nonsense is a thing, what on earth are we all doing wasting time with this silly licence fee or trying to enforce it?! It's time to scrap the licence fee, and just let the BBC advertise.
Television doesn't consist of just 3 channels anymore, it's time for them to compete.
I never want to see the BBC run ads. We deserve public access TV that isn’t beholden to commercial interests.
Replace the license fee, fine - but not with ads.
@@kaieden replace it with what though? How can they make money if they're not allowed to advertise, and we cut them off of our money?
Glad you asked: (1) Charge a subscription fee to access premium BBC TV content, (2) the BBC already makes a massive amount from licencing old content globally every year! @@SpareSomeChange8080
The BBC knows it will not generate enough revenue via advertising because it has expanded its workforce to 20,000 (4 X ITV) so it is now trying to coerce the UK Gov to force we councils to collect a TV License TAX as part of the council tax so that no one will be able to opt out and even low income families will be forced to pay whether they can afford a to even own a TV because as a disabled person on UC I still have to pay certain money to the council for my supported housing which are exempt from UC paying for - Obviously this will in future include the TV license aswell even though atm I could purchase the TV License at a reduce cost of £7 per year but refuse to because I don't think it value for money since I haven't watch LIVE TV broadcasts since before 1999/2000.
@@SpareSomeChange8080
Replace it with a subscription, like Netflix. Your BBC licence number combined with your postcode would act as a key to gain access. Nothing else is necessary.
@blackbeltbarrister
Question re scenarios.
I do not have a tv licence
Scenario 1:
I was working at a Nottingham based media broadcast venue. They recorded a BBC programme for politics. As part of my work there I watched some of it whilst there. My phone was plugged in. I assume I was covered by their licence as they make tv programmes.
Scenario 2:
I was at my mother’s house, she is covered by a tv licence. A family member watched something on my phone whilst I was there. Again, my phone was plugged in.
I have recently had an email stating they have seen activity on my account. I logged in and requested by activity. There was these two occasions plus once or twice when I’ve clicked a video from bbc news not realising it was live and then closed it.
I use bbc news app so I still have account from when I had a licence for that. I also listen to a couple of bbc podcasts using a non bbc podcast app.
It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this.
I called BBC TV Licensing in 2019 letting them know that I don’t need a TV License. The phone call took only a few minutes….
I haven’t heard from them since!
I wrote to them saying the same thing, and I also removed their rights to access my land. Got a letter back in acknowledgement. I have not heard from them since. That was in 2016.
I did no licence needed online 2 years ago and then last year I informed them again. I will keep on informing them every year whether needing to or not. I haven't had any letters or knocks on the door. If you abide by there rules then there should be no problems. If they turn up at my door and I would say come in I have nothing to hide. Most of my family is in the police force so bring it on I say and see where it gets you. I have nothing to hide. I don't watch tv. It's all unplugged and disconnected from the ariel. I watch UA-cam films and subscribe to people but no live tv. All done off my phone. If they want to look at my phone they can, again I have nothing to hide.
What about not needing a firearm's licence? Do you do that too?
@MikeEves No because I have a firearms licence, lol.
@@lizvickers7156I don't either but still have a gun. I wrote to the police to say I don't need a gun licence and they never bothered me.....😅
Calling it a "Television Receiver" presupposes that it is being used to watch our record live tv.
I think scenarios like this show how outdated the TV licensing law is. It was written in a time where electronic devices were largely single-purpose, "television" was synonymous with broadcast, and the divide between home and work were very clear. A lot of us now exist in a world where a work device that contains a lot of sensitive information can also serve as an entertainment hub.
Honestly, given the scenario, I think I'd rather refuse access to the work laptop - quoting it as "not my device" - be arrested, and have them sort that shit out at the station / in court.
Consider that the phone or laptop could belong to a member of parliament, the judiciary or someone serving in the military. The device could have access to protectively marked information at OFFICIAL, OFFICIAL-SENSITIVE, SECRET or TOP SECRET, moreover that information could carry a 'strap' to a specific person or job role.
In the limit you could end up with a magistrate having to decide whether TV Licensing should be allowed to inspect a laptop that might have something at Impact Level 6 or 7 ... that should only be accessible to someone that has signed the Official Secrets Act (for which it is an offence to admit that you have signed the Act) and could require someone with SC, DV or DV+ clearence to inspect.
Put passwords on all your computers, phones etc.
Without a Section 49 notice (which TVL aren't going to get), they cannot require you to give them access.
You'll probably end up being fined for obstruction.
@@Mad_as_a_box_of_frogs Your defence is the Code Of Practice for the Investigation of Protected Electronic Information.
This is a dreadful state of affairs. No-one should be allowed to look through your phone or any other device, just to see if you've been watching live TV. Whilst most people aren't in your shoes, Daniel, I would bet that they would have their own personal, private and confidential information stored there. I do, although none of it refers to customers or clients, but it is private and confidential to me.
Just what, exactly, would the warrant allow TVL to look at? All documents (surely there is nothing for them to see there) or photos and other pictures (ditto).
The only thing I could think of is your browsing history, but that could be just as confidential - dating sites or other deeply personal sites - and TVL should not be looking at that, either. There could be an argument that they could apply to your ISP to check if you've been watching live TV online, but even that I find intrusive.
The TV Licence, as it currently stands, needs to go. Personally, I don't want any kind of licence or tax, but it shouldn't be like it is at the moment.
Forgot about looking through your devices! They have free rein into one’s home (private/domestic sphere)! One’s right to privy is violated!?!?
use a VPN then the ISP wont be able to provide any information to TVL
To get a warrant they need evidence, so do not give them any. If they knock at your door either do not answer or if you do just say "no thanks, goodbye" and shut the door!
It's "reasonable grounds for believing" which doesn't necessarily require evidence.
@Leidolfr You are the kind of person who thinks a knock on your door is a demand when it is in fact a request....wake up
@@willgoodfellow lmao you are an absolute fool
Lol I don't even open it or communicate with them unless I know who it is people can always leave a card with a contact number
Believe it or not many people have large TV's on the rooms walls visible from outside the boundary of the house
I have personally had a TV licensing officer turn up to my door. He stated that this address is showing no license. I then informed him that I have already informed his offices that I don’t require one. He then said if I have a TV then I need a license, I then said no, I need a licence for the viewing not the equipment. He then said he can obtain a warrant. To obtain a warrant the officer will need physical evidence like video or audio of me watching TV without a license and he then needs to present this evidence to a judge. The judge will then and only then sign the warrant so without the judge’s signature on a warrant the officer can not enter your property with out that signature. I also told him if I have milk in my fridge then do I also need a cow in my back garden 😂
Test for what ? You can have a tv and not watch broadcast programs.
very true i have a tv but its never been used for actually watching tv (have not watched tv in 12 years) as its connected to my laptop and xbox both of which have never been used for watching any form of tv programs but under the BBC licensing they would try to claim that i would need a license to own those items because they "have the ability" to receive tv broadcasts not because they are being used for that
@@dazt5831 exactly, no doubt if you have equipment 'capable' of receiving/showing 'live' tv , they'll claim you need a licence for it, the only way to solve this is encrypt all tv services that would come under needing a licence, and when buying said licence, a decrypter device is supplied so you can then watch, each licence surely has a unique number, that could be used as a 'password' to access iplayer and similar ... only those that have bought a licence would be able to watch 'live' tv and no need for the 'goons' anymore
I have knives and a sword in my house.😅
They need proof to get a warrent, if your doing everright ,there's nothing to worry about
The best thing to do when they turn up is not to answer the door. They do not have the right to smash your door or force entry even with a warrant. They will eventually go away even if they have a police escort. This happened to me. I simply said a few words through the window, then shut the window and said no more. They went after deliberating outside for a few minutes. That was a couple of weeks ago and I have heard nothing since.
The warrant does give them the legal right to force entry if need be. I suggest you read the legislation. However, I believe it is their policy not to force entry, even though it would be allowed.
@@magistratesblog7928 Well, exactly the BBC is just about as unpopular as anything could be, and if there was evidence of them destroying someone's home over such a trivial matter, I think 1000s more would stop paying the license.
@@magistratesblog7928 I don't think the disgusting BBC would want to be seen destroying someone's property for such a trivial matter. They are already the most detested company in the country. I think they would lose 1000s more license payers if they started breaking in to people's homes.
Is tv license an criminal or civil offence?
The intentional failure to cooperate (you spoke to them from a window) would in my opinion be within the grounds covering by legislation and would probably result in further proceedings against you since it is in itself an offence even if you don’t need the licence.
If I was living in the UK I would probably get a TV licence whether or not I needed it. Consider it like paying protection money to the Mafia so that they will leave you alone.
Would you buy a gun licence too?
The way Capita work is very similar to the way the Post Office conducted their investigations into sub-postmasters. That didn’t work out too well for them, as we have seen at the Post Office Inquiry, when some of these ‘investigators’ have been questioned by Jason Beer KC. Perhaps Capita ought to be rethinking the way they bully, harass and intimidate people who don’t want to use their service before they too end up on the wrong side of Jason Beer KC.
If this individual has important files on their laptop, then based on my previous experience (albeit with police), I would always always recommend they have an offsite backup. Whether that is a cloud backup without any link to the laptop (I.e. so authorities cannot access the cloud backup and lock you out of it) or on a physical hard disk offsite. I was under investigation for over 2 years and had important business documents seized from servers but thankfully I had a physical offsite backup so I was able to access and restore most of my files whilst the police investigated the hard disks from servers for 2 years (without any success I should add. They could not find anything on me so they kept doing forensics on it over and over again until they gave up and handed the possessions back).
People should indeed refuse to open devices for 'examination'. However, that is when 'Lawfare' will kick in. Devices will be confiscated and returned, 'unopened', months later.
The process will be the punishment ... for never having broken any law.
Does that sound familiar !?!
If the device belongs to a company such as in the case of someone else who commented that it was used for MOD business I expect that it would cause all sorts of issues for the licensing goons. Imagine they took a laptop being used by a member of the CPS involved in investigating a serious crime and how that would play out in court. 😂😂😂😂
This is where the law breaks down, I have no problem with them taking my devices if there is a reasonable time limit of how long they will keep them for and fair compensation will be paid if they find no evidence of wrong doing. I personally haven't watched Live TV Broadcasts on any of my devices in over 24 years (Since before 2000). I have personal information on my devices and would be really put out if they were to remove them all for an unknown amount of time for them to investigate each device. Also being a disabled person who uses my personal digital devices as a form of entertainment, communication including being available to be called by DWP or UC or PIP aswell and as my online banking. I have limited funds so wouldn't be able to rush out and purchase new devices even for a temporary amount of time while they check my devices in fact I wouldn't be able to go online to do this since they would have removed the deices I would normally use for this. So would this be be fair and reasonable on their part, I bet if this were a jury trial then the BBC and Digital forensics would roasted in the media although I would probably have committed suicide over being bored to death having to just sit and watch a blank wall or purchase a TV License and all because I refused to buy a BBC TV License and watch LIVE TV broadcasts ! But that would not seem newsworthy so far as the BBC would be concerned although the general public might believe otherwise !
I believe they would need to seek a new warrant to seize devices. I feel like BBB has mentioned this before? Presumably the bar is set a lot higher by the courts for issuing that type of warrant.
The warrant is only for examination and test. They have NO power to remove any equipment whatsoever.
I think I may say no because I have pictures of family members that have passed and those pictures hold sentimental value to me. Also my phone is running beta software that the maker of my phone should may insist is their property. Lastly like most people I have banking apps that may give access to financial records.
is online banking a reasonable excuse? thank you for the information that you share in all your videos
my thougths exactly, what about those of us who use crypto wallets which are just as sensitive if not more so than a persons online banking
So if they test your equipment and determine that it can receive live broadcast, what does that prove? I does not prove they have been watching broadcast TV.
Some people have equipment such as a cable box to watch netflix app for example. Doesn't mean that person watches live TV. Having equipment doesn't prove how its used.
Yes that is true but you must actually cancel your licence. That’s where people go wrong.
Then the only way they can get you is if they can see what you are watching through your window. Or you are stupid enough to admit something.
@@personalcheeses8073 I didn't cancel my licence, it isn't compulsory to do so. Why are you saying it is? Plus they are no longer allowed to look through your window. Where are you getting your information from? Do you work for Capita/BBC?
@@personalcheeses8073You do NOT have to cancel your licence or make any declaration of not needing a licence.
In any case, such a declaration is meaningless. It does not actually prove you are not watching anything. So you may still get a visit. Doing their declaration might (or might not) stop you getting bombarded with harassment letters.
@@timg1246 If you want to live your life in peace you cancel. Otherwise they will never stop chasing you.
Make your life easier.
Yes, that's 100% legal - But the BBC wants to check just in case !, Its like the Police stating but you own a car that does more than 100MPH so you must be breaking the speed limit whether you even drive it or not !
What if I refuse to unlock my computer, using only the following argument (and also later in court if I get prosecuted for obstruction):
The warrant allows the licensing people to check only TV receivers, not other things.
A TV receiver is defined as any apparatus installed or used for the purpose of receiving TV programs.
My computer is not installed nor used for that purpose, therefore the TV licensing people have no power to check it.
If they press charges for obstruction, the burden is on them to prove that my computer is installed or used to receive TV programs. Just saying the computer can be used for it is not sufficient because people do install computers for other things and not for receiving TV programs, and plenty of people don't watch TV programs on their computers. Actually I'd say that's the majority.
Would that defense work?
Nothing... Just keep your door shut they don't force entry.
Spot on. They can't do sh*t
@@MikeEves They can't if you keep your door shut. Even with a warrant they do not force entry.
My advice is this. Never speak to them. Never let them in. Don't return letters. I'm 15yrs TV licence free and they still haven't taken me to court.
Only self admission will get you procecuted.
shut the door say nothing say no thanks? bearing in mind i do have a tv licence the cloud while good its risky i would prefer an external hard drive myself for sensitive info
My question on this is ; Whenever they contact me with their threats they address all communications to ' the occupier ' or similar ( even though I previously held a licence at this address ) . How can a warrant be valid without a name .
They can obtain a warrant to search the premises. Does not require a name.
Certainly in Northern Ireland, the warrant template has a section for ownership or residence of the premises.
Whilst a name can go in there, it is better practice to simply write that the premises are under the control of the occupant. That is still valid. That gets around any legal argument that the named, potential offender is not an owner or legal tenant. Occupant is much more vague and all encompassing.
A warrant is authority to search premises.
As long as the premises are properly identified then there is no need to identify a person along with them.
A magistrate in issuing the warrant should be satisfied that there is a reasonable connection to the premises and a potential suspect.
The law says they can inspect the "television receiving equipment". Has it been tested in court that this includes laptops and phones?
As I understand it no civilian (i.e. TVL investigator) has the right to examine any personal devices such as mobile phone or laptop/computer with just a warrant of entry. In other words the police would have to get a Court Order to seize such equipment but then they would need evidence of serious crime such as child pornography or drug dealing. Having a TV set though would be different but even that is not evidence of watching a live television broadcast when it could legally be used for catchup services etc without a TV licence.
From the law, "Where a person has the power by virtue of a warrant under this section...". You're right, if that's all the warrant says. But the law implies the warrant may also grant the examining of devices. I guess read the warrant in full before letting anybody in.
I don't understand the panic.
Look the worst scenario is a fine.
You can't be arrested.
You don't have your finger prints taken or a mug shot.
You can't go to jail.
Nothing to be scared of really.
There is a very slight chance of a jail sentence if you don't pay the fine, but I believe they prefer to send the debt collectors /Bailliffs.?
Hang on, Daniel - The Communications ( Television Licencing ) Regulations 2004 ? Has this been repealed??
Section 11 -Meaning of "television set" - which means any apparatus which is capable of receiving any television programme service - but is not computer apparatus""
The legislation pertains to "television receivers". Regulation 9 refers. The removal of regulation 11 makes no difference to the legislation from an enforcement point of view.
Way before 2004 TV tuner cards (Hauppauge were the most popular) were included in equipment capable of receiving broadcast television, so section 11 was unnecessary anyway. That's why it was removed.
Wouldnt we be protected under GDPR/Data protection act and Article 8 of the Human Right Act in this scenario?
Safely stored on a cloud service, haha, you're so funny.
hmm, yeah, the 'cloud' is just someone elses computer, if the firm goes bust, or their server fails, you're buggered, you'd have to have the same data across several c,oud services, plus a local backup (NAS device?) to be as secure as possible against data loss
The fact is as it is Capita that’s buying these depts from bbcl , surely as I have no signed contract with bbc or capita dept collection agents I would not be obliged to take any notice of them, if they buy a dept that’s their fault don’t expect me to pay for it🤷♂️
"Duty" my arse. If it's not an entry by force warrant, they can whistle. Communicate with them from a bedroom window.
"Duty". Is something they made up....
‘Television receiver’ - a device to receive RF transmissions and convert to images with sound.
"on the premises"
So stand on the public pavement outside your house and let them conduct the search (with cctv enabled inside)?
No Licence is required in Australia.Only customs at airport is allowed to look in your phone .In South Africa in 80s they ask to check how many tv's thats it,I dont know what going today,This seems out dated Law.
They won't force entry.
BBC Licence must go.....subscription must replace, you can then choose if you want to watch.
A laptop is not a television receiver.
But if it is connected to the internet it can receive live televison broadcasts.
Oh dear. Do keep up.
Thing is my letters say I need a TV license if I watch a TV they word it as just owning one is reason.
It’s rather misleading isn’t it.
What equipment have I ever purchased from the bbc ever? The old tv purchased not from the BBC. The electricity purchased and paid for by me. Private purchase of fire stick , Roku etc by self, old aerial by self so what equipment ? I don’t understand ?
i dont know if they still do it but when i bought a new tv some 10 or so years ago, i had to give name and address details for them to pass on to TV licensing, so they know who buys tv equipment, they said it was the law and if i refused i they would not sell me the tv or any similar tv equipment
@@andygozzo72 You didn't have to do any such thing as it wasn't the law, so they lied to you. I had that when buying a TV years ago in Curry's. They asked for my details. I told them to sod off as a retailer has no business knowing my personal details when purchasing from them, let alone passing them on to a third party.
@@philgreen8101 i was told it from more than one shop, i also had to give my info when buying a mini freeview box from maplin, , no info, sale would be refused
Under GDPR, I'm really careful which apps I install on my business phone. Nothing that isn't completely necessary.
telephone cord and a tree
Simple solution you ask for their full names, if they are with the police ask for their names and numbers too, then simply tell them you are more than happy for them to come in and look around, but before you do you need to know that they are who they say they are, so tell them you are closing the door while you ring their company to check they are legit, no court in the land will convict you for checking people are who they say they are before you let them into your house, same with the police, it’s not hard to replicate their uniforms or even vehicles, once the door is closed you then go around the house and cut the plugs off the TV’s make yourself a brew then think about letting them in 😉
Don't open the door.
Agree. You’re not obliged too!
Surely everyone's phone has private pictures on it, so no chance would they should have access.
No S49 RIPA, no data
(1) In Part 4 of the Act (licensing of TV reception), “television receiver” means any apparatus installed or used for the purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy or otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is installed or used for any other purpose.
If your laptop is not used for receiving any television programme service. Then it is not a television receiver and does not fall under this act? Giving assistance is admitting it is a television receiver? not sure but seems logically sound
We can have reasonable excuse but will the courts even care ?
Nope !
exactly, magistrates courts are beyond untrustworthy now and seem to act of their own prejudice
Flip the power breaker before you open the door, if you are going to open the door. Watch them try and test away
Sorry, that would be covered under "reasonable assistance". But I take your point, there have been some nasty Capita scum who have actually sat on the floor in front of the TV and retuned it to prove that the TV "could" receive TV broadcasts.