Started by Leon, 30 August 2018, 11:18:04 PM
Quote from: FierceKitty on 26 July 2022, 04:06:23 PMIn dubio pro reo. Fight it all the way: they'd need to prove you were guilty of using it as charged. I've taught a few judges in my time....
Quote from: Gwydion on 26 July 2022, 10:24:33 AMNo, you're not. My uncle in the 1970s abandoned his television - he was a jazz musician as well as holding down a day job and just didn't have time (or the inclination) to watch tv.He got the usual letters which he ignored as he had already told them he didn't have one. They turned up and asked to check! He told them to go and get a warrant. Never heard another word until he died about fifteen years ago.(on the other hand a lot of people who do watch live programming don't have a licence and the BBC need the cash. Its almost as if someone devised a system to alienate people from the BBC. I'm sure that can't be true.)
Quote from: Ben Waterhouse on 26 July 2022, 03:03:40 PMThe law is "watching" live TV not having the equipment that can watch it.
Quote from: DecemDave on 26 July 2022, 08:33:12 AMam I the only one who thinks that the evolution to the position above where we would have to prove our innocence is utterly obnoxious?
Quote from: FierceKitty on 26 July 2022, 04:06:23 PMthey'd need to prove you were guilty of using it as charged.
Quote from: Gwydion on 26 July 2022, 04:00:31 PMAnyone wanting a nice long read on the matter should try:licencefree
Quote from: hammurabi70 on 26 July 2022, 11:46:35 PMThe whole system needs reforming after 75 years and a doubling in real value.
QuoteMy neighbours opposite thought exactly that and are being prosecuted under the Communication Act 2003.https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/part/4 They are retired teachers who have a TV on which they watch nothing but films via an old VHS player, yes some people still use them. They are both in their 80s and didn't even need a licence previously because they were over over 75 and when that changed they decided simply to not watch TV anymore.The evidence on which they have been summonsed is the statement of the Capita TV licensing enforcement officer, essentially his external observations that because there is receiving equipment installed at the address it is used. There is a terrestrial TV aerial on their roof and they will now have to show to a court that they do not use it to receive live TV, or that they play recordings of live BBC TV programmes on their VHS player. Quite how they will do that is unclear. One of the principal current complaints about prosecutions for not having a TV licence is that courts tend to accept the statements of the prosecution and the onus is on the defendants to show otherwise.
Quote from: Ben Waterhouse on 27 July 2022, 10:49:43 AMIn which case they should plead not guilty