TV Detector Vans

[Skywave]

Originally Posted by Jack Spark

Sorry guys, you won't convince me. It's far easier and cheaper to have a list of addresses.

A list of addresses where TV sets are installed: it may well be easier and cheaper now - but for the period in question, I don't ever recall the existence of a system that required TV dealers nor aerial installers to provide installation addresses to the licensing authorities. Hence, some form of 'electronic detection' seems the only remaining possibility for combating licence fee evasion - again, for the period in question.

Al.

[XTC]

Originally Posted by Jack Spark

Sure fire way to defeat the detector vans is of course, to buy the license, they won't come knocking if you do!

Sorry guys, you won't convince me. It's far easier and cheaper to have a list of addresses.

I think it worked in two ways, mainly paperwork, door knocking and assuming people would fess up.

The vans did work but they couldn't exactly cruise down the street and note all the license dodgers. They were much more difficult to get results with. However, the idea that defaulters could be detected from outside their premises was a a powerful one, hence the dummy vans and TV ads.

If you really want to play up over this, a starting point is that if an inspector turns up, you are not obliged to let them in without a search warrant and you don't confess to using a TV illegally.

Pete.

[dominicbeesley]

Coo its almost worth renting a flat and installing a few 15kHz, 4.43Mhz etc oscillators and seeing what they do!

D

[Jack Spark]

I like your style dom!

The house I grew up in as a kid wasn't TV licensed for years, nor did the owner ever pay any parking tickets, working on the theory that as computer storage was expensive, there was only a limited space on the computer for them....Not only is the person an ex BBC employee, they also describe themselves as a Pillar of the Community! The did get prosecuted around 1986and now have ditched the car but purchased a TV license!

I also know someone who always told the inspector to "go away".
Personally speaking, its a legal requirement, regardless of the rights and wrongs, so best to get a license.

Anyway, back on topic and maybe this is the way to determine one way or the other, can anyone here demonstrate a working electronic detection system in a a real life situation?
That means kit installed in the back of a van, in the road outside a house to discover where the set is located, if it is on or off and what channel is being viewed?

Very interesting discussion chaps and I bow to your knowledge.

[wireful3]

I suspect that TV detection (for license evasion) uses a multi pronged approach. Many many years ago I was arranging a talk on radio interference detection, from the GPO. I was very surprised when their contact man tuned up at my house in a detector van. He said it might be a bit over the top for an informal visit but they took any opportunity to drive around in the van. It usually produced some results.

I can imagine it is certainly possible to detect TV sets in use and may not be very difficult, though getting the precise location may be tricky. I remember a situation when I was testing a portable TV. My wife was using a dedicated word processor at the same time and I was amazed to see the text she was writing on my TV screen. It was confined to one particular channel so did not interfere with normal operation. I suspect that the signals were mains borne but never bothered to check.

My main conclusion was that to prevent any indication of use to outsiders, needs great care in the design of the TV set. The amount of garbage radiated from electronic equipment these days makes me doubt whether this happens. If someone tells me that detector vans exist and work, I am prepared to believe them. Whether they are needed is another matter. It is so easy to check whether a house that has had a license in the past still has a valid one. A computer generated letter to defaulters is no problem except to new owners who don't have a TV, it can take quite some effort to stop these letters.

[Paul Stenning]

Originally Posted by wireful3

A computer generated letter to defaulters is no problem except to new owners who don't have a TV, it can take quite some effort to stop these letters.

In my experience phoning them and calmly explaining why you don't need a license works. They say on the phone and in the confirmation letter than an inspector will visit to check, but nobody did in the period of 4 years or so when we legitimately did not need a license.

You could of course do nothing, throw away all the letters and eventually an inspector will turn up, but I'd rather make one phone call and avoid all the hassle.

It depends whether you prefer a quiet life or the brief satisfaction of beating the system.

[Paul_RK]

Oh, visits from the inspectors aren't bad if my experience is anything to go by. One turned up on the doorstep two or three months into my last spell of being unlicensed.

Inspector (after briefly explaining why she was there): "Do you have a television set at all?"
Me (smiling broadly): "Oh, lots of them......"

Cue a raised eyebrow, steadily appeased as I explained the situation, but distinctly jerking upwards again when the sitting-room set, then as now a 1984ish Bang and Olufsen, was manifestly on standby

I used the remote control to bring it to life, demonstrating that it was tuned to the signal output of the nearby PS2 and Xbox and that all other buttons on the remote were similarly set, and that the aerial downlead was connected to the Dynatron Berkeley radiogram. All done and dusted in five minutes or so with my giving an assurance that I didn't watch any live TV via the computer and would obtain a licence if circumstances were to change, as, two or three years later, they did...

Paul

[XTC]

Originally Posted by Paul Stenning

It depends whether you prefer a quiet life or the brief satisfaction of beating the system.

Yes indeed. If you look on the web there are anti-licence sites and a lot of people see baiting the TV licensing crowd as a political cause or a sport.

I don't believe that detection evidence has ever been used in a prosecution, it's used as grounds for a search warrant and the prosecution uses evidence gathered then. Prosecutions usually rely on people incriminating themselves by confessing or not acting within their rights to prevent the gathering of evidence against them.

[julie_m]

The BBC are pretty unique among broadcasters in that they sell programmes to audiences, as opposed to selling audiences to advertisers. The TV licence is what makes all this possible.

If you object to paying 40 pence a day, I respectfully suggest you get rid of your own TV and stick to watching other people's sets.

[Paul_RK]

Only unique among UK broadcasters, there are plenty of state-funded systems out there. But my own motivation for dropping the licence fee, and all TV use, for a while came from noticing that I'd watched about six hours of programming in the previous year and reflecting that it wasn't nearly memorable enough to be worth £20 or so an hour.

Paul

[Welsh Anorak]

Hi
Like Paul S, I spoke to the authorities and they were most helpful. I was able to declare online I had no TV capable of receiving broadcasts at home and I was then informed I wouldn't receive any reminders for a while, but I might get a visit which, so far, hasn't happened. If I choose to go back to watching TV I shall, of course, get a license. I prefer a quiet - and legal - life.
Co-incidentally I've today had a customer's Sony flat panel TV in to modify so it can't be used off-air - something that hasn't happened for a while.
Glyn
PS My reason for getting rid was oddly similar to Paul RK's!

[dave walsh]

AJS is right about the our national broadcasters unique status and and this is why paying for it out of general taxation makes much more sense. Another would be that the cost of running the licensing set up to [in effect] harass a tiny number of defaulters is very high. As he says, even the current funding approach is a real bargain at 40p a day! Despite it's independent status, the Beeb seems to be trapped into chasing ratings [just as if it actually was selling to audiences]. I can only assume the reason for this is the ongoing fear that opponents would use low ratings to try and shut our BBC down, so it's a bit of a vicious circle! I would imagine that when Independent Television first came in and the Detector Vans [Van?] rolled out, it was the start of the situation we are still in 60 years later. I'd still like to hear from a former inspector though. There must be hundreds of good stories
Dave W

[Paul_RK]

Originally Posted by Welsh Anorak

Co-incidentally I've today had a customer's Sony flat panel TV in to modify so it can't be used off-air - something that hasn't happened for a while.

Surprising that anyone would go to such lengths, unless other members of their household are both enterprising and untrustworthy or they're just confused about the legal position. As I understand it, watching live broadcasts without a licence is an offence, not ownership of equipment that could do so - which these days would include everyone who has a computer and an internet connection. My having unplugged the aerial and retuned my TV proved quite enough to satisfy the inspector I saw.

Paul

[Boom]

Originally Posted by Paul_RK

All done and dusted in five minutes or so with my giving an assurance that I didn't watch any live TV via the computer

Which could be proved how exactly? There's no RF or sub carriers to detect.
Mind you there isn't any of them in an LCD set is there?

[MikeyPP]

Originally Posted by dave walsh

I'd still like to hear from a former inspector though. There must be hundreds of good stories

or tens

[Paul_RK]

Would have to be caught red-handed, I suppose, when a computer's involved. As I recall, the licensing site three or four years ago contained an extensive section of funny stories relating to various excuses folk had offered up for the TV programmes which appeared to be showing when an inspector called. The fund-gathering authority may have changed in the meantime, that section doesn't seem to be there any more...

Paul

[Diabolical Artificer]

In 1992-3 I lived in an old bell tent in a remote part of Norfolk. There was a detector van parked at the end of the track once or twice . It was newer than an old Commer,had TV detector something or other on the side. If my memory serves me right it had an "arial" on the roof somewhat resembling the type of arial you get for caravans. A type of geodesic affair.

I havnt had a TV for years,the licsenseing authorities never believe this, but give up after a while . They did say someone would pop in once, but Ive never seen anyone . A

[trh01uk]

Originally Posted by Skywave

The local osc. will almost certainly radiate some of its signal from the aerial - albeit at a significantly reduced level, but enough for a sensitive receiver to find it and then do the necessary D.F.

Al,

sure you can try and DF a signal, but when most people live in built-up areas, with TV antennas and TVs in all directions, its impossible to believe you could actually get a reliable DF fix on any one property. Just far too many reflections for this to be credible.

It would work OK if you had a single isolated house, a long way from another one.......


Richard

For a while I lived in a 10 person house (i.e. ten rooms and communal bath, living, and kitchen), We all had tellys and needed licenses unless... the other 9 where members of my staff, which of course they where (at 1p a year, if you want to cheat, know the rules!). Never had a letter or anything else I guess they see one address that has a license and all is OK. Before that I live in a no telly house, it is amost impossible in my experience to tell them and have them understand.

[Peter.N.]

On the subject of radiation, does anyone remember the 'Unisal', I think that's how it was spelt, band three converters of 1955. They were a cheap alternative to the 'proper' EMI type and were mounted inside the cabinet with a two or three way switch on the outside and converted the ITA signal to channel one. Subsequent to installation the neighbours from several houses around also had ITA whether they wanted it or not. Now that is some radiation, probably via the aerial due to poor filtering.

My point is this, if a TV with the relativly low gain that they had in those days could so easily recieve those spurious signals, how much more so sensitive equipment that was designed for the job.

Peter