The Licensing people cross check Electoral Registration with whether you have a TV license and if you dont have a TV License they assume you should and hassle you for cash. I think that surveillance vans are practically a myth - I’ve never seen one, heard of anyone being caught in this manner or met someone who has worked as a TV surveillance operator. I think it is simply paper work and house calls. Want to avoid paying your license fee? Easy, simply drop out of society, dont vote and dont answer the door! or just cough up…whatever takes your fancy
Apparently the TV licensing Stasi only have something ridiculous like two working detector vans in the country as they are prohibitively expensive. The other vans are just empty and have no detecting equipment in and are just used to scare people into paying. The usual method of detection is by analysing who has bought a TV (shops DO have to provide this information) against who has a TV license.
There were a series of billboard adverts recently too, saying things like “Three houses in Arcadia Avenue, SW666 don’t have a licence”.
I thought that was quite effective.
pan
Arcadia Avenue? Isn’t that where young Eric AKA Bannanaman lives? Oh no, its Acacia Avenue…silly me.
Questions about the dreaded detector vans have been asked various times on the Guardian’s <A href=“http://search.guardian.co.uk/search97cgi/s97nqr_cgi?Filter=notesandqueries%2FFltNq.hts&Action=FilterSearch&Query=detector+van”>Notes & Queries</A> site. The answers include quite a few people who claim to have seen them (particularly in Hammersmith, apparantly), built them, worked in them, been shown them, etc, etc…
The general jist of the answers though is that
(a) there aren’t many of them, but the exact number is unknown
(b) some marked ones are decoys
© some real ones are unmarked
(d) lots of them use handheld detectors instead now, so they can check blocks of flats.
Minor language television is expensive to sustain. The Welsh-language broadcasting this side of the water is amongst the most heavily-subsidised in the world apparently.
As noted before in this thread, this is the system in most European countries.
I refuse to pay (it’s about $200 per annum here) on general principle and political reasons. Every now and then, I get a letter with threats, but the thing is:
- The detectors don’t work in apratment houses. Is it my TV or my neighbours, who have his on the opposite wall?
- So they use computer registers.
- But they can’t enter my apartment, without my consent.
- So it’s only if they can actually see the TV-set from the doorway, when I open. Which they can’t.
I’ve had them come and knock on my door a few times and when asked if I have a TV, I answer ‘No’. They get a very dubious look, and remind me that VCR’s and tv-cards for the computer are not exempt. I tell them I don’t have that either. They won’t buy it for a second, but there’s nothing they can do.
Most people are more honest than I am, and about 95% of the population pay.
I’m pretty sure I have seen a TV detector van - whether real or jsut a scary decoy, I do no know.
And HATE the fact that they seem to have truble with the concept of NO television. grrrrrrrrrr
AH, well, reason I started to post was not to rant but to mention that I have met a guy who used to work at going round giving people “pay up or die” letters.
According to him - there are not many at all of real TV detector vans, and they tend to rotate around the country - as in if it is June, it must be Ayrshire, or something like that.
He did not like tht job much at all - escpecially after the bossguy tore up a whatsit/sitation/booking form cos it related to a rich titled guy who had TV but no licence.
Again, purely anecdotal, but last year the Daily Telegraph was having one of its seasonal rants about the TV licence, and there was brief discussion about non-payment on the letters page from various members of the formerly great and good (retired generals, barristers and so on) saying they were refusing to pay on principle and daring the BBC the prosecute them.
The rumours at the time were that the BBC shyed away from prosecuting such people for the fear that they would fight it all the way and the licence fee would fall foul of the Convention on Human Rights. Rather, the BBC likes to stick to prosecuting people on council estates who don’t have the resources to kick up a legal fuss.
Of course, there is no evidence to support this…
When I lived in England, I too got the “pay or die” letter, though we also were TV-less.
A question about the detector vans. Back when Michael Moore was partially sane, I saw a segment on TV Nation (a US show) about the licence fee. They followed around a detector van, and demonstrated how they could tell if someone owned a TV without actually entering their residence…somehow they were capturing a picture of what was appearing on the target’s TV on a video monitor inside the van! Knowing Moore’s…ah…tendency to stretch the truth, was that on the level, or do the detectors rely on more low-tech methods?
Well, well. I’ve managed to buy both TVs and TV Cards without ever informing anyone of my address, and not from back-street vendors either.
Seems like a stupid law to me.
And yes, I do have a TV licence and this is not the problem. I just don’t care for shops demanding my personal details, for any reason, including passing on to the authorities.
I seem to recall that TV Nation was a joint production between a US station and a UK one, I think the BBC.
My copy of “Tales from a TV Nation” is at home, so I can’t check right now …
… or I coudl just check IMDB:
http://uk.imdb.com/Companies?0108951
Yes, it was the BBC.
I think is was Channel 4 plus a U.S. station.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/profile/michael-moore.shtml
“With such shows as TV Nation - shown in the UK on BBC Two - Moore swung his satirical spotlight on the political arena, and sought to expose the hypocrisy and corruption of big-bucks America.”
I think the confusion is that the then controller of BBC2 was Michael Jackson, who later went on to be the controller of Channel 4. Channel 4 also showed “The Awful Truth”.
A TV also transmits a signal and that is what the detectors detect. The same goes for computer screens, but according to the TV spies they can see what kind of apparatus it is. Nobody believes them, though.
A late friend of mine once said that he took a pride in not paying the TV license so, a couple of years ago, when he was going to buy a new set he was going to tell a friend’s telephone number (that is how TV owners are regsitered here), and he was surpised when they didn’t ask him.
As for myself I don’t pay. On the other hand I haven’t had a TV for the last ten years or so and honestly, I don’t miss it a bit.
I also support the TV license. It’s not just the lack of adverts, the BBC’s programming is generally of a higher quality.
I think that the Torie’s ( and lately Labour’s ) talk about getting rid of the license fee has a lot more to do with silencing a comparitively unbiased news outlet than the money …
NOt sure - Channel 4 news is usually pretty good.
And as for the BBC needing this money so as to providce better quality programming…
East Enders?
lots of gardening and cooking?
anything with the terrible Ann Roobinson?
Imported Aussie soaps?
And mymain whinge is that if you watch the silly machine about 5 minutes a month, you’d still be payhing the same as if it were on all day.
That’s why I predict pay-per-view everything as soon as the technology allows (immediately followed by general bitching about how the quality has plummetted even further).
BBC Prime is a subscription sattelite services - either you pay a fee direct to the BBC or your sattelite/cable company pays the BBC and includes in the cost of your cable/sattelite package.
BBC World (the rolling news service) is “funded by advertising and subscription” according to its website.
Both of these are intended for transmission abroad, and their funding is supposedly separate from the funding of UK channels.
Actually, there is a way of receiving all the UK BBC channels abroad free of charge by sattelite. However, presumably partly because this would be unfair to the license payers in Britain, and also for copyright reasons, the BBC itself frowns on this and takes (albeit rather feeble) steps to prevent it from happening.
You might want to watch Kelvin Saves the Tories on Channel 4 at 8.20pm on Saturday, in which Kelvin MacKenzie explains how to drag their future out of the political toilet :rolleyes:. One of his suggestions is to privatise the BBC apparently.