TV Detector Vans Are REAL!……. Apparently
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 04. 2024
- My friends over at licensing blog have made the news with an foi request that finally proves once and for all the tv licence tv detector vans are real…….. yeah ok.
Source - tv-licensing.blogspot.com/202...
www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...
www.the-sun.com/news/11103147...
Subscribe to TV licence stop to see all my tv licence and bbc videos - / @tvlicencestop
- All You Need to Know About TV Licence - • All You Need To Know
- TV Licence Goon Visits - • TV Licence Goon Visits
- TV Licence Letters - • TV Licence Letters
Need TV Licence Advice?
Get advice from the experts (it’s a free to use forum, I’m not affiliated, they just know their stuff) - www.tvlicenceresistance.info/...
Need to email me? You can do it here (for faster advice use the link above)- www.tvlicencestop.co.uk/contact/
Filmed using A DJI Osmo Pocket on a long stick with a Boya Osmo lapel mic
#tvlicence #bbc
They should focus on trying to detect anything worth watching on British TV that would justify paying for a license.
No point in giving them an impossible task, that would just be a good excuse to waste even more licence paying money.
😂😂😂
Hahha
Very funny 🤣
LOL
My Mother was a TV Licence Officer for over 10 years, she worked in these vans, all they did was park up and watch TV themselves, its a load of wank and nothing more.
Hope they were covered by a licence for it
@@SLIAFFT don't be daft they don't pay for what they sell (classed as a business premises, not private)
that is so brave of you to admit, must have been so shaming for you as a child🤣
@@mrLoftladder Meh i learnt valuable map reading skills from helping my mother plan her routes (this was well before Capita took over enforcement)
@@JetfireQuasaryep my friends uncle did it in the 80s and said they had a list of addresses (no names) and park nearby to scare people and play cards in the back for ten minutes 😂
Funny how the “evidence” they gather has never been used in court
In France during WW2, the triangulated the position of people with radios. But they were finding people transmitting a signal, NOT receiving a signal.
If they are saying they are monitoring digital signals in your home, that is invasion of privacy.
Everything I’ve heard comes from the occupants speaking to the goons.
Of course, "evidence" provided by TV detection equipment has never been used in a prosecution. If the case were defended properly, such "evidence" would be seen to be a hoax.
Wondering did it detect Huws photo shots of him arsing about
It was so covert that nobody could see the evidence
Covert detector vehicles = the goons own car.
Detection equipment = a list of all households without a current licence.
😂😂😂
Well yeah. But the 'detection equipment' then becomes their eyes that they use to look through people's windows when they arrive at an unlicenced property.
They basically want to witness a switched on TV, with something they can identify as a currently being broadcast programme. Which is why the TVL is unfair. Because it actually IS easy to avoid paying it or being caught watching broadcast TV without paying it, for anyone living in a property without street level windows.
@@frankbrodie5168 I see the tongue in cheek swipe at the tvl goons went above your head. 🥱
@@tonytasker489 No no I'm very self aware and read the subtext of your comment. My post was more an addendum than a critique.
Same in the seventies but they had a van and a 12 volt motor turning a pretend Arial 😂
Detection equipment = mobile phone on a stick to peer around curtains 😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Anti detection equipment one hungry rottweiler 😅
If they are spying on us in our homes, isn't that an invasion of privacy? We could sue them.
That is a very real idea.
It would be more a breach of the Data Protection Act and/or GDPR, but I get what you're saying and am inclined to agree. On a different but related note, it is perfectly legal and required under UK law for an ISP to monitor a person's/families internet traffic to try and prevent piracy and other criminal activity, so seeing as the BBC is owned "by the public" (IE: Government), it would probably be seen as ok. There is something that can be done about the ISP issue, simply subscribe to a VPN.
@@Ginger_Dalek its a breach of RIPA
Spotting a tv lighting up a wall in a dark room by using their eyeballs is their detection equipment
@@Ginger_Dalek They don't do it to prevent piracy, they do it to sell data, I don't think they give a toss about piracy, I've had Sky, Talk Talk, Plusnet, Toople & BT ... not once have I ever received a letter or warning.
I've worked for Capita in TV Licensing - never seen or heard of detector vans and asking for a search warrant was laughed off.
Please give us further insights.
All bs
Had a look over a 1500wt Blue Commer van in the 1980's when being serviced by the PO Garage. The guys that drove it had signed the official secrets act so I guess you will have to make your own minds up!!!
@@seantaylor9758 Complete guess - Maybe the GPO / BT Commer van was hunting illegal CB radios.
@@seantaylor9758official secrets act 😂😂 think you might mean non disclosure document. The OSA covers confidential and secret in the armed forces civil service and government not a garage 😊
TV licence Investigation officer qualifications, can't get into police, can't become a "special", can't become a community police officer, refused employment as traffic warden, failed parking enforcement squad, too afraid to work as club doorman, apply today "Capita".
Can't get into the police? Wow, that is bad.
Or become a teacher, if you fail become a lecturer on teaching, otherwise I am afraid you have to become a politician.
@@phann860 You have to have friends in high places and they have no friends, not even in low places.
They wag their tails for their bosses.
And follows the tate bros no doubt
*If* they could actually see what's on my computer monitor remotely, that would be some seriously criminal breach of privacy laws.
They cant. But if you use their website without a VPN then they are able to _'geo-locate'_ you via means of your IP address as you have to access their server to use their website.
@@Rose.Of.Hizaki the IP address is not that accurate to pin point a house number 😂
@@alb673 It actually is. Every device you use that is connected to the internet has an IP address but all that is locked behind GDPR. BBC will know *WHERE* you are but not exactly where you are down to your door number as that is locked down by GDPR and other privacy laws. They arent an ISP or own any of the infrastructure that provides this service to the public so they wont just have your information at a tip of a hat like that.
They would need to go to the police with information that youre doing something illegal and the police will do all the investigating. go to your ISP and ask for your private details and they *WILL* give you up because they are there to give you internet. Not to fight for your civil rights. And the BBC will get your information from the police when your ISP gives it up because your ISP will definitely know where you are and your ISP will give the police everything they ask for with regards to whatever data they have on you.
The BBC will have to jump through hoops to find you and get to you but only if they think its worth it. 99% of the time its not as the money spent on getting to you is money thats not in their own pockets or spent on diversity hires.
Do not make that mistake. IP address can be located to your address.
@@alb673 It actually is. Every device you use that is connected to the internet has an IP address but all that is locked behind GDPR. BBC will know WHERE you are but not exactly where you are down to your door number as that is locked down by GDPR and other privacy laws. They arent an ISP or own any of the infrastructure that provides this service to the public so they wont just have your information at a tip of a hat like that.
They would need to go to the police with information that youre doing something illegal and the police will do all the investigating. go to your ISP and ask for your private details and they WILL give you up because they are there to give you internet. Not to fight for your civil rights. And the BBC will get your information from the police when your ISP gives it up because your ISP will definitely know where you are and your ISP will give the police everything they ask for with regards to whatever data they have on you.
The BBC will have to jump through hoops to find you and get to you but only if they think its worth it. 99% of the time its not as the money spent on getting to you is money thats not in their own pockets or spent on diversity hires.
I worked for the GPO when they ran TV licensing, it is not possible to detect 'ANY' receiving equipment. Only transmissions can be picked up, that your TV doesn't do. And yes, the vans are fake in that they cannot detect anything.
That bloke with the handheld aerial was picking up the broadcast, same as the bloke in the van.
Not true - google "Tempest Sigint"
As a long retired TV engineer that used to repair CRT TV 's I can assure you they do emit radiation but it would be pointless to try to detect this from a street van.
@@tigerteff015 the story I've heard is that certain digital broadcast frequencies are detectable from your broadband connections. Perhaps this is why, despite the usual hardline paperwork from the agency, they've not knocked at my door yet! I'm simply not watching, full stop.
@@stuartreynolds4480 Thats story is duff, mate. Your broadband cables are shielded and any device you use in or around your home to watch tv on, does not emit signals that could possibly show what is on your screen.
@@tigerteff015 The Vans did detect the Line timebases but as soon as they created a database of houses without licences around 1980, they kept the vans but scrapped their VLF receivers
I used to work for TV Licensing as a "detector" van driver. I started doing it as an agency job for a couple of weeks, then they took me on as an official employee. The van I drove had NO equipment whatsoever inside it, it was just a mini-bus with blacked-out windows, and the livery painted on. I also had to sign the official secrets' act when I was given employment by them! Never read it of course, just signed it. Probably said some rubbish about not disclosing anything about the stupidity that you have spoken about here Jon!
My employment was exactly as you said, a scare tactic. I was told to drive to a certain area each day, and make myself visible. There were no goons (enquiry officers) in the van with me, apart from on the odd day here and there when they needed to go knocking doors making nuisances of themselves! I soon found out that I could con them myself, as I just drove up and down the motorway a few times, racking up the mileage on the van, then parked up in secluded areas, sometimes having a nice afternoon kip in the van! I had to fill out timesheets of my hours "worked". Did this for nigh on two years without getting detected myself! Until I DID eventually get caught out by one of the bosses and fired!
There were eight vans in total apparently, which covered the entire UK! The area I covered was South/South East, which covered East and West Sussex, Hampshire, Dorset, and a part of Wiltshire.
I'm quite happy I did the job, as it basically gave me money for doing absolutely nothing apart from racking up miles on the van, for almost two years!
I see that Huw Edwards has just resigned. That’ll save them some cash! - Time to get an emergency video out Jon 🎉
The only issue I have with him resigning is he gets to keep his pension. If he had been fired he would have lost his pension
Hopefully get rid of Lineker as well.
Bugger, that means that they’ll have spare money in their budget to buy more detector vans 😂
@@phann860 we couldn't be that lucky...👍👍
@@simplestuff3895
Huw's new career , driving around the streets at night looking for a signal.
I've seen inside one, just seen a couple of blokes sitting on orange boxes smoking,then jumping out every now and then going round knocking on doors with clipboards.
When I was a kid in the seventies we used to laugh at the 'detector van' ads
I saw a TV Detector Van on our road last weekend. They even stopped when I flagged them down. After a chat with the bloke, he gave me a 99, strawberry Mivi and a 1L bottle of warm Panda cola for £30. My pet unicorn was pleased with the treats!
Apparently our local TV detector van used to also sell E’s
Nope that was what is called an Ice Cream van, the driver of a TV Detector van
is more likely to give you a 69, Strawberry Merkin and a 1L bottle of Bucky's with added GHB
I've seen a few of those. They have refrigeration equipment on board, presumably to cool the neutrino detectors.
You forgot the drugs😂.
Detection equipment is a tablet where they enter the address and the data they enter will show unlicensed property
Yes that how its been for the last 40 years, only 40 years ago the database
was printed on paper for the streets they were going to visit
Yep, I'm also unlicensed for guns.
@@MikeEvesbe careful what you say in jest.
When I was a police officer one of these detector vans ended up in the police compound. I had a good look around it and I can confirm that there was absolutely nothing inside that could have possibly detected anything.
Once they had a database of unlicenced houses they did strip the vans of ineffective equipment, but still drove the vans around just to create fear
When I was a thief, I stole one of these detector vans and can confirm that the copper is correct, there is nothing special about these vans except a TV or two to flog out the back of it.
@@petrolhead0387 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Thats true after around 1980, once they had developed a database of houses without licences
Before that the vans did have VLF receivers to pick up 405 and 625 line CRT TV's line output which could radiate a couple of hundred meters
@@phillipsmiley5930Why did they take until the 1980s to build a database?
Remember that TV Advert, There in the front room watching COLUMBO!
I watched Columbo for years but never saw a detector van... I was in the back room!
Yes. That's the one that sticks in my mind. Oh, there is one other thing.
@quantisedspace7047 one other thing 🤔brilliant 😂.
A fella keeps knocking on our door for TV licence. He says that if you dont watch live TV you need to go on to the website and register has no licence needed. Otherwise we'll keep coming around. Ok fella see you next month!!
See you tomorrow. 😂
I miss the declaration form they used to send - it would certainly save them from sending the other 6 letters! I have in mind all of the folk similar to me, who can't or don't wish to do much online.
Next time, ask him if he has informed his local police that he does not need a shotgun licence!
yes they leave you alone for two years i did it said i only use tv for the computure .soon as the two years was up the extrotion letters started .we should letter them and say if i have to reply to this the costs of that reply will be £50 per letter each time you require me to verify i dont require a tv liscence
A TV is a passive receiver
Theoretically TVs can give off a faint 'repeat signal as you watch. But, in reality, they could never pinpoint the signal. Also, modern flat screen TVs have an almost invisible 'repeat' signal.
So, it was always purest rubbish, one way or the other.
They did exist back in the day of CRT TVs and were ran by GPO Telephones before it was privatised on behalf of the licensing authority. How many there were and how effective is another thing. Don't know how they would even work now a days.
@@ericpode6095 was that based on crt tv's having a winding or small transformer that gave off 455Khz signal ? Only a tiny amount though ?
@@merlin5476 with a sensitive receiver and a good Directional aerial it could (in theory) be detected. I do agree that the vans were used more as a deterrent and from what I learned about them would be useless in the digital age.
@@ericpode6095 thank you Eric👍
If the BBC lies about the tv detector vans, what else are they lying about.. im never giving them a penny.
Ivan and Andy... so funny and borderline ridiculous it's just like a Hale & Pace sketch 😂
I can almost see 'Duh Management' walking along the street holding that stupid aerial above their heads. 🤣
@@jasonuren3479 Sounds like the Teletubbies 🤣🤣🤣
Ha ha
@@tillyt4054 🤣👍
I thought so too. Loved the line about the work not being "all glamour".
Of course, "evidence" provided by TV detection equipment has never been used in a prosecution. If the case were defended properly, such "evidence" would be seen to be a hoax.
I thought CJ was sat a bit close to that mobility scooter race nearly six minutes in. I wonder who won. My money's on the lady. She was in the lead and the chap behind her didn't seem really committed to the race.
A man in a car/van unknowingly watching your house using binoculars or telephoto lenses to snoop through your windows is basically covert surveillance... They are a pathetic joke.
If you catch them pearing through your window report for stalking.
Record them and their car numbers and report them to the police stating that you believe they have inadequate insurance for using their cars in a commercial manner.
Hey man! Love your channel, canceled my TV licence today.... STOP TV LICENCE 💪
Congratulations on getting clean man. You no longer fund State propoganda.
I only use my TV to watch my huge Ben Dover video collection.
Does that mean that these modern day Television Detector Van Operators outside my house can tune into what I'm watching?
"OOH! WHAT a lovely bottom!" Not that I'm an expert...
@@Presenterbloke😂😂😂 The best quote that I remember was with the blonde that he picked up from a railway station in his Mercedes. Later on, she looked up at Ben and said, "I'm only 18!" and Ben Dover replied, "We had better not dwell on that!!". 😂
I see we have men of culture! 😊
Ben must be getting on a bit now.
😅😅😅😅
If Huw Edwards is in the van they will be.😂
I've seen videos of the inside of a TV Detector van on TV in the past. But then again I've also seen the bridge of the Starship Enterprise on TV too.
😂😂👍 and Tom bakers Tardis.
Thing is the Bridge of the NCC1701 actually exists.
Hi Jon - I have to say you are a bright spot in a cloudy and dismal British day…😃.
So 1000 people per week fined for not paying the license. So 52 (weeks) x 1000 (people) x 150 (average fine) = 7.8 million quid... but 135 million on collection?????
Thanks that's interesting not exactly a good bushiness model is it.
Who ever said the BBC is efficient, the collection firms take their cut. The BBC is a bloated, leftist organisation and because of the extortion of some 20 Million households they will not change.
13 million a year just on threatograms too.
And those fines are paid to the courts, so it's not as though the BBC even gets the £7.8 million.
Plus how many of those convictions are the vulnerable people who are defined in their procedures that have been tricked into convicting themselves 🤔
TV detector vans come under the same heading as tooth fairies, Father Christmas and the Easter Bunny, they don't exist and never have done.
I disagree. Father Christmas is real.
You've just shattered my life tooth fairies, father Christmas and Easter bunny not real sorry i can't take that
@@ef7480 Agree seen him in the local shopping centre, portly elderly gentleman with a white beard, he must spend all his money on toys for the kids though because he always seems to be wearing the same clothes year after year. Assumed he could not afford to buy new clothes after buying all the toys?
Easter Bunny certainly exists also, she jumps out of a cake and sits on your lap for the evening (if your lucky).
Unicorns snitch on poor folk for personal gain.
@@breakit46 Unicorns do exist Virologists hunt them, ask Dr Tom Cowan
Detection equipment : smart tvs revealing their usage statistics
Yup, they do collect 'n' sell your information if connected to wi-fi and making the BBC's detector vans a reality.
Not if you turn every single setting off, and like me don't watch the propaganda div brain programming shyte in the first place..........
I block my smart TVs from the router settings.
You have to wonder why the BBC lobbied to have the iPlayer app on every TV from the factory and no option to uninstall it. Mines registered to Rishi.. co/ No. 10 ....
Unicorns, elves and the Loch Ness monster. All real I tell you.
Yep, and pigs can fly don't you know!
So the BBC itself has determined/decided that the information asked for in the FOI request cannot be released. Nice to know that decision is made by a completely impartial board.
Thanks for your videos, very helpful. I've now cancelled my licence and they said they'd contact me in 2 years. Result, as I don't watch TV!
The "van" is just their car, and the "equipment" is a set of binos from Amazon. They sit outside and look through people's windows. I do love the old video of them pointing the aerial at a block of flats like it actually means something. There is no way they would be able to tell which flat contained the TV at that distance, and they probably wouldn't be able to match windows to an address unless they knew the building well, and detecting a single TV out of all of the TVs in the building? No chance.
Friends uncle did it in the 80s, he said they had a list of addresses (no names) and would park nearby to scare people and sit in the back of the van playing cards for ten minutes then drive off
As a retired electronis engineer I cannot see how to pinpoint the emissions from a tv , let alone from flats.
As a retired electronics engineer, shoudn't you be able to spell electronics ?
@@colinankcorn6881 my chubby fingers weren't designed for smart phones.
Years ago, someone who did this job said it had a chair, a light and a radio times
And some sandwiches!
@@mda5003 Bottle of whisky
I love that line 'its not as glamorous as it looks' priceless😅😅😅
I remember decades ago noticing one night the neighbours front room light flickering, brightness rising and falling matched what was on our TV at the time and thought "Oh, they're watching Benny Hill (or whatever it was) too". I think the detector vans worked in a similar way especially when there were just the four channels to compare to, a guy watching for similar light signatures.
If they were still detecting, this is how they would do it still, it wouldn't be hard to record say an hour of light flicker then compare it to a signature generated from known broadcasts, you wouldn't even need to do it for the a programme, adverts would be a more reliable signature for non-BBC channels as each channel will have a unique series of adverts at a particular time. It would be similar to how music matching works on CZcams, even if you have barely audible music playing in the background of someone talking, CZcams can still detect it and do a content match. Jon isn't technically correct, they could do it, but it's likely not practical, in that hour of recording someone's curtains, a Capita goon could knock on the doors of 10 people they have on record as not having a license.
I saw detector vans on our street in the 1960s and 1970. Then I read an article saying that they were unable to positively isolate a property in a particularly congested area such as a block of flats. I never saw another van after that. The vans were big with huge rotating antennae on the roof.
Wasn't there a story of a high ranking military guy that said something like 'if that technology exists, then why hasn't the army adopted it?'
(or words to that effect)
"The capita detection team... deploy in covert vehicles" - means that goons go out in unmarked cars, usually their own private vehicles.
"Which usually contain detection equipment" - this is the goons themselves and their little tech devices that have a camera in them, the "detection" is the home owner admitting on film to needing a licence and not having one, or signing a statement to say as much.
"Limitations of the detection equipment... struggling to keep up with technological advancements" - this means that the goons can no longer "detect" by claiming they saw your TV on or heard it in the background, as there are many ways it can be used without needing a licence.
It's all just ambiguous wording to scare people.
Detector vans are as real as the Loch Ness monster
It was never possible to detect reception. Only transmission.
Not true - google "TEMPEST Sigint"
There's plenty of evidence to suggest it's true with tests that have proven that it's possible. With CRTs it was much easier and since the vans were equipped with addresses of unlicensed properties they knew where to focus the detection equipment. They detected leaking signals from the local TV oscillator circuit.
@@gmo4250 They never released the technology. My bet would be either using a directional microphone like in 60's spy movies. Or they watched for someone making a cuppa in the window when a popular soap finished. The only way to detect reception is if it somehow also transmits. Everything metal can receive RF.
@@lucifermorningstar4606
You claim it's not possible, I have told you that they detect a leaking signal from the old CRT. It's even possible to detect TV viewing from Smart Meter data, I am not suggesting that TVL do that, in fact I would say they definitely don't do it. The paper is called, "Identification of TV Channel Watching from Smart Meter Data Using Energy Disaggregation".
@@gmo4250Yes. But it would never be possible, in reality, to identify a particular TV or address, in amongst the dozens of other TVs within range. The whole was always rubbish.
The tv licence will never get my money
Ive been caught out twice before.
£100 fine-not paid.
Agreed to Monthly Payplan-cancelled 2 days after setting it up.
😂😂
Caught how
You admitted to it..
I have 2 electronics degrees and If they have this I'd be shocked. They could find a transmitter EASY but a receiver? Oh hell no.
Even transmitters can be hard to pinpoint with great accuracy. In WW2, Special Operations Executive had transmitters all over Europe and the Germans couldn't find them easily, even using two vans to triangulate their position. They know roughly where, but not enough to find them. So finding something that doesn't even emit a signal? And being able to triangulate it to a particular property? Leave that to sci-fi.
During your 2 electronic degrees, did you study the theory of operation of the superhet receiver ? If so, you would understand that older ‘sets have a local oscillator which must tuned to a certain frequency in order to receive BBC 1. This local oscillator signal could be detected if the detector van had very sensitive receiving equipment.
@@user-rf9me7xm1w You hook one up a demo it in from a van in the street . No doubt you'd detect all kinds of EMF..Show us...
@@user-rf9me7xm1w spot on. I thought it was a 455khz frequency that got emitted from the tv that got detected !! Nowadays the circuitry is rather different, but who's to say that modern tv's dont a have a " secret" tx device that sends out a signal ! Possibly !
Thanks Merlin, don’t give them ideas !
Explaining to my American friend how the BBC can get search warrants to enter your property looking for TVs! He's STUNNED!
But they are not looking for TVs, they are looking for any device that is capable of receiving live broadcast TV or access their shitty website.
I once saw one in Cookridge Leeds. Probably empty.
The BBC in the past have played a blinder to so many people who lap up their 'authority' status - they sell a product you dont want or use? dont pay for it, no matter how hard they push the sales.... if you still pay out of some sort of fear then you deserve to pay for it.... its well known now so you have no excuses to keep paying!
They will do absolutely anything to make sure they get their funds.
Not from me, they get nothing
If someone challenged the issuing of the warrant demanding to know what evidence was used to get the warrant then, much like the police having to prove a speeding camera was calibrated and working correctly, would the BBC have to provide evidence that the detection van equipment was calibrated and working correctly?
The fact the BBC never uses detector van evidence would still suggest the any detector van evidence would not hold up in a court of law.
If the detection van evidence is not robust enough to hold up in court prosection then surely it is not robust enough to be used as evidence for a search worrant.
I think they only need to show reasonable suspicion in order for the court to issue a warrant. If they had hard evidence, presumably, they wouldn't need a warrant.
@@davidspear9790 They'd still need a warrant. Imagine if the police operated under the same 'rule', there would be riots everywhere.
Pure bunk of the finest order .... someone should get an award for the longest lie in broadcasting
and precisely why you should never under any circumstances pay for a 'TV licence'
The world's full of misinformation and the misinformed.
Good fun checking blocks of flats.
I'm sure that some clever person could make up a spoof video of BBC's latest advert promoting paperless licence . Where the amended version could go along the lines of "I have gone paperless for my licence, I have cancelled it"
As someone from "back in the day" I can say TV detection was just as much a myth as it is now.
I worked at the Post Office. BS these vans do not exist. It's just to frighten people. How many times do I have to say this. They are empty vans. You,cannot separate one property from,another.
It IS possible to see what people are watching on flat screens. They can use Van Eck Phreaking but I'm not genned up enough on this to be definite. I'm sure that the watchers have to be very close to the screen they want to read though. I do recall when I was younger, 45 years ago lol, I did see a blue Commer minibus with GPO logos on it a lot of pipes on the roof, like a plumbers nightmare. Pretending to be detecting with guys going door to door. Our telly still worked fine without the licence.
In the old days, they would drive up and down the streets in vans marked TELEVISION DETECTOR, with a guy in the back turning a handle to rotate a dummy antenna on the vehicle roof. First thing Monday morning, Ethel and Deirdre and all the other local wives would be fearfully queuing up at the post office. Local gossip did the job for them. Now they put stickers on Transits and sit around in supermarket car parks.
So is the bloody big dog in my front garden!
"Detection equipment" is code for a clipboard and a brass neck.
They got more chance of detecting a fart in a windtunnel.
Got another letter from TV licensing saying that i will get a visit in 10 days time just like the last 3.
The vans are empty, they always have been empty.
If you genuinely do not watch BBC channels, (and lets be honest, why would you?) then cancel your TV licence.
It's all LIVE broadcast tv channels, not just BBC.
@@williamstroker6805Yes, we know but it's only really the BBC that gets your licence fee. The thing being suggested was that people who watch non-BBC TV should not pay, not that that was legally allowed.
"Quite strong signal there.." The signal coming from transmitter. The only thing they can detect is tv station's antenna.
Keep up the good work Fella! And love seeing Maldon prom, I'm getting home sick lol
They're not real done to make u pay!!
Of course they are ....... 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
If they was, then I would be in jail.
and on the advert the man said they are watching Colombo : Bollocks
It’s total ball 💩 jon
😂😂The same people saw flying pigs apparently. TV detectors have never ever ever ever been real buddy 😂😂
The only covert surveillance technology they got is a pair of binoculars in a old van....
TV detective vans did exist, without going into a huge amount of detail the old analog TVs fundamentally worked at one frequency when you tuned into a TV channel. It basically modulated that signal to the frequency of the TV worked at and TV detective vans were able to pick up that signal, however small it was, but with the event of digital TVs This method of viewing what is being watched is no longer possible.
A UHF hand held Yagi Aerial is totally useless, as the TV signal is transmitted on UHF then gets processed by the Tv receiver into sound and vision information.
Other than the local Oscillator in the receiver, there is nothing radiated on UHF after that. The screening on the Receiver makes sure very little of that local Oscillator gets out, so would only be "detectable" in the immediate vicinity in the room.
Much older Valve CTR TVs had very vocal time-based and radiated lots of RF. But how do you know which House Flat ETC had the TV.? You simply could not prove beyond doubt which property was being detected, hence no action in court ever, but you could work out which channel was being watched, due to the local Oscillator..
David G1ZQC (UK Radio Amateur).
Precisely.
I agree but even then you'd still not detect any RF from the set through brick walls. You'd have to be in the room and likely as not, inside the TV. Doesn't the emission degrade at the square of the distance? So even across the room you'd get nothing. That's why you were never supposed to sit right in front of CRTs.
@@derektaylor2941 As a Shortwave listener back in the 70s, I would get up early to catch the Top Band nets of Radio Amateurs on 1.8 to 2 mHz, and 3.5 to 4 mHz 80 meters nets.
I could always tell when my Mother switched on the TV as it wiped out much of the lower bands. I had to tune very much higher to get away from it.
The older Valve TVs did not have much (if any) meaningful screening, and zero Mains filtering either, so they radiated far afield, certainly to the road which was 20 feet away. I did tests later to prove it.
So yes it was possible to receive the local Oscillators in the older TVs, as well as the time-base, from not far away.
It was of course not possible to pinpoint like they claim, as who knows which House or Flat has the receivers.
Modern TVs do not radiate very much in the way of tuner RF, but they do kick out a huge amount of hash from the power supplies, which would wipe out any meaningful evidence other than it is switched on. You do not require a licence for any TV, only to watch live propaganda channels, provided by the government, and they want you to pay for it. Not likely here.
I think "covert" is the keyword here. I don't think it's being used in the sense most take it to mean. The dictionary says it can mean covered over, hidden.
Could it be they are trying to cover over or hide the fact this equipment if it exists, doesn't do what they say it does? I believe I'm right in saying that there is no record of a conviction as a result of the use of this equipment, if it does indeed exist. That to me is a massive hint that it's all a big cover up. I'm more than willing to be corrected of course.
Edit: obviously I wrote this before I watched the video 😂
In the early 70s we bought a house with a large H aerial however we had no TV. I frequently got a visit from a belted man saying "We have no record of your TV licence I just told him we didn't have a licence without saying we didn't have a TV either !!!! I took great pleasure in imagining him trying to catch us out !!!
IVAN and ANDY was and still is the best comedy sketch
…Ivan and Andy, the BBCs version of AI, but the wrong way round. Haha
@@simplestuff3895 lol
According to the Communication Act 2003 you only need a licence to watch broadcast TV. Since no streamed service over the Internet is broadcast (they are all sent on-demand) that means you do not need a licence to watch anything on the Internet (including live-streams which are not broadcast) apart from iPlayer.
Not entirely correct.
If you watch live sport on Amazon Prime or some other service, you do need a licence. Bonkers.
That's a misunderstanding of the law. For the purpose of the act a “television receiver” means any apparatus installed or used for the purpose of receiving (whether by
means of wireless telegraphy or otherwise).
No that a misunderstanding it covers watching live broadcasts it streamed, but if u watch it live licence needed be it itv or CZcams live bring live broadcast ie if u see sky new live, itv, bbc cnn and do on
@@timg1246 Not according to the law as it is not broadcast but sent on-demand
@@gmo4250 Indeed, but it also says you only need a licence to watch BROADCAST TV or iPlayer. Streaming services over the Internet are never broadcast and are all on-demand and so you do not need a licence to watch them.
😮I drove a detector van .doesn't do anything .man sits in the back with a ledger of names and addresses of people who bought tvs but not bought a licence .that's why they ask on purchase of tv your name and address,
They don't ask anymore. Was to much of a outcry.
No they change that because they changed the law, because more and more using devices, it woukd of meant logging details of all phones sold, laptops etc it made more sense to say ok any device tv otherwise ok to have but don't watch live TV broadcast or use iPlayer
@mpol701 I presume you are a mp by your ignorance/lie ,reply if you wish but I will not waste my time for your misinformation
@@alexanderevanska4274 trying paying with cash ? Credit card details traceable
@@joffey1212 think that's you, u don't give name and adress for licence any more nit since 2013, sorry your giving misinformation
Thanks Jon, more good info
well that has cheered me up on this Monday - detector vans are real - oh my thats a hoot !
There is a 1970s TV license detector van at the Science Museum in London.
Why?
Yeah why, they don't work, 😂😂😂😂
@@BillyBanter100 I think it’s there so people can get a closer look at all it’s fake BS equipment
@@BillyBanter100 Because 'science' can be bought, like everything else. lol
!!!My outlook on money changed when I realized someone making $300,000 can retire broke & someone making $80,000 can retire a multi-millionaire. With the current market movement, you have $100,000 to invest. Where are you investing it?
Money advice varies, but planning is key. Exposed to personal finance early, I started working at 19, bought my first home at 28, faced job loss at 36 during COVID. Consulting a CFP helped grow my finances. Currently, I'm 25% short of my $5m goal.
Yes, Andras Bohm made headlines in 2020, but I'm not sure if I can bring him up in this context. he manages my portfolio and acts as a counselor for me.
I've seen positive reviews on his web, he appears to be well-educated and well-read. its always good to share important things such as this that can change someone's life forever.
Have you tried investing in TV licences?
@@ditch3827 I've found the best way to not lose any money, is to not believe financial comment threads in CZcams video's made by bots.
As a kid learning about sound, light and stuff, I often wondered how anything could detect what someone else was seeing or listening to. Sending a signal is different, but passive reception is impossible to track. I never believed in the dummy vans for that reason.
Think about it! If you can get screwed for cameras on your own property, how much of a stink do you think there would be at this gross invasion of privacy! In a short phrase; it's horseshit!
Radio signals and presumably analog TV too when it was a thing did generate feedback on the receiver, so if someone was watching BBC stations back in the day they could tell directionally whether an antenna is being used to watch their channels because it will to an extent act as a weak repeater where it amplifies the received signal in order to make it an actual image
The BBC - "How can we make sure people are paying for our lies?"
Also the BBC -"Let's spy on them"
In the "old" days of T.V which used CRT tubes during the processing of the T.V. signal the receiver used intermediate frequency which used to change when you watched a different channel, these could be detected by the "detector vans". Now with digital broadcasts there is nothing to detect.
I've laughed at the idea of detector vans since I left the RN in 1987. As an ex Aircraft Electrician, I'd dearly love to learn of the technology they "invented"
Its never been used because they'd be lying in court, which would be perjury.
I am old enough to have seen the detector vans - most recently it was an LDV van so it must have been the very early 2000s. It was odd though as they parked in a very "observable" part of town, but never drove through neighbourhoods. There was no spinning whirligig on the top of it by this point either - it was just a van - with a very obvious logo on the sides.
Be interesting if a retired TV van detectorist would come forward and share the scam or make a comedy series about it.
🤪 Why not pitch that idea to the BBC?👆
When this FOI request was made several years ago, the answer that was released included an admission that they had just 26 vans to cover the whole country.
Jon they certainly weren't in the 1960s till at least the 1990s. They could NOT detect people receiving an incoming signal..
Ask anyone who worked the RN or Merchant navy it was a scare tactic.
Tbe programme they had on the advert was Columbo.
And a bloke with an ocilloscope in the back of the van! Hilarious!
Did they have permission to show Columbo?
I would like to see you get in touch with one of those two detector men and interview on your channel!
nice vid, if tv detector vans could not work in the 60/70s with their primitive electronics, all those crt tvs would be throwing out signals from each side of the road and bounce off metal cars causing ghosting on their equipment (if they had any)
I won't be renewing my licence,my TV's haven't been on for months