• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

TV detector vans

Well that depends on where you live -

In Denmark you have to pay license if you have a TV, no matter if you use it or not. It could be sitting in your basement, you still have to pay.

Fair point, however my comment wasn't referring to any discussion about Denmark, as there hadn't been one.

Your Danish rule is more like US laws I suppose, where you need a licence merely to own some equipment regardless of what you do with it. I can't understand the logic behind it though, unless TVs are deadly weapons in Denmark? I suppose a rock star could hurl one out of a hotel window and kill an innocent passerby...

Do you need a licence per set or merely per household?
 
ISTR they used a sensitive reciever and a directional aerial to tune into the TV reciever's Intermediate Frequency in order to determine if the TV is actually recieving a broadcast. Seems it's possible to detect such things via this method.

However, it requires relatively specialized equipment and a somewhat trained operator. I suppose it's probably just as effective to randomly hassle households known to have a TV.


It would be nice if you could subscribe to some kind of satellite TV with hundreds of channels, but explicitely not receive any BBC.

That's how to put the nail in the coffin of the BBC and their government patrons (note: patrons with your money, not their own.)
 
I just had a visit from a TV licensing man. He was polite and I let him look at my living room and showed him a TV in the hall that's waiting to be picked up by a local charity. I then felt the urge to email TV Licensing to ask them about the uilty-until-proven-innocent policy and so forth.
Prompting me to look back at this thread.
From a PDF on tvlicensing.co.uk:
a license is required to receive BBC, ITV, Channel 4, Channel 5, satellite, cable and/or digital television
Well, that's fair then. Why don't they pay some of the tax to ITV and SKY?
If we suspect you are (using a TV without a license) our staff may interview you under caution in line with the applicable criminal law requirements within each jurisdiction.
and
Note that if we are refused access, we may use our detector vans or apply to court to obtain a search warrant
and
We received just over 9,000 telephone complaints during 2003 (...) we received 9,000 written complaints during 2003.
 
I just had a visit from a TV licensing man. He was polite and I let him look at my living room and showed him a TV in the hall that's waiting to be picked up by a local charity.

Moopet- Polite or not, I think you will be prosecuted. You had a TV on your premises and (from context), no licence. Given TVLUK's attitude- (Everyone has a TV, so anyone without a licence is a criminal unless we can look in their house)- you would seem to have confirmed their suspicions. You have no licence. You have a TV. QED.

If they prosecute, it comes down to who the court believes-
1.Your statement that the TV was in transit to the charity shop or 2.TVLUK's view that you are a criminal.

I suspect 2 is more likely, unless you can show a paper trail (licence, receipts etc) proving where the set came from.

Please let us know what develops, if anything.
 
Moopet- Polite or not, I think you will be prosecuted. You had a TV on your premises and (from context), no licence. Given TVLUK's attitude- (Everyone has a TV, so anyone without a licence is a criminal unless we can look in their house)- you would seem to have confirmed their suspicions. You have no licence. You have a TV. QED.

Nah.
 
Meanwhile, back at the opening post...

Has anybody been prosecuted based on a report from a detector van? What was in the report? "Intruments showed the at 7:47 PM on June the 14th, there was a TV on the upper floor, street side, north corner of this residence. It was tuned to BBC 4...."

Aren't records of criminal proceedings open to the public in England?
 
I suspect not. I reckon that they can only use the detector as supporting evidence - so they actually have to catch you with a tv in the house as well. I don't know whether unplugging it when the doorbell rings and muttering about Oxfam will put them off - let us know, please, moopet ;)
 
first, i can't believe what i am hearing. tv licenses? pay to own a TV or radio? where the hell do you live, communist north korea? that is an outrage! this is the first time in my life i am glad to be an american over an englishman. how do you people put up with that?

we have public TV in the US, PBS. it is funded by telethon drives and some government money. but to FORCE people to pay for TV?! we would revolt here.

maybe that's one of the major differences between the US and the UK, we have a more ornery nature and are more liable to go into the streets and riot. and steal TVs. and not buy licenses.

btw, funny you don't like american tv, because i get BBC here, and many of your shows, and several channels carry BBC news. so, we get almost everything you do there.

eastenders, black adder, are you being served, allo allo, the kumars, benny hill, monty python, coupling, father ted, yes PM, i get them all.

so, our TV encompasses the best of your TV.

also, we have a 24 hour science channel, and many other channels not filled with crappy dramas like 'west wing' or 'desperate housewives' and such. we have a techie channel, G4, we have a documentary channel, independent film channel, many others.

perhaps being from the UK you didn't realize that we have more than four or five channels. i, in fact, get over two hundred. counting PPV, On Demand, and music, i get over 500.

my sister moved to england 3 years ago. an avid TV watcher in the US, she hates TV in the UK. too boring and dry, she says. personally, i love the british comedies, but your dramas are so boring. it makes it seem like you brits are as boring as hard-tack.

no offense, my brit friends. i admire you for many things, and you do many things better than us. but media entertainment is not one of them.
 
perhaps being from the UK you didn't realize that we have more than four or five channels. i, in fact, get over two hundred. counting PPV, On Demand, and music, i get over 500.
Er, we have satellite and cable TV in the UK, too.
 
Er, we have satellite and cable TV in the UK, too.

Yeah, and I heard that a guy in my town has a TV where the pictures are in colour!!! But I don't believe it. They'll be saying people have been to the moon, next.
 
Last edited:
Er, we have satellite and cable TV in the UK, too.

sure you do. you haven't even invented coffee yet, you all have to drink that crappy tea.

sar·casm (särkzm) n.

1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.
3. The use of sarcasm.

are you really english?
 
Moopet- Polite or not, I think you will be prosecuted. You had a TV on your premises and (from context), no licence. Given TVLUK's attitude- (Everyone has a TV, so anyone without a licence is a criminal unless we can look in their house)- you would seem to have confirmed their suspicions. You have no licence. You have a TV. QED.

If they prosecute, it comes down to who the court believes-
1.Your statement that the TV was in transit to the charity shop or 2.TVLUK's view that you are a criminal.

I suspect 2 is more likely, unless you can show a paper trail (licence, receipts etc) proving where the set came from.

Please let us know what develops, if anything.

No, no, no and no.

I AM NOT SAYING IT AGAIN!!!!

Oh, alright, I guess I am saying it again *takes a deep breath*.

If the TV was not connected to anything, then moopet will not, cannot, shall not be prosecuted. I'm going to shout, only because I want people to understand this bit:

IF YOUR TELEVISION SET IS NOT CONNECTED TO AN AERIAL, AND CANNOT RECEIVE A TELEVISION SIGNAL ANY OTHER WAY, YOU ARE NOT LIABLE FOR A TELEVISION LICENCE. THIS IS NOT A STATEMENT OF OPINION, IT IS A STATEMENT OF FACT, AS CONFIRMED BY THE LICENSING AUTHORITY THEMSELVES.

If the licencing man that visted moopet saw a disconnected TV in the hall, and no other TV on the premises, he will first have satisfied himself that the TV in the hall was, in fact, disconnected, then he will have filed a report to that effect. Moopet will not be prosecuted, as he does not need a licence merely to own a television set. The licence (I can't believe I'm saying this again!) is to receive the television channels, for which you need to set up receiving equipment. A TV alone doesn't do this, you need to plug an aerial in and tune it. That's what the inspectors are looking for.

*takes another deep breath and relaxes*
 
no offense, my brit friends. i admire you for many things, and you do many things better than us. but media entertainment is not one of them.

Main Entry: pa·tron·ise
Pronunciation: 'pA-tr&-"nIz, 'pa-
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -ised; -is·ing
1 : to act as patron of : provide aid or support for
2 : to adopt an air of condescension toward : treat haughtily or coolly
3 : to be a frequent or regular customer or client of
 
but to FORCE people to pay for TV?! we would revolt here.

There's no such thing as a free lunch. You are paying for over-the-air broadcasts (and much basic cable), even if you don't have a TV or cable (or satellite). Increased cost of products due to paying for advertising to provide your "free" TV.

Difference is you aren't paying the government for your TV. That is what most Americans would revolt against. Probably at least as much as they do against the art grants (many of which go to producing documentaries that air on PBS).
 
Main Entry: pa·tron·ise
Pronunciation: 'pA-tr&-"nIz, 'pa-
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -ised; -is·ing

3 : to be a frequent or regular customer or client of

i like that one better.

besides, i was not being patronizing. england isn't exactly famous for it's media entertainment. was i wrong? as far as i know, america is the biggest exporter of TV and movies and all other forms of electronic entertainment save video games (japan). 4 billion people can't be wrong.

and the english do alot of things better than the US.

although roundabouts are horrible, and your healthcare system is as bad as ours, but in different ways. and you pay way too much public money for the upkeep of the royals.

but you make much better chocolate.

ps, don't take offense. just a little joke, to lighten the tension.

pps, if it wasn't for us, you'd all be speaking german right now. JOKING!

ppps, if it wasn't for us, you'd be the smallest proving in the russian empire. JOKING!
 
There's no such thing as a free lunch. You are paying for over-the-air broadcasts (and much basic cable), even if you don't have a TV or cable (or satellite). Increased cost of products due to paying for advertising to provide your "free" TV.

Difference is you aren't paying the government for your TV. That is what most Americans would revolt against. Probably at least as much as they do against the art grants (many of which go to producing documentaries that air on PBS).

that's right. i'll give my money to some greedy corporation BUT I'LL BE DAMNED IF I GIVE IT TO SOME COLLECTIVE COMMIE-LIKE INSTUTION LIKE A "GOVERNMENT"!

ps, i work for the world's largest media corporation and i don't even get free cable! in fact, i suspect they are charging me extra.....
 
It is kind of strange that people who aren't in the UK but can watch BBC channels can do so without paying a license :/
 

Back
Top Bottom