6 ms·

How do TV detector vans work?

17 points by georgecmu 3y ago

dazc 3y ago
Correct answer... TV detector vans exist, but they do not detect anything. They are just for show. TVL have a database of addresses in the UK with or without a licence. It is just assumed that anyone without a TV licence is guilty, and so a campaign of harrassment begins by letters and visits to intimidate people into buying a licence. Fact 1: Never in court has evidence been used to prosecute people (mainly single mothers) based on 'detector' van evidence. Fact 2: Although TVL threaten that they might apply for a search warrant if you do not let them in to inspect your house, it is very difficult indeed for them to apply for a warrant. They first need proof that you are receiving live broadcast. Never has 'dectector van' evidence been used to apply for a warrant. Search warrants are very rarely applied for today. The reason people get prosecuted is that they admit to having a TV and then sign a 'confession' form. They assume a visiting TVL 'officer' has some sort of legal power when they visit. They have no more legal power than if any member of the public came round. Tell them to leave and they must immediately comply else be in breach of law. Philip Dean, Newport, Wales Source: My mother was convicted many years ago, I was there and witnessed the entire confession-based playbook.
- exe34 3y ago
  I ignore their letters, because they're rude. I was looking forward to denying them entry, but the last time one of their goons came around, they said they didn't want to come in because of COVID.
- jt2190 3y ago
  > ... they admit to having a TV and then sign a 'confession' form... I believe this "confession form" is a Demand Letter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand_letter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand_letter These are routinely used for theft by retail employees, for example.
- 369548684892826 3y ago
  > admit to having a TV and then sign a 'confession' form "Having a TV" is fine without a license. It's watching live broadcast television, or using iPlayer, that isn't allowed.
  - tentacleuno 3y ago
    ...or watching TV as it is being broadcast[0]. For anyone outside the UK, this is designed to be confusing. Many people unnecessarily pay for the TV License just to stop the harassment campaign by TV Licensing. This entire system is akin to a protection racket. [0]: https://www.gov.uk/find-licences/tv-licence https://www.gov.uk/find-licences/tv-licence
- rwmj 3y ago
  http://www.bbctvlicence.com/ http://www.bbctvlicence.com/ - the website of a guy who posts all the threatening letters he receives.
- LorenPechtel 3y ago
  In the old days it was probably possible to actually detect a TV based on the intermediate frequency. There's no transmitter but neither are they TEMPEST-rated equipment, there would be leaks. But that only detects that there's an operating receiver, not what it is receiving. Originally, live was the only option--but not any more.
- ghusto 3y ago
  One of them actually said to me: "Are you refusing my right to inspect your home for a T.V.?" — notice the wording. I slammed the door in his face as he was saying "You'll be prosecuted!". Remember, if someone like that is _asking_ for something, it means they have no right to it.
sys_64738 3y ago
You had to provide your legal name and address to the shop when buying a video recorder, hifi system, or any type of television (including B&W). Basically, it was illegal to buy such devices without providing your name and place of residence.
- rwmj 3y ago
  I think you still have to, don't you?
  - switch007 3y ago
    No (not since 2013). If a retailer is asking your name and address etc while buying a TV, it'll likely be to spam you.
- ghusto 3y ago
  Really? I've never done that, and I've bought several televisions.
SillyUsername 3y ago
Note that the BBC won't switch to a subscriber model and now needs to include other providers' channels in the tax classification, which should be evidence enough that its content can't compete with modern competition. As an institution I feel the BBC is no longer needed to educate the UK's citizens as we have other high quality providers for that, and obviously the internet.
- rwmj 3y ago
  The publicly funded channel acts as a quality baseline below which commercial providers won't usually go (since they would lose viewers). It can also be unbiased, where commercial channels are almost always biased in some way, usually towards whichever billionaire runs them. How far the BBC fulfils these needs can definitely be argued (especially on bias), but you should worry about not having the BBC around.
  - harvey9 3y ago
    True in some contexts but right now the BBC CEO is concerned that they can't afford expensive dramas like Netflix or Prime can. Regarding bias, commentators on both left and right claim bias in the other direction. This does not imply the BBC is neutral - to (dis)prove that would require study.
    - rwmj 3y ago
      The BBC does vastly more than just some Netflix-style dramas. They have news, many radio channels, local journalism, national events ...
  - denton-scratch 3y ago
    > The publicly funded channel It's not "publicly funded". It's funded by licence-payers. And it's hardly one channel. > It can also be unbiased Nonsense. E.g. Any mention of "HAMAS" on the BBC is routinely accompanied by the reminder that HAMAS is a proscribed organisation in the UK and many other places. I used to rely on BBC news, not because it was unbiased, but because their reporting was better (they used to have a large network of international correspondents). But their news staff has been cut to the bone, and job-title inflation means that all their correspondents are now referred to as "editor". I now get my TV news from ITV/CH4. The notion that the BBC forces up standards for the "independent" channels is manifestly untrue.
lozenge 3y ago
Betteridge's law works here... they don't!
AdrianB1 3y ago
Is the type of problem encountered in a country a sign of the type of civilization you have in that country? In a way, I would expect this article to be applicable also in North Korea, just with different outcome ("42 were shot today due to missing TV license"). Also, given the US gained independence from UK and wanted to go a very different path (ex: 1st A, 2nd A don't exist in UK, but the opposite), why is the same legal system used in USA?
- ta1243 3y ago
  Could be worse -- in Maryland you have to pay a tax just to flush the toilet
denton-scratch 3y ago
"I cancelled my TV licence 2 years ago after checking with them that I did not need a TV licence to watch such as Iplayer etc, as I found I was watching very little TV due to work and then when I did nothing I watched was live - or at the broadcast time." Sharon, barnsley UK Sharon was mistaken. You do need a licence to watch iPlayer. You need a licence to watch satellite and cable. You need a licence to watch streaming services like Netflix or Prime. You don't have to be watching it live, you need a licence to record or timeshift. I think you don't need a licence to watch pre-recorded material on VHS/DVD/Blueray. The vans do exist (or at least they did - I haven't seen one since the 70s). I'm pretty certain they were bogus. There's a lot of bullshit in those comments; I assume some of it is from the TV Licensing Authority. There's a comment there saying that the TVLA doesn't have the power to investigate and prosecute under the Police And Criminal Evidence Act; that is false. The TVLA has the same prosecuting powers as the Post Office, currently notorious for the Horizon Scandal. At the very bottom of TFA, there's a date: the article is from 2011. Maybe that should be appended to the HN title. TV licensing is absurd. You're expected to fund the BBC via the licence, even if you don't watch BBC. And in funding the BBC, you are funding the World Service, a government propaganda operation controlled by the Foreign Office. The Director General of the BBC is appointed directly by the government, so arguably the BBC is a government operation, and should be funded from taxes. If it were funded from taxes, we might not have 4 (four!) BBC TV channels, in addition to the panoply of TV channels broadcast by companies that are not the BBC, but in which the BBC is a majority shareholder and provides much of the content (e.g. Dave). End it, already.
- toast0 3y ago
  What's the difference between a license and a tax? What if cigarettes were untaxed, but bundled with a license to smoke?
- cassianoleal 3y ago
  > You need a licence to watch streaming services like Netflix or Prime. You don't have to be watching it live, you need a licence to record or timeshift. This is wrong. Do I need a TV Licence to watch Youtube? If you are watching a TV programme live on YouTube, you need to be covered by a TV Licence. A licence is not required to view user generated content, clips and videos on YouTube. This includes live streamed content that is not part of a television broadcast. Or being broadcast at the same time by other means. --- Do I need a TV Licence to watch Netflix? You don’t need a TV Licence to watch on demand programmes on Netflix. --- Do you need a TV Licence to watch Amazon Prime? If you’re watching TV showing live on Amazon Prime, you need to be covered by a TV Licence. You don’t need a TV Licence if you’re only watching on demand programmes on Amazon Prime. --- Do you need a TV Licence to watch Disney Plus? You don’t need a TV Licence to watch on demand programmes on Disney Plus. Source: https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/cs/ContentServer?c=Page&childpagename=TVL/Page/TVL1ColumnFAQ&pagename=TVLWrapper&rendermode=preview&cid=1339697263400 https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/cs/ContentServer?c=Page&childp...
rob_76 3y ago
If TV detector vans actually do exist, according to the official surveillance regulator they don't work very well at all! https://tv-licensing.blogspot.com/2024/04/surveillance-regulator-bbc-tv-detection.html https://tv-licensing.blogspot.com/2024/04/surveillance-regul...

17 points by georgecmu 3y ago

dazc 3y ago

Correct answer... TV detector vans exist, but they do not detect anything. They are just for show. TVL have a database of addresses in the UK with or without a licence. It is just assumed that anyone without a TV licence is guilty, and so a campaign of harrassment begins by letters and visits to intimidate people into buying a licence. Fact 1: Never in court has evidence been used to prosecute people (mainly single mothers) based on 'detector' van evidence. Fact 2: Although TVL threaten that they might apply for a search warrant if you do not let them in to inspect your house, it is very difficult indeed for them to apply for a warrant. They first need proof that you are receiving live broadcast. Never has 'dectector van' evidence been used to apply for a warrant. Search warrants are very rarely applied for today. The reason people get prosecuted is that they admit to having a TV and then sign a 'confession' form. They assume a visiting TVL 'officer' has some sort of legal power when they visit. They have no more legal power than if any member of the public came round. Tell them to leave and they must immediately comply else be in breach of law. Philip Dean, Newport, Wales Source: My mother was convicted many years ago, I was there and witnessed the entire confession-based playbook.

exe34 3y ago
I ignore their letters, because they're rude. I was looking forward to denying them entry, but the last time one of their goons came around, they said they didn't want to come in because of COVID.
jt2190 3y ago
> ... they admit to having a TV and then sign a 'confession' form... I believe this "confession form" is a Demand Letter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand_letter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand_letter These are routinely used for theft by retail employees, for example.
369548684892826 3y ago
> admit to having a TV and then sign a 'confession' form "Having a TV" is fine without a license. It's watching live broadcast television, or using iPlayer, that isn't allowed.
- tentacleuno 3y ago
  ...or watching TV as it is being broadcast[0]. For anyone outside the UK, this is designed to be confusing. Many people unnecessarily pay for the TV License just to stop the harassment campaign by TV Licensing. This entire system is akin to a protection racket. [0]: https://www.gov.uk/find-licences/tv-licence https://www.gov.uk/find-licences/tv-licence
rwmj 3y ago
http://www.bbctvlicence.com/ http://www.bbctvlicence.com/ - the website of a guy who posts all the threatening letters he receives.
LorenPechtel 3y ago
In the old days it was probably possible to actually detect a TV based on the intermediate frequency. There's no transmitter but neither are they TEMPEST-rated equipment, there would be leaks. But that only detects that there's an operating receiver, not what it is receiving. Originally, live was the only option--but not any more.
ghusto 3y ago
One of them actually said to me: "Are you refusing my right to inspect your home for a T.V.?" — notice the wording. I slammed the door in his face as he was saying "You'll be prosecuted!". Remember, if someone like that is _asking_ for something, it means they have no right to it.

sys_64738 3y ago

You had to provide your legal name and address to the shop when buying a video recorder, hifi system, or any type of television (including B&W). Basically, it was illegal to buy such devices without providing your name and place of residence.

rwmj 3y ago
I think you still have to, don't you?
- switch007 3y ago
  No (not since 2013). If a retailer is asking your name and address etc while buying a TV, it'll likely be to spam you.
ghusto 3y ago
Really? I've never done that, and I've bought several televisions.

SillyUsername 3y ago

Note that the BBC won't switch to a subscriber model and now needs to include other providers' channels in the tax classification, which should be evidence enough that its content can't compete with modern competition. As an institution I feel the BBC is no longer needed to educate the UK's citizens as we have other high quality providers for that, and obviously the internet.

rwmj 3y ago
The publicly funded channel acts as a quality baseline below which commercial providers won't usually go (since they would lose viewers). It can also be unbiased, where commercial channels are almost always biased in some way, usually towards whichever billionaire runs them. How far the BBC fulfils these needs can definitely be argued (especially on bias), but you should worry about not having the BBC around.
- harvey9 3y ago
  True in some contexts but right now the BBC CEO is concerned that they can't afford expensive dramas like Netflix or Prime can. Regarding bias, commentators on both left and right claim bias in the other direction. This does not imply the BBC is neutral - to (dis)prove that would require study.
  - rwmj 3y ago
    The BBC does vastly more than just some Netflix-style dramas. They have news, many radio channels, local journalism, national events ...
- denton-scratch 3y ago
  > The publicly funded channel It's not "publicly funded". It's funded by licence-payers. And it's hardly one channel. > It can also be unbiased Nonsense. E.g. Any mention of "HAMAS" on the BBC is routinely accompanied by the reminder that HAMAS is a proscribed organisation in the UK and many other places. I used to rely on BBC news, not because it was unbiased, but because their reporting was better (they used to have a large network of international correspondents). But their news staff has been cut to the bone, and job-title inflation means that all their correspondents are now referred to as "editor". I now get my TV news from ITV/CH4. The notion that the BBC forces up standards for the "independent" channels is manifestly untrue.

lozenge 3y ago

Betteridge's law works here... they don't!

AdrianB1 3y ago

Is the type of problem encountered in a country a sign of the type of civilization you have in that country? In a way, I would expect this article to be applicable also in North Korea, just with different outcome ("42 were shot today due to missing TV license"). Also, given the US gained independence from UK and wanted to go a very different path (ex: 1st A, 2nd A don't exist in UK, but the opposite), why is the same legal system used in USA?

ta1243 3y ago
Could be worse -- in Maryland you have to pay a tax just to flush the toilet

denton-scratch 3y ago

"I cancelled my TV licence 2 years ago after checking with them that I did not need a TV licence to watch such as Iplayer etc, as I found I was watching very little TV due to work and then when I did nothing I watched was live - or at the broadcast time." Sharon, barnsley UK Sharon was mistaken. You do need a licence to watch iPlayer. You need a licence to watch satellite and cable. You need a licence to watch streaming services like Netflix or Prime. You don't have to be watching it live, you need a licence to record or timeshift. I think you don't need a licence to watch pre-recorded material on VHS/DVD/Blueray. The vans do exist (or at least they did - I haven't seen one since the 70s). I'm pretty certain they were bogus. There's a lot of bullshit in those comments; I assume some of it is from the TV Licensing Authority. There's a comment there saying that the TVLA doesn't have the power to investigate and prosecute under the Police And Criminal Evidence Act; that is false. The TVLA has the same prosecuting powers as the Post Office, currently notorious for the Horizon Scandal. At the very bottom of TFA, there's a date: the article is from 2011. Maybe that should be appended to the HN title. TV licensing is absurd. You're expected to fund the BBC via the licence, even if you don't watch BBC. And in funding the BBC, you are funding the World Service, a government propaganda operation controlled by the Foreign Office. The Director General of the BBC is appointed directly by the government, so arguably the BBC is a government operation, and should be funded from taxes. If it were funded from taxes, we might not have 4 (four!) BBC TV channels, in addition to the panoply of TV channels broadcast by companies that are not the BBC, but in which the BBC is a majority shareholder and provides much of the content (e.g. Dave). End it, already.

toast0 3y ago
What's the difference between a license and a tax? What if cigarettes were untaxed, but bundled with a license to smoke?
cassianoleal 3y ago
> You need a licence to watch streaming services like Netflix or Prime. You don't have to be watching it live, you need a licence to record or timeshift. This is wrong. Do I need a TV Licence to watch Youtube? If you are watching a TV programme live on YouTube, you need to be covered by a TV Licence. A licence is not required to view user generated content, clips and videos on YouTube. This includes live streamed content that is not part of a television broadcast. Or being broadcast at the same time by other means. --- Do I need a TV Licence to watch Netflix? You don’t need a TV Licence to watch on demand programmes on Netflix. --- Do you need a TV Licence to watch Amazon Prime? If you’re watching TV showing live on Amazon Prime, you need to be covered by a TV Licence. You don’t need a TV Licence if you’re only watching on demand programmes on Amazon Prime. --- Do you need a TV Licence to watch Disney Plus? You don’t need a TV Licence to watch on demand programmes on Disney Plus. Source: https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/cs/ContentServer?c=Page&childpagename=TVL/Page/TVL1ColumnFAQ&pagename=TVLWrapper&rendermode=preview&cid=1339697263400 https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/cs/ContentServer?c=Page&childp...

rob_76 3y ago

If TV detector vans actually do exist, according to the official surveillance regulator they don't work very well at all! https://tv-licensing.blogspot.com/2024/04/surveillance-regulator-bbc-tv-detection.html https://tv-licensing.blogspot.com/2024/04/surveillance-regul...