Jump to content

Live aboard TV license


The Dreamer

Featured Posts

5 minutes ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Haven't we had enough of referenda? The same would probably vote for  Capital Punishment and who knows the result of a vote on the Monarchy would be (particularly after Andrew's efforts). Doesn't make either outcome right (although I suppose the abolition of the BBC would satisfy the extreme right!)

Yes, and if I could have done I would have joined it, job at the time made it impossible. As it turned out my only allowed protest was to pay the sum monthly in a bag containing mixed coinage of the maximum allowed of each denomination, which wasted a whole lot of time sorting and counting, my means of expressing annoyance at such a crap tax system.

I might have assisted occasionally with bailiff visits, all very polite of course, it was amazing how little some people actually owned :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Welsh Cruiser said:

 

 

Having established the above, it's difficult to comprehend how a socialist type could support the funding system for the BBC. I remember the poll tax riots, socialists full of anger, it was so wrong that everyone should be expected to pay the same, regardless of their wealth or ability to pay. But now, 30 odd years later, the same socialists support a poll tax for owning a television.

 

It's a strange old world. 

I don't pay for a tv licence - no tv

 

I could avoid car tax by not having a car

 

I pay no tax on alcohol as I dont drink

 

The only way to legally avoid poll tax was to stop breathing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

I don't pay for a tv licence - no tv

 

I could avoid car tax by not having a car

 

I pay no tax on alcohol as I dont drink

 

The only way to legally avoid poll tax was to stop breathing. 

Completely incorrect old chap. I didnt pay it as I lived on a boat and when I went to ask about paying I was told it couldnt be taken as there was no way to do it. Your choice not to live on a boat ? I am still breathing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, LadyG said:

The Licencing people seem to be able to identify those who watch programs via the internet.

 

One needs to be careful with language here. About the closest that can be done technically so far is identify the IP address and consequently, usually, the name and address of the internet service subscriber, and even which of their computers are being used to watch the programmes. 

 

What they can't do yet is identify the person watching the programmes, especially if they have taped over the webcam built into their laptop which will be looking at them....

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

Completely incorrect old chap. I didnt pay it as I lived on a boat and when I went to ask about paying I was told it couldnt be taken as there was no way to do it. Your choice not to live on a boat ? I am still breathing.

You may not have paid ut but that wasn't legal, just as not having a TVlicence isn't legal if you have a TV. The fundamental flaw in the system was the local authorities couldn't trace people who didn't have (or didn't admit to having) a postal address. Students and young professionals in shared houses were a particular headache as even the landlord might not actually know who was living in the house (as opposed to who was paying the rent). If you were over 18 and eligible to vote (as in, not disqualified from voting) you were supposed to pay, homelessness wasn't an excuse, being in prison was the only exception to the "you're breathing so you must pay" rule. 

 

Edited to add that there was an obvious anomaly if one was imprisoned for non-payment of poll tax... 

Edited by magpie patrick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, magpie patrick said:

You may not have paid ut but that wasn't legal, just as not having a TVlicence isn't legal if you have a TV. The fundamental flaw in the system was the local authorities couldn't trace people who didn't have (or didn't admit to having) a postal address. Students and young professionals in shared houses were a particular headache as even the landlord might not actually know who was living in the house (as opposed to who was paying the rent). If you were over 18 and eligible to vote (as in, not disqualified from voting) you were supposed to pay, homelessness wasn't an excuse, being in prison was the only exception to the "you're breathing so you must pay" rule. 

 

Edited to add that there was an obvious anomaly if one was imprisoned for non-payment of poll tax... 

I agree that we were supposed to pay. I had just come out of the police at the time and didnt want to fall foul of the law in relation to paying it. I was on the soar in Leicester and went into the council offices and they didnt want to know. They told me without a post code ( how many times have I heard that joke over the last thirty years ) they simply couldnt administer it, we were ccers that year and went between Macclesfield, London and Bath. So we never paid until we bought a holiday home in Cornwall in 1994. The trouble with many things relating to paying in the UK is the absurd " Must have a postcode " scenario. Same with the tv licence and a host of other stuff, should be able to take yer money tell em your boat name and job done, or tie it to your ni number or whatever. There must be an easy way with todays technology. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

One needs to be careful with language here. About the closest that can be done technically so far is identify the IP address and consequently, usually, the name and address of the internet service subscriber, and even which of their computers are being used to watch the programmes. 

 

What they can't do yet is identify the person watching the programmes, especially if they have taped over the webcam built into their laptop which will be looking at them....

 

 

Under Part 4 of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 ( IPAct)  The IPAct contains a variety of measures,  one of which that forces broadband ISPs and mobile operators to store comparatively detailed Internet Connection Records (e.g. details of all the websites / servers you’ve visited) about all their customers for 12 months. This can then be supplied to a valid authority without a warrant  and occurs irrespective of whether or not you’re even suspected of a crime.

 

The High Court of Justice (Queen’s Bench Division) judicial review in January 2018 ,  Required that the Government change the law to require prior review by a court or independent administrative body and – in the context of crime-fighting – to only allow access to data for purposes of combating “serious crime.”  Before this judicial review. The stored data was being easily supplied, upon request, to dozens of public bodies (i.e. from local police to financial regulators). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, nbfiresprite said:

Under Part 4 of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 ( IPAct)  The IPAct contains a variety of measures,  one of which that forces broadband ISPs and mobile operators to store comparatively detailed Internet Connection Records (e.g. details of all the websites / servers you’ve visited) about all their customers for 12 months. This can then be supplied to a valid authority without a warrant  and occurs irrespective of whether or not you’re even suspected of a crime.

 

The High Court of Justice (Queen’s Bench Division) judicial review in January 2018 ,  Required that the Government change the law to require prior review by a court or independent administrative body and – in the context of crime-fighting – to only allow access to data for purposes of combating “serious crime.”  Before this judicial review. The stored data was being easily supplied, upon request, to dozens of public bodies (i.e. from local police to financial regulators). 

Lol. I reckon they would soon be bored of seeing me logged on to Canal world or ebay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nbfiresprite said:

– to only allow access to data for purposes of combating “serious crime.”

 

Evading your licence fee IS a "serious crime", Shirley.

 

On reflection, could you list the crimes formally classified as "not serious", please? I don't think there are any.

 

Much obliged....

 

:giggles:

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We very quickly decided that paying a TV licence would involve jumping through silly hoops filled with people unable to accept that we didn't have a postcode which reflected where we actually lived. Apparently there are boaters that have managed it but we took the pragmatic decision to not pay during our cc years. I'm not fighting a system to pay money to them. Our registered address at the time belonged to my husband's parents, both elderly and therefore exempt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, WotEver said:

That’s twice now, in as many posts. Perhaps I’m mistaken but this doesn’t appear to me to be the political board. 

 

You could always report the posts, and see what happens....*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* 'Nothing' I predict, other than a denial that there is anything wrong with the post, it being true! 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WotEver said:

That’s twice now, in as many posts. Perhaps I’m mistaken but this doesn’t appear to me to be the political board. 

All I wanted was advice on how to sort my license!  But no, it’s all a political conspiracy, apparently!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Dreamer said:

All I wanted was advice on how to sort my license!  But no, it’s all a political conspiracy, apparently!

 

Let's imagine they knocked on your boat, and said "Our TV detector boat has detected you using a TV without a licence". Now what?

 

In order to prosecute you, I bet their systems need a postcode!!!

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Let's imagine they knocked on your boat, and said "Our TV detector boat has detected you using a TV without a licence". Now what?

 

In order to prosecute you, I bet their systems need a postcode!!!

 

 

 

 

Don’t care about being detected, being prosecuted or my access to a postcode.  Controversially, I think the BBC does a good job and deserves my £3 per week, others might not, but that’s there business.  However it appears that this forum is unwilling, or unable to share advice on the subject matter, so I will retire gracefully, and seek my counsel elsewhere...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Dreamer said:

Don’t care about being detected, being prosecuted or my access to a postcode.  Controversially, I think the BBC does a good job and deserves my £3 per week, others might not, but that’s there business.  However it appears that this forum is unwilling, or unable to share advice on the subject matter, so I will retire gracefully, and seek my counsel elsewhere...

I think many have shared. You can't buy one without a silly postcode. Not your fault. After 30 years living aboard I am used to it. Just one more instance, to register to vote peeps just go online and its done easily very quickly. If u r homeless and live on a boat you cannot do it online you must fill in paper forms which can be downloaded and take or post em in. Usual bunkum that you will get used to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Dreamer said:

Don’t care about being detected, being prosecuted or my access to a postcode.  Controversially, I think the BBC does a good job and deserves my £3 per week, others might not, but that’s there business.  However it appears that this forum is unwilling, or unable to share advice on the subject matter, so I will retire gracefully, and seek my counsel elsewhere...

 

Going back and reviewing the thread, I think you've received plenty of accurate advice in amongst the dross. In summary:

 

1) You need a licence to watch the telly

2) You can only buy a licence if you have an address and postcode

 

The inescapable conclusion is, you have no address with postcode so you cannot buy a licence, and therefore cannot legally watch the telly. 

 

In you position I would try writing to TV Licensing and asking them if an itinerant with no address needs a TV licence, and if they do, how to buy it. 

 

 

 

Failing that, as I advised earlier in all seriousness, take it up with your MP.  This is the sort of thing where a letter from them on their House of Commons notepaper cuts through the bureaucracy. 

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, The Dreamer said:

Don’t care about being detected, being prosecuted or my access to a postcode.  Controversially, I think the BBC does a good job and deserves my £3 per week, others might not, but that’s there business.  However it appears that this forum is unwilling, or unable to share advice on the subject matter, so I will retire gracefully, and seek my counsel elsewhere...

I lived on board, without a TV Licence for about 15 years. My feeling was, and still is, that if the powers that be can’t set up a system whereby I  am enabled to buy a licence, then I won’t feel guilty about not having one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WotEver said:

That’s twice now, in as many posts. Perhaps I’m mistaken but this doesn’t appear to me to be the political board. 

Bored are you?

 

To save you the bother I have just reported both of my posts. ;)

 

Edited by Loddon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WotEver said:

That’s twice now, in as many posts. Perhaps I’m mistaken but this doesn’t appear to me to be the political board. 

Whilst some might deplore the terminology used, political references are within our rules. Threads which have primarily political themes are not allowed except within the politics section. Political references in an otherwise non-political thread are acceptable. 

   However, constantly describing a mainstream politcial party as "fascist" could be seen as inflammatory (no pun intended) and members may care to refrain from doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Athy said:

Whilst some might deplore the terminology used, political references are within our rules. Threads which have primarily political themes are not allowed except within the politics section. Political references in an otherwise non-political thread are acceptable. 

   However, constantly describing a mainstream politcial party as "fascist" could be seen as inflammatory (no pun intended) and members may care to refrain from doing so.

Greenie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Athy said:

 

   However, constantly describing a mainstream politcial party as "fascist" could be seen as inflammatory (no pun intended) and members may care to refrain from doing so.

 

 

Persistently calling people 'losers' is fine though and not inflammatory, for the avoidance of doubt....

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

 

Persistently calling people 'losers' is fine though and not inflammatory, for the avoidance of doubt....

 

 

Touché, mon vieux!

 

You are quite correct, as - if I have understood aright - it is used in the sense of "supporter of the faction [Brexit voters] which lost", and is thus simply factual. It would, similarly, be accurate to describe people who voted in favour of leaving the EU as "winners", which I would not consider inflammatory either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Athy said:

Touché, mon vieux!

 

You are quite correct, as - if I have understood aright - it is used in the sense of "supporter of the faction [Brexit voters] which lost", and is thus simply factual. It would, similarly, be accurate to describe people who voted in favour of leaving the EU as "winners", which I would not consider inflammatory either.

 

You are however, deliberately and perversely failing to recognise it is also quite a serious insult when levelled at someone you are arguing with, in real life likely to earn one a punch in the gob, factually correct or not. In fact more likely when factually correct!

 

You loser....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.