Teefenn1
-
Posts
12 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by Teefenn1
-
Your spot on, of course, renegadeimp but it amazes me how successful their scaremongering has been. Most people buy a licence in the belief that they would be certain to be caught otherwise. Most are under the impression that if some jobsworth from Capita knocks on their door they are legally obliged to let him (or her) in and answer his questions. The same people probably now think said jobsworth has the power to examine their laptop for evidence and would naively allow him to do so. The TV licencing minions have no more special powers than you or I do and the only people that ever get prosecuted are those who tamely allow access to their homes and then admit everything. Without prima facie evidence they cannot get a search warrant and simply not having a TV licence does not constitute evidence of an offence. They can't get any evidence unless you are stupid enough to invite them in and / or engage in conversation.
-
No, that was never suggested. You might intuitively think it would be the simplest and obvious step but how would they prevent a dozen (or more) friends and family all using a single licence number? They probably think any revenue gain would be too small to justify the costs. What that would achieve, though, is to prevent people from overseas watching, who currently use a VPN to connect througha UK IP address (currently non-UK IP addresses are blocked). It wouldn't get them any extra revenue though.
-
Yes it does cover it. If you're watching iPlayer through your TV then your TV must be connected to the internet in some form and there will be a record of your IP address accessing the iPlayer. As far as I'm aware iPlayer is not broadcast over the airwaves like BBC1 or Sky channels are. I'm not suggesting there's any current risk of being detected as watching iPlayer. Capita have no legal powers to obtain IP addresses and any ISP that voluntarily cooperated would see its reputaion for trust destroyed overnight. I was just pointing out the possibilities in future as this gullible population passively accept the march towards a full surveillance society.
-
I wonder whether the BBC have been promised access to internet connection records at some future date after the insidious IP Bill becomes law, mandating ISPs to keep logs of every website visited by their customers. If so, there's a simple way round that: connect to iPlayer via a secure VPN. You'll have to make sure to use a UK server of course or be automatically blocked.
-
@vodafoneuk Mystery missed call on your mobile?
Teefenn1 replied to AndyOrch's topic in Telecoms - mobile or fixed
Exactly what I thought, ADDLED, when I read the original story in the Daily Mail a couple of months ago. Even the original report failed to specify how many 'victims' there were supposed to be. I suspect it's just a handful of idiots whose curiosity induced them to call back a nd the line was then left open at the other end after they had hung up. Faced with a £300 bill, of course they aren't going to admit to having called back. Also, consider this. Most people theses days (myself excepted) are so obsessed with their mobile devices that they'd rarely let an hour pass without calling somebody, let alone 12 hours, so would be aware that something was wrong when unable to make a call. You cannot connect to two numbers simultaneously. -
Provided my Council (LBTH) is charging me precisely what Thames Water would be charging me, based on the old rateable value of the property, I have no complaints. If Thames Water were giving any bulk discount to the Council I wouldn't expect this to be passed back to the ratepayer and I'd rather they did invest it in the general housing budget. I would still be getting a free administration service in not having to deal directly with Thames Water. That said, I don't trust the Council and would like to calculate the weekly charge myself for verification. The problem is it seems that only the water companies hold records of all the old RVs for domestic properties. Even the Valuations Office no longer has any records. I'd also need to know the multiplier figure used in 2016 by Thames Water against the RV for my property. I suppose my only option is to ask Thames Water directly for these two values.
-
I wouldn't take too much notice of TV Licencing's own website. Like their bluff letters it is designed to scare the public into submission by misrepresenting their own powers and technical ability. Note, for example, that all information about detection vans is withheld. That's because they don't want you to know that they do not work and certainly cannot be used as the sole evidence for a prosecution. All you need do is not answer the door; if you accidentally do open it, shut it in their face without conversation. They cannot prosecute anyone without gaining entry (or an admission). A search warrant will not be granted without reasonable evidence of an offence, which they cannot obtain without entry so they're stuffed. Simply not having a licence is not regarded by the courts as reasonable evidence to grant a search warrant.
-
It's all very well MS advising to upgrade but I.E.9 is the highest version that Windows Vista will support...and no, I have no intention of forking out a small fortune to upgrade Windows to the latest version when I am perfectly happy with Vista. It would probably go wrong anyway and leave me with no OS at all. As it happens I detest I.E. and use Firefox 99% of the time but it was handy to have I.E. available as a backup for the odd site that doesn't work too well with FF. I suppose it would be dangerous to even open I.E.9 from now on.
-
Fines of any amount against these type of companies will always be ineffective. They'll simply liquidate the company and reopen under a different name. There needs to be fines against individual directors of these companies, sufficiently punitive to bankrupt these scumbags, seize their assets and render them penniless and homeless.
-
Exactly, Fredsie, because OFCOM clearly hasn't the faintest idea of how the internet actually works. The people that should be legitimately entitled to exit free of charge while under contract are those whose throughput speed is significantly below the sync speed that their length of line allows, even if only at peak times. That is invariably a result of congestion at the exchange caused by under capacity provided by the ISP. Either that or their equipment at the exchange is faulty in some way. OFCOM's new rules do nothing to facilitate migration under these circumstances. In fact their new code of conduct is so ambiguously worded that it can mean anything the ISP want's it to mean. For instance when they refer to the speed of the lowest 10th percentile it is not specified whether that means sync speed or throughput speed. Equally ambiguous is the code's reference to the lowest speed of "similar" customers. Does this mean a line that's, say, 1 mile from the exchange can be compared with lines that are 1.1 miles, 1.2 miles, 1.5 miles or what? It's quite simple to calculate an individuals absolute minimum sync speed using the distance to the exchange and the resultant line attenuation figure. Anybody getting a throughput speed below 80% of that sync speed should be allowed free exit under contract. Once again OFCOM are competing with the I.C.O. for the title of the most useless quango ever to drain public finances.
-
I don't care one iota whether they are a genuine MRC or otherwise, I don't want their bloody call. Why are market research companies exempt? Which government idiot decided this in the first place and why are the present government continuing to exempt the market research scumbags?
-
E.on increases energy bills for elderly
Teefenn1 replied to Michael Browne's topic in Utilities - Gas, Electricity, Water
The headline is misleading because the StayWarm scheme is not the cheapest tariff available anyway. Just as with insurance products and savings accounts that are promoted as 'exclusive to the over 60s/50s they are never the cheapest available on the market. They are designed to deceive this clent group into thinking thay are getting a special deal due their age when in fact they can get lower prices simply by shopping around.
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS