Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Can TV Licence inspectors check your bedroom?

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Pawwed Rig
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 22,294 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Lemming wrote: »
    If you have a TV (or other device) that is - at the moment in time we are discussing - not able to receive a broadcast signal then the argument falls flat on its face. You do not receive a broadcast signal via any sort of cable; cables are nothing but a medium. You receive a broadcast signal by another piece of equipment. If you are lacking that equipment (or the cables to connect it all up for that matter) to receive a broadcast signal, well then again, the argument again falls flat on its face.

    The Irish law is different to the UK law and encompasses more. In UK you must be able to watch live TV. In Ireland you just have to have the apparatus.
    Also the Inspectors are not as aggressive or frequent here as they are in UK. We also have a constitution that protects a persons home which the TV license law seems to be in breach of but afaik this has never been tested as the TV inspectors are wiser than to try to enter someones property without permission.


  • Options
    #33
    Lemming
    Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    I stand corrected Pawwed Rig. I had incorrectly assumed that Irish licensing law would be roughly similar to the UK given how much of the law apparatus was inherited in the first place.

    So, disregard much of what I've written then folks!


  • Options
    #34
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Lemming Im going to assume that you read none of what I posted below the quote you took, nor did you look at either of the links I posted. Suffice to say I dont appreciate having my opinion being called lazy or cynical when Im basing my opinion on what is a pretty clear definition.


  • Options
    #35
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    So if i only have a desktop pc with monitor and internet, i still have to have a tv license ?. It's not a TV it's a computer. If i did let the inspector in to my abode would they still say i need a license if i only have a pc ?.


  • Options
    #36
    Lemming
    Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    djimi wrote: »
    Lemming Im going to assume that you read none of what I posted below the quote you took, nor did you look at either of the links I posted. Suffice to say I dont appreciate having my opinion being called lazy or cynical when Im basing my opinion on what is a pretty clear definition.

    I wasn't saying that you were being lazy or cynical djimi; rather that those who would place themselves in position of authority do so by claiming that that is how the regulations should be accepted as interpreted.

    Regardless, my reading of what you wrote was based on incorrect assumption so it's moot.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,980 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    I'm on a tablet so excuse the lack of direct quotes, but end of page.
    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2009/en/si/0319.html


  • Options
    #38
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    I'm on a tablet so excuse the lack of direct quotes, but end of page.
    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2009/en/si/0319.html

    A standalone monitor is not a computer if thats what youre getting at.


  • Options
    #39
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    zenno wrote: »
    So if i only have a desktop pc with monitor and internet, i still have to have a tv license ?. It's not a TV it's a computer. If i did let the inspector in to my abode would they still say i need a license if i only have a pc ?.

    Provided the monitor doesnt have HDMI input you would be fine.


  • Options
    #40
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    djimi wrote: »
    Provided the monitor doesnt have HDMI input you would be fine.

    I see. My monitor has a hdmi input connection. A bit of black insulation tape comes to mind to hide it :)


  • Options
    #41
    Faith
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 30,655 Mod ✭✭✭✭Faith


    What happens if they knock on the door and you just admit to not having a licence? Do they just tell you to buy one or what?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    Faith wrote: »
    What happens if they knock on the door and you just admit to not having a licence? Do they just tell you to buy one or what?

    I'd say they would just say to you.... that you will receive a reminder letter informing you that you have 10 working days to get one ? maybe.


  • Options
    #43
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    To require a TV licence you must have a TV (doesnt matter if it can pick up saorview or not) or a TV tuner in PC/laptop.

    PC monitors do not count towards this, even if you could hook up a saorview box to it.

    A registered letter from them is a summons, if you dont accept the letter they are a bit stuck and I have no idea what happens then. So far I havent seen anything since not accepting a letter for a former housemate that moved out.

    They will just tell you to get one and if you dont they'll start sending letters threatening court action


  • Options
    #44
    An Ri rua
    Registered Users Posts: 4,475 ✭✭✭An Ri rua


    I have received a letter three residences in a row now: over the last four years.

    The 1st 2 to the 'resident', the last to me directly, as I hd ordered a setanta card for my mother's Sky Box, to my address. Nothing illegal there, but enough to set their geiger counters agog....

    I simply emailed back, following up on the previous 2 email correspondences, advising that I do not have a television at my current residence. When, in 2009, I advised the same office that I watched only catch-up services on laptop, he advised me that if I was watching live broadcasts via IP, I needed a licence. I sent him a link of a press release from Minister Eamonn Ryan detailing specifically that that was allowed under the updated 2009 Broadcasting Act and he duly put it on file and let me be. That is the correct state of affairs as we stand.
    Regarding a TV licence inspector entering your home, neither he nor a Garda nor any other state agent have any right to enter your home except in exceptional circumstances. A TV licence would not be one of those moments. Suspected child abuse is one, among other heinous crimes.
    What I would advise, no matter what situation you are in, whether in the right or in the wrong, record your conversations. Its too easy not to; with modern tech. TV licence inspectors have been known to tell blatant lies in court; with the result that decent people I know have had no televisions for years (hippies) but have a licence because the Irish State peddles fear.

    Know your rights. Whether you are an upstanding citizen or a crook, know your rights. If not, you will be manhandled by thugs.


  • Options
    #45
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,252 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    A registered letter from them is a summons,
    Might be a summons.
    if you dont accept the letter they are a bit stuck and I have no idea what happens then.
    The simply ask the judge if they can do a substitued service and send it by oprdinary post.


  • Options
    #46
    Bozo Skeleton
    Registered Users Posts: 749 ✭✭✭Bozo Skeleton


    The age old solution is not to answer your door if you're not expecting anyone.


  • Options
    #47
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,407 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    It's the 'whether or not a device is dependent on other equipment to receive the signal' bit that confuses me. I reckon that was put in to cover subscription services and things, but on a technicality could that cover just about every component in a tv? As in if you had a tablet you COULD modify it in order to display a tv broadcast. Or even just an electron gun and silvered vacuum tube? You could use other equipment to make a tv out of it. Hell a cardboard box could be a tv if you get the right equipment.


  • Options
    #48
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    Bozo Skeleton wrote: »
    The age old solution is not to answer your door if you're not expecting anyone.

    ^^ This! I never answer the door in my gaff. If it is a friend outside, they will phone or text me to suggest polictely that I get my ass off the sofa and open the door. Otherwise, I'm not interested


  • Options
    #49
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    TheChizler wrote: »
    It's the 'whether or not a device is dependent on other equipment to receive the signal' bit that confuses me. I reckon that was put in to cover subscription services and things, but on a technicality could that cover just about every component in a tv? As in if you had a tablet you COULD modify it in order to display a tv broadcast. Or even just an electron gun and silvered vacuum tube? You could use other equipment to make a tv out of it. Hell a cardboard box could be a tv if you get the right equipment.

    I think thats overcomplicating it just a little! The device has to be capable of receiving a television signal; its a fair assumption that it means it must be capable in its current state, and not just because it can be modified to receive a signal.


  • Options
    #50
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,980 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    djimi wrote: »
    Provided the monitor doesnt have HDMI input you would be fine.

    HDMI, DVI-D and Displayport are effectively interchangeable.

    By your definition a laptop screen, tablet screen or phone screen are also capable of receiving a TV signal since they have the ability to receive video inputs.


  • Options
    #51
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,980 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    djimi wrote: »
    I think thats overcomplicating it just a little! The device has to be capable of receiving a television signal; its a fair assumption that it means it must be capable in its current state, and not just because it can be modified to receive a signal.

    But you need a device capable of decoding and sending the TV signal. So you need a second device to make a monitor capable of showing video, which is effectively modifying it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    HDMI, DVI-D and Displayport are effectively interchangeable.

    By your definition a laptop screen, tablet screen or phone screen are also capable of receiving a TV signal since they have the ability to receive video inputs.

    Except it specifies that a computer and phone (and I presume by extension a tablet) are currently exempt from requiring a TV license.

    A 24" "computer monitor" with HDMI input and a 42" TV with HDMI input are the same device and can both be used for either purpose. Just because you choose to plug it into a PC does not change the fact that it is still a device that is capable of receiving a TV signal and can be used for that purpose.

    We can debate the finer points of it all we like; to me the law as it is written is pretty black and white on the matter. If you have a device that is capable of receiving a TV broadcast signal (be it direct or via decoding equipment) then you must pay a TV license, even if the device is not being used for that purpose. I dont see how you could argue that any device that has HDMI or SCART input would not fall into this.


  • Options
    #53
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    But you need a device capable of decoding and sending the TV signal. So you need a second device to make a monitor capable of showing video, which is effectively modifying it.

    From the statue book:
    “ television set ” means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasting services broadcast for general reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on the use of anything else in conjunction with it)

    Its not modifying the device to plug it into a signal decoder such as a cable or satellite receiver, and if the device is capable of being plugged into such a receiver in its current state which allows it to broadcast the signal then by definition it is a television.


  • Options
    #54
    srsly78
    Registered Users Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    djimi wrote: »
    Except it specifies that a computer and phone (and I presume by extension a tablet) are currently exempt from requiring a TV license.

    A 24" "computer monitor" with HDMI input and a 42" TV with HDMI input are the same device and can both be used for either purpose. Just because you choose to plug it into a PC does not change the fact that it is still a device that is capable of receiving a TV signal and can be used for that purpose.

    We can debate the finer points of it all we like; to me the law as it is written is pretty black and white on the matter. If you have a device that is capable of receiving a TV broadcast signal (be it direct or via decoding equipment) then you must pay a TV license, even if the device is not being used for that purpose. I dont see how you could argue that any device that has HDMI or SCART input would not fall into this.

    You clearly have no clue how monitors work.

    The difference between monitor and tv: monitor does not have the electronics to decode the tv signal.

    Now, things may be more complicated these days with the analogue turn off - but most tvs have the signal receiving and decoding bits built in. The monitor just shows a picture, it can only receive a pre-decoded signal from an outside source (usually a pc or other box).

    This is pretty funny because nowadays that means that many tvs themselves can't receive signal (analog is gone). The tv licence properly applies to your saorview box.


  • Options
    #55
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    srsly78 wrote: »
    You clearly have no clue how monitors work.

    The difference between monitor and tv: monitor does not have the electronics to decode the tv signal.

    Now, things may be more complicated these days with the analogue turn off - but most tvs have the signal receiving and decoding bits built in. The monitor just shows a picture, it can only receive a pre-decoded signal from an outside source (usually a pc or other box).

    This is pretty funny because nowadays that means that many tvs themselves can't receive signal (analog is gone). The tv licence properly applies to your saorview box.

    The monitor doesnt have to be able to decode the TV signal; it only has to be able to display the signal that is coming from the cable/satellite decoder box.


  • Options
    #56
    srsly78
    Registered Users Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    djimi wrote: »
    The monitor doesnt have to be able to decode the TV signal; it only has to be able to display the signal that is coming from the cable/satellite decoder box.

    The law does not say that - a video signal is not a television broadcast. This is why they are changing the law to cover everything.

    Consider a bunch of monitors hooked up to closed circuit tv cameras. You think these need a tv licence? NO!

    You can watch RTE over the internet via official methods on your pc, but whether this constitutes a "broadcast" is unclarified right now. This is the excuse they will use to change the law and make all internet capable devices subject to the new "broadcast licence".


  • Options
    #57
    R P McMurphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭R P McMurphy


    Just dont engage in conversation with them at all and close the door. In fact dont open the door at all. Nothing good ever comes from an unexpected knock on the door


  • Options
    #58
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    srsly78 wrote: »
    The law does not say that - a video signal is not a television broadcast. This is why they are changing the law to cover everything.

    Consider a bunch of monitors hooked up to closed circuit tv cameras. You think these need a tv licence? NO!

    You can watch RTE over the internet via official methods on your pc, but whether this constitutes a "broadcast" is unclarified right now. This is the excuse they will use to change the law and make all internet capable devices subject to the new "broadcast licence".

    Look at the quote that I posted from the statute book about four posts up.


  • Options
    #59
    srsly78
    Registered Users Posts: 7,157 ✭✭✭srsly78


    djimi wrote: »
    Look at the quote that I posted from the statute book about four posts up.

    Your interpretation of the law is different from that of the inspectors themselves, they have been fine with monitors for years.


  • Options
    #60
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,268 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    djimi wrote: »
    Look at the quote that I posted from the statute book about four posts up.

    Your fighting a losing battle, a monitor can not receive a broadcast signal ( most can't even do sound)
    This is why they are changing the system.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    djimi
    Registered Users Posts: 13,238 ✭✭✭✭djimi


    srsly78 wrote: »
    Your interpretation of the law is different from that of the inspectors themselves, they have been fine with monitors for years.
    ted1 wrote: »
    Your fighting a losing battle, a monitor can not receive a broadcast signal ( most can't even do sound)
    This is why they are changing the system.

    There is a difference between a more old school computer monitor (which typically only has a VGA/DVI connection on it) and the type of monitor that is more commonly in use nowadays which is basically a small TV complete with HDMI and often SCART. If inspectors see a monitor connected to a PC and ignore it then well and good, but essentially there is no difference between the 24" monitor that is plugged into your PC via HDMI and the 42" monitor in your living room that is connected via HDMI/SCART to the PS3 and the Sky box, and an inspector who knows what they are looking may see the 24" monitor with its HDMI connection and realise that it is fully capable of broadcasting a TV signal from a Sky/UPC box.

    I should clarify (or backtrack if you will) and say I am referring to monitors that are capable of carrying sound as well as picture. A monitor that is not capable of carrying sound cant really be considered to be a television.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement