You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Hello @poly have just checked and 74% of convictions over the last 5 years were of women. Report here and confess to not having yet read it:
Should be noted however that the conviction rate overall is down. Nevertheless, this figure does concern me and, whilst they claim that there's no discrimination, frankly there has to be. Have seen from Youtube vids how persistent these men can be (not seen any women, funny that) and how they lie. It's OK for someone like me who knows their rights and absolutely refuses to be intimidated by anyone but it's morally reprehensible that less aware/unaware women are being picked on cos they're viewed as an easy target.
Didn't realise about fixed penalties in Scotland and you may well be right with your thoughts although TVL do say that they visit in the evenings as well as daytime.
Report here and confess to not having yet read it...it’s morally reprehensible that less aware/unaware women are being picked on cos they’re viewed as an easy target.
You should read it. It's complete rubbish that women are being picked on or viewed as an easy target.
This review has found:
• There is no evidence of direct discrimination by TVL.
• Gender is not a factor in the way TVL approaches collecting and enforcing the
licence fee. TVL does not collect gender information and does not use gender
information in its decision making.• Societal factors, that are outside of TVL’s control, remain the significant factors
in explaining the gender disparity. These factors include:o household composition, where around 62% of single households are female led than male led, and all other things being equal you might expect about 10% points more women than men to be prosecuted;
o behavioural factors, where women are more likely to be at home, answer the door (61%) and take charge of household bills;
o financial factors, where women on average have lower incomes than men, make up 60% of employees on low pay and 73% of part-time workers and are more likely to be in financial difficulties than men...
...The review found no obvious directly discriminatory policies and practices in the process and it’s clear there’s no intention to discriminate...Women and men do not appear to be
treated differently.
They may not be being picked on directly, but I can see that some groups are more susceptible to the bullying tactics that are employed, and that doesn't really sit right with me.
BBC Income, year 22-23: £3.74Billion from licence fee, £2.11Billion commercial income. Total £5.85Billion.
(info tucked away on page 48 of 246 page Annual report) -
Quite how they manage to spend £5.85B a year is beyond me. (actualy it isn't. My friend used to work as an IT contractor at the BBC. Him and everyone around him were earning six figure salaries. Also extremely generous pay for their presenters.)
It's a gravy train with a guaranteed income whether or not they produce much quality content.
I can think of a few better places the money could be spent.
You could run the NHS for about ten days.
The NHS has 1.27 m employees. The BBC has 21,000.
I do watch GCN Racing after work on my iPad occasionally, but that’s while I’m faffing about or if I’m in the lounge I’ll watch it on the TV (with a firestick)
Do you watch the racing 'live' or after the event? 😉
The NHS has 1.27 m employees. The BBC has 21,000.
**** off back to GB News
Should be noted however that the conviction rate overall is down. Nevertheless, this figure does concern me and, whilst they claim that there’s no discrimination, frankly there has to be.
I don't know if anyone has done similar analysis on other offences. e.g. shoplifting, speeding, driving without insurance, parking tickets etc. in general more men are convicted of crimes in general, which makes these stats more startling BUT doesn't automatically mean there has either been direct or indirect discrimination.
Have seen from Youtube vids how persistent these men can be (not seen any women, funny that) and how they lie.
I don't believe it should be outsourced and enforced the way it is. I'm always a bit "surprised" that the people who record these things for youtube were just ready and prepared for them coming and "know their rights", and have the awareness to pull their phone out and record. Its almost like they make money from controversial or antagonistic videos. I would be hesitant to say that there is some direct discrimination about the workforce demographics doing this stuff. If you look at bailiffs, utility company payment enforcement, etc they are predominantly men - I think thats as much a reflection on the "customer base" and how they treat an unwanted knock on the door as it is on the people doing the job.
It’s OK for someone like me who knows their rights and absolutely refuses to be intimidated by anyone but it’s morally reprehensible that less aware/unaware women are being picked on cos they’re viewed as an easy target.
The data you would need is about who they originally write to, and at what stage the cases "resolve". My suspicion with no data is that actually women are more likely to seek early resolution (quick admit guilt and pay the fine) than be a beligerent prick about it. Is it Capita's fault if in general women answer the door to TV licensing and say "I'm really sorry, I didn't have enough money so I haven't paid it" rather than men saying "prove it"?
Didn’t realise about fixed penalties in Scotland and you may well be right with your thoughts although TVL do say that they visit in the evenings as well as daytime.
I'd bet that's about being more likely to get someone in, rather than the right person in. I'm surprised in E&W aren't using fixed penalties for this - usually they are "ahead" of the curve in presuming guilt!
My friend used to work as an IT contractor at the BBC. Him and everyone around him were earning six figure salaries
Well that’s definitive evidence.
As for those who don’t have an aerial so can’t watch live TV. Utter bobbins. Already pointed the device you’re using to post on here would very likely to allow you to watch live TV. Yes, there are those who don’t bother with TV at, those who only use it for watching Netflix et al. I doubt that’s everyone who doesn’t have an aerial or TV though.
The YouTube videos of aggressive TVL staff, terrible they need dealt with. But YouTube videos of polite one moving on doesn’t generate outrage clicks.
My friend used to work as an IT contractor at the BBC. Him and everyone around him were earning six figure salaries
Let's check some facts. Page 200 of the annual report linked above (204 of the pdf) gives salary costs and employee numbers. Excluding apprentices the mean is around 53K but we know that includes some high figures (cos they publish those too) so the median will be a fair bit lower. That doesn't really support everyone being on 6 figure salaries does it.
BBC pay for technical staff has traditionally been low compared with the rest of the industry, my real friend who’s a freelance editor, gets half the rate at the beeb that he gets elsewhere. But anyway, what’s the obsession with salaries? It costs a fortune to produce proper telly, and I’m not talking about the ten bob shite ‘bargains under the celebrity antique’. Plus, let’s not forget, stuff like Peaky Blinders for example, will be sold all around the world producing an income. Our GB News watching friend above has missed the salient point THE TUFTEN STREET TORIES WANT SHOT OF THE BBC. Buy your licence, use it or lose it.
As for those who don’t have an aerial so can’t watch live TV. Utter bobbins.
@drac that was a sum total of me that said that and I already addressed it in my comment to convert above. Not sure what you're bringing to the discussion other than point scoring as it still doesn't change the fact that I don't need a licence by any metric.
I’m always a bit “surprised” that the people who record these things for youtube were just ready and prepared for them coming and “know their rights”, and have the awareness to pull their phone out and record.
I always assume they've been harassed enough times that they've put together a plan of action.
There is a world outside of the forum squirrel king who claim the sane. I don’t have one that works, it’s not needed none of our TVs have it plugged in. Only the living room has a freesat aerial.
Calm yourself I’m not point scoring, just pointing out it’s a rubbish reason.
I always assume they’ve been harassed enough times that they’ve put together a plan of action.
Requires an assumption of a level of intelligence and enterprise that given bleach still requires a label on the bottle instructing people not to drink it, I don't think the general public possess
"I can't watch TV because..." is just "I don't watch TV" with emphasis though. Presumably because of all the people who can't accept that such a thing is possible.
The bit about the TV Licensing is that the BBC are required by law to collect it. This is defined by the the UK Government. The Beeb don't choose to do it. The Government also take a chunk of it to pay for other stuff. We may or may not consume any BBC output, but that is totally academic. Not paying it, is a crime. No ifs, buts or whatevers. Of course we all know that we can choose which bits of the law we want to follow, but if you do - then accept the outcome.
I agree with the fact that vast chunks of the BBC output is not for me - most of the stuff that has the highest viewing figures, I will never watch. But if we get rid of the BBC, what do we get?
Not paying it, is a crime. No ifs, buts or whatevers.
Untrue.
There's a slight conflation of two issues there, firstly the licence is not just for the BBC, it is a requirement to watch any live broadcast TV through whichever medium you choose.
The BBC have a mandate to oversee the licencing due to the historic way the broadcast rights were set up.
There will always be those who try and dodge whatever licences/fines etc they have to pay but in this day and age there are also a large number of people as evidenced here who legally have no requirement to pay for a service they do not consume.
For the latter group, it is not a case of "Getting rid of the BBC" or "doing Tufton St's bidding" by not paying, merely exercising their right to choose.
The BBC / Gov need to accept that times have changed and if the BBC is at risk of collapsing due to the drop in people consuming live TV then they need to look at how they can continue to function. PPV is one model open to them. One idea is maybe they can go down the YT route and have basic channels available with adverts for free, and more channels plus no ads for paying subs.
Not paying it, is a crime. No ifs, buts or whatevers.
I agree with most of your post but that is patent nonsense. We buy a TV licence without quibble and I think it's quite good value considering the amount of BBC output we consume, plus other broadcast TV. But if I never watched TV in any form and I know people who don't, then I wouldn't pay and no crime would be committed.
My suspicion with no data is that actually women are more likely to seek early resolution (quick admit guilt and pay the fine) than be a beligerent prick about it.
I suspect that's exactly what happens.
I usually treat them the same way I treat any other unsolicited caller.
'no thank you' close door.
Once I did let one in and demonstrated that my TV wasn't tuned in, or plugged into an ariel or receiver. The clock wasn't even set, and that it was just used for bluerays and gaming.
He said that's fine, but I now require you to fill out this form...
I said "you are no longer welcome so I require you to leave immediately before I use reasonable force to remove you."
He scarpered pretty sharpish.
Not heard from them since.
“I can’t watch TV because…” is just “I don’t watch TV” with emphasis though.
It's an important difference though.
You require a licence to watch TV. You don't require a licence to be able to watch TV.
I rather suspect that "can I come in" is really just an exercise in entrapment / waiting for the non-customer to slip up. You can keep them talking for a lot longer if you're "inspecting" instead of standing on the doorstep. What else could they be looking for? Do I have a TV? Yes. Is it capable of receiving live TV? Yes it is. Does it tune to a broadcast station if I switch it on? Probably (most do, mine goes to an irritating 'attract screen' menu). But I don't do any of those things. I don't switch on the TV with the remote, I switch on the Xbox and that automatically turns on the TV switched to HDMI-1. Do I watch TV? No I don't.
And if I did and wanted to evade detection: Do I have a TV? No (it's hidden in a cupboard). Is your TV capable of receiving etc? No, the aerial is unplugged (I plug it in when I want to watch TV and then unplug it again just in case you knock on the door). Etc etc.
So really we're into the realms of "can you prove that you don't watch TV?" Sure I can, right after you prove that god doesn't exist.
If you think its bad now, 25+ years ago it was unheard of not to have a TV. If you didn't watch Eastenders or whatever you were basically weird. There was no streaming and no grey area. My wife and I didn't have one and probably got a visit twice a year, often by rude and overbearing baliff types. Constant stream of letters etc. Must have cost a fortune.
Oh, and whoever way back posted that they streamed and only watched the odd show on C4 catch up, you need a licence:
"The BBC have a mandate to oversee the licencing due to the historic way the broadcast rights were set up." is correct and it doesn't matter if you never watch a single BBC show, if you watch ANY catch up then technically, if not morally you need a licence.
I usually treat them the same way I treat any other unsolicited caller.
"Sorry, no cold callers" *points at sign* does seem to somewhat flabbergast them.
if you watch ANY catch up then technically, if not morally you need a licence.
Again, wrong.
https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/watching-live-online-and-on-mobile
Do I need a TV Licence if I only ever watch on demand or catch up TV online?
It depends what you watch.
You don’t need a TV Licence if you only ever download or watch on demand or catch up programmes on services other than BBC iPlayer. You also don’t need a licence to watch S4C TV on demand.
You do need a licence to use BBC iPlayer, on any device.
That has recently been reworded then. Good but strange all the same as you DO have to have a licence to watch live C4. Whatever, unfortunately my family has now fully embraced the world of TV and thus we have a fully paid up Licence DD!
It's always been the case that it only applies to live TV, it's never applied to catch up. Perhaps the wording has been amended to clarify that.
Doesn't make sense.. Technically you can watch re-runs on iplayer without a licence, but if you watch iplayer live stream, <span style="font-size: 0.8rem;"> like the news or something, you require a licence.</span>
ITVX for example I think you can watch live or catchup too...
Why would it only apply to iplayer?
Technically you can watch re-runs on iplayer without a licence
I don’t think so.
https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/bbc-iplayer-and-the-tv-licence
I think so!
The asterix is doing some heavy lifting!!
A TV Licence covers you to watch live on any channel, TV service or streaming service, and to use BBC iPlayer*. On any device
Technically you can watch re-runs on iplayer without a licence
iPlayer is different, you need a licence. You used to be able to watch catch up on it without, but the law changed in 2016.
TIP:
If you dont have a TV licence, and a 'collector' turns up at your door, they'll ask you how long you have had it.
Say under 6 months. If you say 1 year, you will be liable for 1 years licence cost, but if you say more than that the cost is multiplied by however number of years you've had it. So say 5,8, whatever, you are due to pay the cost of the licence times how long you've had it, which if you've had one 10 years would be upwards of £1600.
The bbc work on the premise that there is X number of households, and x number of properties, and that there needs to be that number, multiplied by a tv for each one. Its why they always say there are 'thousands or 10's thousands of properties currently unlicenced'. They're including derelict, unoccupied or even shops as properties without a tv.
They came to my door once. Chap(dodgy looking guy in a sheepskin coat) Do I have a TV was the first question.
Yes I said. He smiles broadly, and his friend steps into view, he'd been hiding just out of sight
How long have you had it ?
Hmmm, probably 15 years says I. His smile widens even more
I'm from TV licencing he says,and our records show you have no licence at this address, and are you aware you need to pay for it including those 15 years.
Thats ok I said, I have a TV licence. His beaming smile starts to drop 😆 'Not according to our records'.
So I tell him to hold on I'll go and get it, slamming the door right in his face(with some level of satisfaction I must say.
Went in, sat down rolled a ciggie, then looked out my licence. but I gave them another five minutes standing in the cold 👿
Here we are..... It was examined in minute detail.
'The address is wrong' Yes I moved house - TV licences are licenced to the householder(me) not the house itself, so its basically transferable.
He was no longer smiling.
Oh I am sorry, can you update the details thanks or do you want me to ? 🙂 They then left.
I think I might have called them a couple of parasites as a parting shoot. Really brightened up my day sending them off with their tails between their legs.
I always assume they’ve been harassed enough times that they’ve put together a plan of action.
imagine being harassed enough to care and develop a plan but not being bothered enough to fill in an online form to say “leave me in peace”. Some of you enjoy the argument… Everyone I know who filled in the “no TV here” form gets a slightly threatening “make sure you tell us if it changes” response and then never hears any more for a couple of years. People who don’t fill it in seem to live ready for an argument on their doorstep. Seems a strange way to get an easy life.
I do have a TV License, but don't watch anything live...It's like a gym membership. "I wanna quit the gym!"
iPlayer is different, you need a licence.
Yes, re reading it you are correct.
Although that raises more questions.
It used to be... Before the advent of streaming services that people were incorrect in calling the licence fee 'the BBC tax' as it was essentially a government tax payable by anyone who watches live broadcasts.
Is the licence fee now ring fenced so all revenue goes directly to the BBC.. Or does it go into the general tax pot like 'road tax' doesn't get spent purely on roads?
Live streams non withstanding, why does it only apply to iplayer catchup and not ITV catchup, etc ?
So many discrepancies! So many questions!
That has recently been reworded then.
It hasn't been reworded "recently," it's been that way for years.
‘The address is wrong’ Yes I moved house – TV licences are licenced to the householder(me) not the house itself, so its basically transferable.
That's only true in so far as the licensed address isn't watching live TV at the same time. Eg, your household could go on holiday and watch "unlicensed" TV at the holiday home on your licence. But couldn't go on holiday on your own leaving your family at home and watch TV in both places at once on one licence.
If you'd moved house, did the new owners have a licence? Will TV Licensing allow two licences at the same property? It seems doubtful.
Everyone I know who filled in the “no TV here” form gets a slightly threatening “make sure you tell us if it changes” response and then never hears any more for a couple of years.
"a couple of years" is the problem. Imagine if every licence type did that. Would you want to be sending "yup, still don't have a gun" letters to Firearms Licensing every couple of years? A SCUBA licence, a driving licence, a public broadcast music licence, a street party licence, an alcohol sales licence...
Here we are….. It was examined in minute detail.
‘The address is wrong’ Yes I moved house – TV licences are licenced to the householder(me) not the house itself, so its basically transferable.
He was no longer smiling
Presumably if he’d have studied the license he’d have seen the words “licensed address” and similarly if you’d have studies s363 of the communications act you’d know that licenses are not “basically transferable” but are issued with restrictions like the premises where they apply. He may have given up at this point, or even believed you were right, but if you keep trying the tactic - expect one of his colleagues to point out your error, possibly to the Magistrates if you try hard enough to be too smart!
Is the licence fee now ring fenced so all revenue goes directly to the BBC.. Or does it go into the general tax pot like ‘road tax’ doesn’t get spent purely on roads?
It goes to general taxation and then is passed back to the arts in the form of grants.
Live streams non withstanding, why does it only apply to iplayer catchup and not ITV catchup, etc ?
Because the BBC is the state broadcaster protected in law, ITV is not (the clue is in the 'i' bit).
So many discrepancies! So many questions!
It's perfectly simple, completely consistent and all your answers are on the licensing website. The discrepancies and questions only arise because people have been making shit up about it for decades (including TV Licensing itself).
I think in the age of GDPR, it's pretty reasonable to not want to provide agencies with more PII than they absolutely require.
A SCUBA licence, a driving licence, a public broadcast music licence, a street party licence, an alcohol sales licence…
License for your pet fish, Eric?
Because the BBC is the state broadcaster
Streaming pre recorded material is not a broadcast though, at least not in the common understanding.
Otherwise itv catchup audiences would also require a TV licence. The law should be applied equally or not all.
It would be interesting to see it tested in court.
Not that I give a damn I this specific context , as it's not applicable to me personally, but makes me concerned from a general point of law, that it it's so purposefully confusing and multi tiered.
It would be interesting to see it tested in court.
Not really, the law was amended to be pretty clear on the subject.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/704/made
So do I need a TV licence in both geo locations to stream a video from my NAS box, from location A to a PC in location B over the Internet?
Always been a supporter of the BBC, and paid the licence fee as I consider I get good value for money. However when mum had to move into a dementia unit of a large nursing home I fell foul of their bully boy tactics as I was her POA.
Long story short, their record keeping couldnt cope with multiple private rooms at a single postal address, and where residents died frequently and rooms changed hands. To get around this they just made up a scheme of fictional addresses linked to the postal address of the home. I got threatening letters for others at her "address", for her at multiple incorrect "addresses", and finally for me at my home address (which was licenced) as I was her POA.
I tried the route of registering the address as not needing a tv licence, but they just allocated this to another ficticious "address" in the building, and then continued to persue us as being unlicenced at another "address".
..and at no time did she actually have a TV!
It only ended when I was sadly able to send them a copy of her death certificate.
So yes, not a lot of sympathy here for TV licencing.
I think in the age of GDPR, it’s pretty reasonable to not want to provide agencies with more PII than they absolutely require.
Tell me you don’t understand GDPR without telling me you don’t understand GDPR! 1. It’s there precisely to protect you from misuse of your data; 2. PII is an American term which is much less encompassing than the Personal Data GDPR protects; 3. If TV licensing are sending letters to you or knocking at your door - do you not think they already know who you are?
mattyfez
Full Member
So do I need a TV licence in both geo locations to stream a video from my NAS box, from location A to a PC in location B over the Internet?
You need a licence to watch recorded broadcast TV. Are you simultaneously watching it in both locations?
I thought GDPR was defunct in the UK post Brexit? Do we not just rely on the old skool DPA now?
Or have the conservatives abolished that, too?
Tell me you don’t understand GDPR without telling me you don’t understand GDPR!
Do you think you could be more patronising?
1. It’s there precisely to protect you from misuse of your data;
That wasn't the point. The point was that in a time where we recognise that such protections are necessary, it's reasonable to not want your information stored in more databases than required.
2. PII is an American term which is much less encompassing than the Personal Data GDPR protects;
PII is a generally recognised term, gets the gist across, and saves me many characters of typing.
3. If TV licensing are sending letters to you or knocking at your door – do you not think they already know who you are?
Every letter ever is addressed to "The Legal Occupier".
I thought GDPR was defunct in the UK post Brexit?
GDPR was incorporated into the most recent UK data protection act, so it ain't going anywhere in the short term.
Also regarding the question about collection of personal data above, data minimisation is one of the key principles of the DPA so no data controller should be collecting or retaining data that is not specifically needed for their stated purposes and should be able to jutlstify why they are holding the data and why each item is retained for as long as it is. If the ICO have any reason to look at your processes they will delve into many nooks and crannies and, trust me, you do not want them to be dissatisfied with what they find.
so when can we have an STW group burning of the TV license letters, and anything else they may stick through our letterboxes?
Every letter ever is addressed to “The Legal Occupier”.
Because if it was addressed to you by name and you'd moved, it would be illegal for the new occupant to open it. They're well aware of who you are, doing it this way potentially nets more fish.
Sorry for digging this up again!
I've just move house and dont need a licence but got the letter saying that their records show i dont have one please fill out the forms and so on. Within the next week I get two letters through the door doing surveys on what TV i watch! is it time for tin foil hats?
I got a letter within two weeks when I moved house, even though I transferred the TV licence on the day I moved. I assume it's just a standard letter.
aye its more the fact ive had two surveys for what i watch
We’ve had the letters for 3 months or so on our building plot. Royal Mail must tell them there is a new house there. I’m being ‘investigated’, and someone is coming round. No one has been round. The letters still come every 2 weeks or so.
Within the next week I get two letters through the door doing surveys on what TV i watch! is it time for tin foil hats?
What, surveys which appear to not be from TVL? That would be mega-sneaky.
Aye they are from a company called barb which looks like a proper company but what do i know? Seems a bit desperate that they send two forms a week apart. Never been asked this in 30 years of house ownership that i can remember and then two show up not long after the licence letter.