Black Belt Barrister on TV Licence - What's Going On

Let’s have a chat about the latest couple of tv licence videos from The Black Belt Barrister as people have been contacting me about them
Source - • BARRISTER EXPLAINS: Wh...
www.tvlicencer...
----
VPN Deals - nordvpn.com/ch...
- 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) - tvlicenceresistance.info/forum
Want a video doorbell? - www.amazon.co....
Need a streaming box or stick? - www.amazon.co....
See the stuff I use to make my videos - www.amazon.co....
I have merch like hoodies and t-shirts - chillijoncarne...
Need to email me? You can do it here (for faster advice use the link above)- www.tvlicences...
#tvlicence #bbc #blackbeltbarrister

[@ChilliJonCarne]

Let’s have a chat about the latest couple of tv licence videos from The Black Belt Barrister as people have been contacting me about them Source - kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y6GxmYmPi6Z9fbc www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/index.php?topic=19317.0 Some useful links for you. Some stuff for sale also yes......... VPN Deals - nordvpn.com/chilli Want a video doorbell? - www.amazon.co.uk/shop/chillijoncarne/list/W6YKNEOGP4LF Need a streaming box or stick? - www.amazon.co.uk/shop/chillijoncarne/list/1HJYI0K2FLQO0 See the stuff I use to make my videos - www.amazon.co.uk/shop/chillijoncarne/list/3DZGJRINRKR7Q I have merch like hoodies and t-shirts - chillijoncarne.creator-spring.com/ - All You Need to Know About TV Licence - kzbin.info/aero/PLMva1clw0IhzdDP4u3ajw4VD0rJD4JBni - TV Licence Goon Visits - kzbin.info/aero/PLMva1clw0IhwlttqedbCgBp1E8ax9RiJh - TV Licence Letters - kzbin.info/aero/PLMva1clw0IhytPD8cm81rWRHQuVaRijdR 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) - tvlicenceresistance.info/forum Need to email me? You can do it here (for faster advice use the link above)- www.tvlicencestop.co.uk/contact/

[@Mr_Ashley]

please if anyone can answer, what about having the ITV HUB (ITVX now) app on your phone or fire stick, we've allowed to watch catch up on itv, but this app also has a tab for LIVE TV, is this considered having access to live broadcast then even if you don't use that function of the app?

[@stephenoliver9235]

Thank you Jon I think all your doing for the greater good I totally despise The BBC and I think you guy’s that do a exceptionally great job of getting out the information that we need to go forward. I just can’t see why they don’t listen to your way forward for The BBC it works for the other channel’s. And I think that the Blackbetbarrister

[@stephenoliver9235]

Was leaning towards the legal side and I can see how many others could get the wrong idea. I won’t be giving you a hard time cos I think your doing an amazing job keep on going Jon 🌶🇬🇧👍

[@fordcapri6288]

I believe that the BlackBeltBarrister is just a schill for the system, i also work in the field of law, and i have found holes and inaccuracies in quite a few of his videos which he seems to make on whatever subject is popular on youtube at the time, such as bailiffs, smartmeters, auditors or even harry&meghan. It is strange in itself that a barrister is posting in youtube begging for likes/follows/subs in the first place, i certainly dont believe that he is doing it to help people (a more sinister side, he even threatened police action against comments criticising his advice in a recent video), which is the complete opposite of chillijon's channel, which i thoroughly believe is geared towards helping people free themselves and end the bbc propaganda machine, which i commend him for.

[@alliedatheistalliance6776]

That guy might be a good barrister but he isn't necessarily a good advisor because as a legal representative he has to tell you not to tape a song from the radio or whatever. Good legal advice maybe, but I'm not going to him to ask if i should watch a footie match at the pub because he'd probably tell me i need a TV licence for it

[@BedsitBob]

My car will do 120mph, but that's not evidence of speeding.

[@roncollins9222]

Exactly, my car does about 95 and that would have been my benchmark.,

[@Nodster]

Mine can do 160mph and can recieve TV too as the android unit came with a tv adapter which is kinda pointless as it was analogue LOL

[@parkamark]

It is evidence for the potential of speeding.

[@pascoecharlie]

And, just because it will do 120mph it does not mean that you must drive at that speed to prove it.

[@bobbydazzle4113]

You don't need a driving licence to own a car. You only need a licence to drive it not to own a car. Same as a TV.

[@MoReeceJTV]

Watched it and can't see what people are getting hyped up about. Black Belt Barrister does have a way of delivering his chats but still, I think some people are just nuts. I've not paid TV licence for 11 years by just ignoring them, so I can confirm you are correct

[@brimkathstampex2306]

But you obviously never ever watch or record any live TV, and you do not ever use BBC iPlayer? Is that the case?

[@adamskyj69]

@@brimkathstampex2306 A lot of us don't, no. I for instance cannot stand modern BBC output and whilst sometimes popping over to news KZbin channel, watch the on demand programs at a time convenient to me. We have Netflix, ITVx (Britbox), Disney, Amazon and a large PC Server video library - never watch anything live now, nor would use IPlayer to watch BBC shite. Also, as BBC is part of ITVx, I can even watch the 'best' of its output using that anyway - without a license. Don't assume we all watch live and BBC content anymore. An outdated license fee to pay for Strictly, ludicrous. Put it behind a paywall and slice it down. In this modern age, be just a public information channel or fund entertainment through subscription, any other way is completely unfair when it no longer represents a large swaithe of us.

[@ZL54JK8]

Do you watch live TV broadcasts?

[@stucody]

@@brimkathstampex2306 I’ve not had a TV license for many years as I do not watch any live tv.

[@anonnemo2504]

I followed the link provided and saw the Black Belt Barrister explaining, quite clearly, a very unclear situation regarding what defines a company providing a TV service. There was very little regarding warrants or what constitutes TV receiving equipment, as I recall and I see no possible cause for anyone to criticise, far less abuse, CJ for the content of his channel. Either it was the wrong link, or those complaining have not understood what they have heard.

[@robertjames5511]

I never ever disbelieved you, although I do dip into the BBB, your channel is informing us of one thing. The tv licence! And you do that in a fun and informative way, with the information well explained and all backed up. Keep up the good work and thank you

[@anonnemo2504]

I followed the link provided and saw the Black Belt Barrister explaining, quite clearly, a very unclear situation regarding what defines a company providing a TV service. There was very little regarding warrants or what constitutes TV receiving equipment, as I recall and I see no possible cause for anyone to criticise, far less abuse, CJ for the content of his channel. Either it was the wrong link, or those complaining have not understood what they have heard.

[@LazyMoneyUK]

Here's what I find strange: The search warrant only entitles TVL to inspect devices which are "installed and used" to watch live TV. Therefore they would have to know BEFORE inspection that a device is being used for this purpose. This would mean that guilt has already been established, defeating the point of the inspection.

[@spudhead169]

From the research I've done, warrants are not usually needed. The goons have either had a conversation with the resident, been let in or both. From there they will twist and warp what was said and/or seen to imply guilt and that's that, the resident gets a summons. Warrants are then only issued when the evidence TVL present is not enough to convince the authorities to prosecute and further evidence is requested. TVL are asserting that the device(s) in question is/are installed and used for watching live TV, so for the purposes of the warrant those are the devices it is referring to. These are almost always TVs because devices such as cell-phones and computers contain private information so they need further RIPA authorisation to inspect those. At least that's what I've discovered, as to how accurate this is? I'm not a barrister.

[@stevel9914]

My suspicion is that the warrants and often the prosecutions are crisis actor led scenarios..... for publicity purposes only... they serbe the same purpose as the van patrolling a street

[@alanwhitham4]

TV licensing know very well the law is confusing , they like it that way . They also know that most households have equipment capable of receiving live tv . So their aim is to bamboozle people into confessing . I suspect they wouldn't want to take anyone to court who has admitted nothing and would plead not guilty . They would be entering uncharted waters and God forbid the confusion might get cleared up by a court ruling . So the advice not to talk to them , let them in ,or even answer the door is perfect . They rely on what we give them , give them nothing .

[@scdoors4128]

BBB has that solicitor affectation where he needs to say 100 words when 10 would do.

[@oojimmyflip]

longer times to explain means more time spent doing the job and therefore time is money, its a very clever way to earn money. The trouble with Law is you are learning all of time, if you dont learn you dont earn.

[@_vindicator_]

thing is, the law is intentionally complicated, so if he says it shorter, he's saying it wrong

[@davidsworld5837]

no not saying a 100 words say a 100 words that are far more complex so you are not meant to be able to understand what the answer is. using long words, or wording some thing in a way that you could come to the idea of what is said is the opposite to what is being said

[@moorgunandmarshes]

As I pointed out in BBB's comment section, any actionable warrant is to find evidence and not a prosecution in itself. They still have to prove to a court that you have used any equipment found in any warrant search to require a tv licence. You keep talking in a way us simple muppets can understand Jon, your saving many people a fair chunk of cash with your pearls of wisdom.

[@cassiejvance7496]

Bloody great comment my friend

[@anonnemo2504]

I followed the link provided and saw the Black Belt Barrister explaining, quite clearly, a very unclear situation regarding what defines a company providing a TV service. There was very little regarding warrants or what constitutes TV receiving equipment, as I recall and I see no possible cause for anyone to criticise, far less abuse, CJ for the content of his channel. Either it was the wrong link, or those complaining have not understood what they have heard.

[@lroche3262]

@@anonnemo2504 well said. BBB explains extreme situations, once they get your home by a warrant they will try to make out any evidence and push it to the court. As he said, you’re obliged to assist the agents to look for evidences against you (so ironic), if you do so they may find something that can turn into evidence, if you don’t do so you’re also in trouble. So I prefer to think that, once in court, some prosecution is likely cos the definitions in Law are vague. That was my takeaway

[@danmitchell1955]

That the issue with the law it open to interpretation and that why it never as simple as black and white that people seem to think it is .

[@matthewtalbot-paine7977]

That is true but a this guy said 100 warrants per year are still somehow carried out.

[@iandawkins2182]

My employer owns loads of T. V's but only uses them at shows and Exabition's as computer monitors, the company's legal department has confirmed that no T.V. licence is needed to own them.

[@Britsishmum7695]

My friend saw it and tried to lecture me that I have a Tv and they will be investigating me because so many people have cancelled. I pointed her to TV licensing rules but it fell on deaf ears. 🤦‍♀️

[@jacquelineperry1960]

Not much of a friend then.

[@pirateadam3686]

In fairness to BBB, I think the important point was that *if* they get a warrant then you have to comply with it and provide a certain level of support, which is true. If anyone has a warrant from the court you must obey it, so if it says that you have to unlock any equipment then you have to do that. The "say nothing, close the door" advice is great advice and will almost certainly stop them getting a warrant. However, if you try that when they *do* have a warrant then you will be in breach of it and in a lot more trouble.

[@tuffty203]

Glad you made this video. The BBB shocked me and others with his video. Thank you for putting 1000's of peoples minds at ease. Credit where credit is due. Great video as usuall.

[@Buster_Piles]

I trust you Jon. You've saved me hundreds since I first came across you (ooh,err, not that way Matron) several years ago. You're a good bloke. 👍

[@grannytakesatrip1128]

Well said ChilliJonCarne. You've made many videos explaining in great detail and very succinctly when you need a license and when you don't. Mobile phones, tablets, computers, etc can't receive a tv signal, ergo you don't need a tv license. Maybe BBB will address this in one of his future videos. However, I do enjoy watching BBB YT channel, I find his videos on understanding the law, educational.

[@johnhastie8103]

Blackbelt Barrister did not say you would need a tv licence if you own a mobile phone or computer he stated that with a warrant tv licencing could search a phone, tablet or computer to check for tv receiving apps as these items are capable of receiving live tv without the use of an ariel.

[@chrisjepson5050]

This! 👍

[@MikeEves]

They couldn't search my home or my gadgets with a warrant; because I won't let them...

[@Tony-fr4ic]

Did you not watch this video? Did you buy your IPhone to watch TV? How about your PC? No, you didn't, therefore it is not a TV receiver.

[@Tony-fr4ic]

@film fan They cannot access your device. It is not a TV receiver, was not bought/installed for that purpose - it's a phone. Are you going to tell them you watch live TV on your phone? The TV resistance guy has it correct - the warrant is to inspect 'TV receiving equipment' (live/IPlayer). Simply don't mention the phone, or if asked say it was purchased to talk to people! Who buys a phone to watch live TV? Same with my PC - it was not bought/installed to watch live TV (or any TV). Sure, it can do but that does not equate to having been bought/installed to do so. Therefore it is out of bounds.

[@johnhastie8103]

@@Tony-fr4ic A phone or computer is not a tv receiver but with the correct apps installed it can receive live tv. tv licence can check to see if these apps are installed.

[@jameswelsh5672]

Hey CJC, great work as usual and always a blast. As you say, it is simple to get shot of a goon. Just say no thanks and close the door, job done. I do get a letter every single month without fail. I actually look forward to seeing which of the 10 variations they send.

[@Mark-Singleton]

Don’t open them, return to sender in big black felt marker, along with every other bullshit that comes through the letter box

[@stevenharrison9257]

This is the comment I left on BBB's video "So any device which is capable of receiving live TV, regardless of whether it is or isn't used for that purpose, can get you into trouble when the TV licensing salesperson lies about it. Yes, it's very clear that we're all stuffed, including you Daniel. My TVs have no ariel connected & can't connect to iPlayer as I don't have an account, so all TV programmes we watch come from catch-up services. BUT if a TV licencing salesperson lies to a court to obtain a warrant, I will be prosecuted because I have TV (& other) equipment which can receive live TV. I also have a car which is capable of travelling at 165 mph - looks like I should expect a visit from plod & a prosecution for speeding, despite never having used the car for that purpose! That also has a (unused) WiFI hotspot facility, so potentially could also receive live TV 🤦‍♂" BBB does come out with some good stuff but, boy, can he bore!

[@Joe-lb8qn]

Yes. The crazy thing about that video is that BBB interpreted the law far more strictly than the BBC itself does !! making the leap that basically every single electronic device since it "can" receive broadcast signals, therefore needs to be licenced >>despite the BBC themselves saying they dont

[@alancrane4693]

@@Joe-lb8qn unfortunately it's written in law and it does happen. I've no licence and hate BBC with every hatred i can muster. But BBC do get warrants even if it is a hundred but that's a hundred people taken to court with the stress of it because of this TV licence law. The elderly people in ill health and those struggling due to mental health issues pay up because of this TV licence which BBC enforce and has magistrates on their side. I've been taken to court for not having a licence but I'm head strong got legal advice provided evidence that I don't watch live broadcast TV. The magistrates automatically think you are guilty before they seen you. Once magistrates know you know what to say and give specific details and also know it's not going to be a ten minutes here the fine go away they throw it out. But don't expect a apologize they probably double fine the next poor sod. Ban BBC and good riddance to them.

[@Joe-lb8qn]

@@alancrane4693 it's guilty before innocent. How can you prove a negative?

[@seanmurray8051]

@@Joe-lb8qn exactly!

[@seanmurray8051]

@@Joe-lb8qn how many magistrates do you reckon share the BBB view on this!

[@SaphireSalvatore940]

I do love how berserk people go and abusive they get as soon as they hear different info rather than doing their own research 🤦‍♀️ 99% of those people will also now claim it's not their fault they got so upset and they're sorry he feels like they were abusive to him

[@anonnemo2504]

I followed the link provided and saw the Black Belt Barrister explaining, quite clearly, a very unclear situation regarding what defines a company providing a TV service. There was very little regarding warrants or what constitutes TV receiving equipment, as I recall and I see no possible cause for anyone to criticise, far less abuse, CJ for the content of his channel. Either it was the wrong link, or those complaining have not understood what they have heard.

[@Gosportinfo]

Thank you when I started watching you in September I didn't think I would be licence free by now. I was able to see as I watched very little broadcast TV just using a Freeview HDD recorder which was packing up, now scrapped, for a few programmes. I bought a Fire Stick and tested that I was able to follow the rules for 3 month, found all that I want and more.

[@knightofyourlife]

Thank you for this video. I watched Black belt barristar and it shocked me a bit when he said the law was if I don't have a licence then they can come in my house and take every thing that they like.

[@stephenbennett7245]

i always knew you were right especially with my own research alongside your good information but i think black belt barrister could have put it in more layman's terms because as you have pointed out lots of times and experienced people dont listen to everything and over-react keep the great videos coming jon

[@laceandwhisky]

That's the thing with BBB when you hear him he talks barrister clear concise words but people argue the case cos they don't listen to what he actually says in legal jargon.

[@mickman0073]

I sometimes find BBB's legal videos confusing at times.. As he approaches subjects from a legal point of view with tons of legal gobbledegook.. I prefer plain advice that shows results.. Your advice has worked several times for me.. Basically telling the goons to jog on and close the door.. Job done..

[@philhunt9297]

FTFY Basically recording "for evidential purposes" telling the goons to jog on and close the door.. Job done.

[@robg521]

Yep, he takes 20 minutes to say what could be said in 5 minutes. He goes into long winded explanations of the law which appear to conflict with the facts then spend s about 2 minutes somewhere in the vid giving the genuine clarification.

[@mightylove5641]

i cant wait for them to turn up here, im on the 6th red-threatening warning letter lol. roll on the pedophile enforcers, i cant wait to make them famous

[@anonnemo2504]

I followed the link provided and saw the Black Belt Barrister explaining, quite clearly, a very unclear situation regarding what defines a company providing a TV service. There was very little regarding warrants or what constitutes TV receiving equipment, as I recall and I see no possible cause for anyone to criticise, far less abuse, CJ for the content of his channel. Either it was the wrong link, or those complaining have not understood what they have heard.

[@mrnobody4771]

I have a MacBook Pro. You can close the lid of it and serve Steak and Chips on it if you "wanted to". It's not sold as a plate though. A TV can be much much more than a Television Signal Receiver. Many many people use them as monitors for their laptops for instance.

[@brianmorrison3937]

I recently watched BBB and he didn’t say that you can’t have a tv in your home , he was discussing search warrants . Not a regular visit from Capita . On his second video he went into a deep dive of a TV receiver and he did say pretty much what Chilli Jon Carne has always said . He also said the law is flawed because the BBC can’t produce a list of who is or isn’t a TV broadcast company

[@laceandwhisky]

Yep agree, trouble with many on BBB they are trying to prove him wrong and only hear what they want to. BBB explained it very clearly

[@anonnemo2504]

I followed the link provided and saw the Black Belt Barrister explaining, quite clearly, a very unclear situation regarding what defines a company providing a TV service. There was very little regarding warrants or what constitutes TV receiving equipment, as I recall and I see no possible cause for anyone to criticise, far less abuse, CJ for the content of his channel. Either it was the wrong link, or those complaining have not understood what they have heard.

[@stig350]

When Daniel asked the bbc for a list of broadcasting companies it was specifically aimed at KZbin live broadcast. One thing Daniel was concerned about was the fact a lot of new t.v's come with bbc and bbc iplayer installed by the manufacturer that can't be removed by us the consumer. I've also asked Daniel about forced entry I.e if a locksmith is used to gain entry and you have bolts on the inside of your property is it legal for the locksmith or Mr.T.V man to force the door. No reply on that as yet but by my understanding and the footage I've seen so far is that they are not allowed to force the door past drilling the lock.

[@tenbear5]

Great content, thanks. I thought BBB did in fact say that very same thing: that a license was only required if you viewed or recorded live broadcasts, or watched the iplayer content. I’m sure he did say that, without confusion… perhaps it was in another tv licensing vid, he often clarifies things after the event.

[@utube4andydent]

Black Belt Barrister gives guidance in his videos. On the whole like your videos they are informative. Keep up the great work.

[@MrTenacity]

When me and my late wife got our house over 5 years ago. We elected not to install an aerial or dish. When we had our 1st sales letting for a TV licence, Read it and went nope I am not using anything that needs this. Every two years I get a lettering "checking" if I need one. These videos help me reinforce my choice. I've explained to my family many a time and now I think they get it (even if they still pay the fee just for iPlayer)

[@victorjames7]

I spent a while in court recently, some barristers are an absolute mess, an utter laughing stock.

[@DMC888]

Some people on that channel think his opinion cannot be questioned just because he’s a barrister. So when he goes to court and he’s up against another barrister or even a KC with an opposing view, who’s right then?

[@icdgyixifyinstereo]

Many are not even British. They are clueless as to our culture.

[@daizyflower272]

If a Barista has to follow the law in courts, and the law is an ass..........

[@herbidaceous]

The trouble with the BBB video was that he didn't make clear that it is the purpose for which the receiving equipment is installed or used rather than the mere fact of its existence. So, if, for example, a TV is only used as a computer monitor then it is not installed or used for the purpose of receiving television broadcasts, so would not reqauire a licence. But if it were used to watch live TV/iPlayer as well as being used as a computer monitor then it would. Purpose is the key. Also, 'for the purpose of' implies intention which might be evidenced either by an admission that live television/iPlayer is watched or Capita salesman is allowed in and sees connected aerial/set top box. So say nothing and don't let them in.... And BBB quoted the out-of-date original 2004 Regulations, rather than the regulations currently in force which were amended in 2016. First rule in legal research - always make sure that the legislation used to evidence legal opinion is both up-to-date and in force.

[@djburland]

I noticed the black belt barrister was talking about “if a warrant is issued” you have to give access. The warrant would be issued if there was evidence of live tv viewing.

[@James-zu1ij]

Why would you need a warrant if there was already evidence.

[@alanjackson2540]

Remember the days when 10 of the neighbours used to tell you the TV Licensing van was parked nearby. We thought that it had special radar to detect people who didn't have a license until one lady put in a blog that her dad used to drive those vans and had to buy 5 newspapers to kill the day long boredom because there was absolutely noting indie the van apart from seats & a steering wheel.

[@noelward8047]

When I watched the BBB video referred to I had an exclaimation mark above my head ! The whole thing was very odd. Ordinarily I am happy to belive what he says ... even when some of it goes over my head at times. However, the comment about suggesting people to not video 'visitors' had me taking a double-take. My phone, having a camera, does not make it a live broadcast or Player reciever. It was the strangest thing to say.

[@stevel9914]

@freemobilegames4u covers most solicitors and barristers... they're programmed to operate in the system. They reject anything that may actually be legal but doesn't appear to follow the program. On the one occasion I had a solicitor , he talked me through what not to say when in the interview.... what he should have said is .. don't talk to the cop. The cops did exactly what the so called conspiracy nutters say he will do ...."use my evidence against me" and ignore anything I said that rejected the accusation.

[@hulmedav]

You have saved me a fortune and as you say don’t speak to them and don’t let them in

[@dantae666]

Blackbelt said if you have a device that can receive a tv signal they can use the presence of the equipment to get a warrant to confirm if you are using it to watch tv. so don't let them them have the evidence by seeing a tv receiver in person

[@matthewjenkins1161]

If that is what he said, he is wrong. To get a warrant requires reasonable suspicion an offence has been committed, with the reasonable expectation evidence of live viewing will be obtained. The simple presence of a TV or PC will not be enough to obtain a warrant, as there are many legitimate uses that don't require a licence.

[@markmcgrath4853]

good video jon ! youre doing a great job !

[@jmiller007]

BBB didnt sensationalise anything. He clearly spoke about what would happen if a warrant was issued. He's also clearly explained the tv licence requirements in another video. Quite why people are confused, i dont know. But it was REALLY clearly explained.

[@neroj7690]

My hat is down for you sir, for not being afraid to challenge people higher up

[@barrystubbs983]

surely it's up to the b.b.c. to PROVE you have been watching live t.v. ? then ask yourself how would they be able to do that if you kept your door shut to them

[@stephaniecorbett5356]

We are very grateful for all your help…it’s you that I listen to.

[@bobwright2692]

Hi Jon I too do not have a TV licence as don’t watch live broadcasts /BBC iplayer. Chatting to guys in the pub some too do not have licences and seriously believed they could watch other channels but BBC. I put them onto your channel so they are informed. Thanks again for all this helpful work.

[@awreetmeowd]

When we gave up the licence years ago, they asked if we had a TV, I told them we had three, they then told me I needed a licence, I then had to explain to them that the licence is for using not owning.

[@Cdr_Mansfield_Cumming]

BBB never said that though Jon. He was talking about if you use a tablet, iPad, laptop and smart phone that you can watch live TV on. Of course, as he said, that's if you "Watch" it on them.

[@GG-kp4gy]

100 television license warrants per year. I bet Capita wishes that they are called British Gas. They would be waved through then with a solar level of enthusiasm as a Spanish immigration officer dealing with an inbound flight from Gatwick!

[@alzender7826]

I wonder how many had a go at you Chilli via email, etc, will have now not only done their homework, but will actually have the decentness to apologise to you for getting their knickers in a twist - LoL

[@contessa.adella]

I think in part what BBB was saying about phones and tablets was IF a warrant is served you may have to, on demand, show the screen of the device does not have BBC iPlayer installed. If they do not see a phone during the visit, they can’t ask you to demonstrate the screen. One of our smart tvs does have an irremovable iPlayer app…..we have it locked it off (padlock icon) which we hope will be sufficient to satisfy a court the app is not in use. A comment on this might be relevant to many viewers Jon.

[@slaphead2965]

All said and done Jon. ...nice wig mate! I mean m'lud! 😜👍🇬🇧

[@ClaymateDesigner]

I did post to the BBB that he was suggesting that any electronic device with a screen could be regarded as reasonable grounds for a warrant. He confused me too. Thanks for the response.

[@peter3234]

Another clear concise vid Jon. Well executed. 👍👍

[@kevinmaltby4202]

The TV licence is incorrectly named. It is a 'Broadcast Reception and iPlayer operator' Licence. It is just the same as a UK driver's licence. You need a driver's licence to operate a car on the public roads but you do NOT need a driver's licence to OWN a car. And of course the DVLA do not knock on your door when you turn 17 to enquire why (if you have legitimately chosen not to) registered for a driver's licence.

[@75eszhgclk]

As always, thank you for your superior videos.

[@peterbumper2769]

I am not British, nor a lawyer. But IF the tv licensing bureau had these sweeping powers, they would not have spent years sending out vaguely worded messages to people, trying to scare them into paying. Rather they would be directly mailing people "Mr JonCarne, you have not paid for a license, pay now or be fined", the message would be direct without burbling on

[@Fifty1stState.]

Just saw BBB's response. Glad it's all sorted, very amicably.

[@krissymarklewis1793]

BBB is a good guy but it was confusing to some. As s you say, just don't talk to them. That's all you have to do.

[@TelThePower]

I absolutely knew the BBB would do an update vlog after watching this last night, he does seem to confuse things, where you're vlogs are to the point & simple! Awesome Chilli mate 🙂👍

[@deadliaski]

People are truly thick. Not sure how BBB's video could have confused anyone. Both your stance are completely clear and congruent!

[@pascoecharlie]

The issue around TV Reception has been around for ages since while it is true that all TV Sets should be capable of receiving any broadcasted TV Signal within their reception catchment range it is also equally true to say that because our TV Sets are also fully capable of being used for other Lawful and Legal purposes and means other than for any Live TV Reception for our very own Private usages with using DVD's Video's and for playing Games etc; by other Private means that don't require you to plug in any TV Ariel even if you have one. This makes our TV Sets - Multi Functional that can be used for different purposes which could also include using Add-On Boxes for Satellite TV Reception. Therefore just because our TV Sets might be Multi Functional it does not mean that you have to use any unneeded Functional Capabilities which would entail that you would then need to buy a TV Licence to carry out any Non-TV Licence Functions which don't involve you gaining access to watching any Live TV Channels.

[@user-of4sd1rm8r]

You mention about disconnecting an aerial to avoid picking up broadcasts but don't forget you can also stream live TV broadcasts using your broadband connection.

[@Hugh248]

BBB is just confusing the issue more with his legal jargon!!

[@JungleJeffarnold]

I watched his video and wasn't worried by anything he said, Seemed like a response to people claiming you can refuse entry to a warrant which you can't . . . . Closing the door on license salesmen is different.

[@yorkshirepud6676]

I used to watch BBB but got pulled up on my spelling (my mind is not what it was.... I live with it) not just him but another sub on his channel, they took turns at picking on me while 👍 each other nasty comments... I came away ..... I lov this channel sooooooo

[@honestg]

Yeah Yorkshire Pud, there's tons of numpties out there. I've got the T-Shirt with a lot of assaults on my comments😁. Keep commenting as it's good to read well grounded/sensible' remarks 👍 Remember Y.P., it's a fact that you'll never win an argument with an idiot 😉

[@littlelioness4278]

When I called tv licensing to cancel my TV license in 2019....the very helpful chap on the phone specifically told me I could still watch Netflix, Prime and catch up channels (not iPlayer) and I didn't need to get rid of my TV altogether, which I said I would do if necessary. I don't bother with catch up TV as I avoid pretty much mainstream TV. I do not miss it at all and have saved myself a few quid into the bargain 👍

[@anonnemo2504]

I followed the link provided and saw the Black Belt Barrister explaining, quite clearly, a very unclear situation regarding what defines a company providing a TV service. There was very little regarding warrants or what constitutes TV receiving equipment, as I recall and I see no possible cause for anyone to criticise, far less abuse, CJ for the content of his channel. Either it was the wrong link, or those complaining have not understood what they have heard.

[@lroche3262]

They were just messers! They flooded BBB first with request to make a video on the topic, then at the first misunderstanding they came back to judge Jon. People are quicker to judge than to understand.

[@alliedatheistalliance6776]

I saw that bb barrister video, and i think people have completely misunderstood his point. It sounds threatening but his point was that its too vague to be legally enforceable. That's how i understood it anyway. I think those people who emailed didn't understand, or maybe some of them were just capita/bbc trolls. Either way don't let them get you down, keep up the great work, you are the number one source of information for me 👍

[@Broomfondle1]

Two vital changes were made during the last decade: 1 You no longer have to provide details when buying a new TV 2 The BBC was forced to hide iPlayer behind a registration wall, this will hopefully lead to a paywall at some point in the future. Since the BBC was forced to hide iPlayer behind a registration wall you no longer need a license if you stick to using on-demand and catch-up. Yes, a loophole was deliberately created, but it was created to stop the BBC getting its grubby claws on the internet, the BBC was desperate to license the internet hence the reason behind iPlayer in the first place. The BBC mindset if they have an internet app they'd have a legal argument to extend the licence to cover the internet, but that argument was blasted and the BBC was forced to hide iPlayer behind a registration wall. Hopefully the registration wall will turn into a paywall forcing the BBC to create content rather then churn out rubbish because there's no insensitive to do so on free money.

[@Holycurative9610]

Based on some of what BBB said just owning a phone would mean you need a TVL because your phone could be used to watch BBC iPlayer and you could be prosecuted, or a warrant could be issued, JUST based on ownership of said device. This would be similar to the police pulling you over because you have that same phone in your car so you must be using it to ring people while you're driving.

[@alanlewis1625]

The point Black Belt Barrister made in his video was in relation to the TV license salesmen making a claim for a search warrant in connection with ANY device that might be capable of installing iPlayer. If they saw a phone / tablet / laptop / PC etc, then, in theory, they would have enough evidence to make an application for a search warrant. At least that was how I understood what he said.

[@stpeter7432]

If people had listened properly to what BBB actually said, there would be no confusion. The law is complex and, as BBB said, flawed. He was attempting to point out the details of it for those who wanted to know. You can't blame him for people's lack of understanding.

[@andrewgilbertson5356]

BBB and you both do good work.

[@stevew3196]

I watched the videos and I think there's been confusion on the part of the viewers. What he pointed out was IF they come with a warrant you have to let them in. Whether or not you have a TV they will look for other devices (laptop, computer, tablet or phone capable of viewing live TV. They will want to check the device's history for evidence and you must co-operate with the search. If you do not you may be charged with a separate offence. His advice comes from extensive legal knowledge. Your from years of experience of dealing with queries by viewers and subscribers. Both have value! Neither of you can be responsible for viewer interpretation!

[@connorscoolcorner1695]

You have said it spot on. Doesn't matter what you have, it's what you do that counts. If you do not watch or record live TV broadcasts or watch iplayer, you don't need one, no matter how many devices you have. I think some of these videos are confusing the issue.

[@MichaelB-wm5cg]

John, you can have your aerial plugged in quite legally because you are still allowed to watch S4C and to receive digital radio stations through your TV/TV set box combo. Thanks

[@MichaelB-wm5cg]

I agree that's a very good point.

[@lynneharding1101]

Don't stop what your doing. Black belt barrister, say no more. He works for the bar, in the same club which we are not a part of.

[@rolandrimann8788]

You are spot on Jon , I've read the TV licence rules myself and that barrister is wrong.

[@cassiejvance7496]

Bbb did mix it up for the lay person, but I followed you for years and you have always given us the up to date Correct info. Not dissing Bbb, but you are right about us avarge ppl who cancelled because we keep within the law. Many thanks 💯💯💯💯🤘🤘🤘

[@BarFlyBrewing]

I'm licence free mate ,but technically aren't all TV,s capable of receiving equipment even without a box or ariel . I mean Samsung TV has live ,so does amazon , its on them to prove its being watched not that its preinstalled on the TV

[@jimwhittaker7321]

Surely the simplest way to deal with the BBC is to use the Breach of Contract argument. The TV licence fee is a contract between the BBC (provider) and the viewer (user) where for a set fee each year we the user we agree to pay that fee for unbiased, quality TV programmes. The BBC agrees to make and present unbiased, quality TV programmes in return for the licence fee (TV Tax). This contract has a name and is called the Royal Charter. If I breach this contract by not paying to watch BBC programmes, the BBC can take me to court, have me fined up £1,000 plus costs, or even imprisoned, for my breach of contract. When the BBC breaches the Royal Charter they merely apologise and carry on regardless. They face no punishment whatsoever and this is wrong! They should be fined or have the licence fee reduced for each and every failure to comply with the Royal Charter! If the licence fee was reduced by £5 per offence, they would soon stop their bullshine or go out of business. Personally I believe that the BBC should be forced to go subscription only, as they already have a subscription service, Britbox, which they operate in addition to the TV Tax, such is their greed and wastefullness. In the 21st Century with literally hundreds of channels and subscription service providers, there is no place for a state sponsored television service! The whole TV Tax system is biased and one sided, with the BBC happy to waste our money and beg for more! Defund the BBC now!

[@YumiYume]

Even having iPlayer installed is not evidence of watching programmes on it. Some TVs come with it pre-installed but if you do not watch the service, you do not need a licence. It's like going on your Web browser to the BBC Web site and they put up a box in a page, saying "click here to watch live". You cannot be done for having a browser or visiting the web page. Only if you were seen to click the live TV box or admit to watching it.

[@ptinca]

In the old days schools and others business used to glue a plate over the RF in on back of TV's so only component or scary input could be used to get round the TV licence requirement. This was before clarification that this wasn't needed.

[@EveryUserName]

My opinion: Black Belt Barrister didn't say you couldn't have a phone, laptop or whatever. He was just saying that those devices are able to receive live TV programmes so they will likely fall under the list of devices that CAN be checked to see if you've been watching it. From my perspective, the fact I might have live TV in my history on whatever app is installed doesn't mean I've been watching live TV illegally. In my case, I would have been watching it at my parents house, that has a license. On the "I'd give them the controller ..." you're obliged to help them ... IF and ONLY IF they have the warrant, which they won't have. BBB was simply clearing up the issue of what happens IF they have a warrant, in which case you've already stitched yourself up.

[@djmattblack]

I have watched the video and found it pretty straightforward, he did not say you need a TV license if you just own a TV and he also admitted that he had several TVs and only used them to watch catchup TV such as Netflix, he also said that he had several mobile phones and ipads none of which had BBC iplayer on them. The only thing he said which concerned me was that if they had a warrant that would also give them the right to check your mobile phone as they could argue that a mobile phone could be used to access broadcast TV services and also they might want to check your search history to see if you have accessed such services. I think that may worry some people as we all have mobile phones and if they have a warrant they might want to check your phone or tablet and you have to give them reasonable access or they could argue that you obstructed them in their duties of executing the warrant

[@stuartb4525]

That was a video from today? If they get access in the first place, said person must have gave them a reason. Simple advice, close the door on the goons.

[@spm36]

The warrant even if granted...a very slim chance btw is entry only..not access to your personal items..they have no authority to access devices...say nothing, help them in no way whatsoever, remain silent, sign nothing

[@MikeEves]

The BBC have no power, nothing, even with a warrant. Ignore them, every time.

[@robin9342]

The warrant does NOT give them any powers to search phones, tablets, computers etc. He was incorrect on that point.

[@oojimmyflip]

Jon I totally agree with everything you said no disrespect to BBB I think he was trying to help, his latest The Law is flawed is very interesting about the License fee. Trouble with the internet is there are a lot of complainers, you know what they say you cant please all of the people all of the time. dont take it to heart you know the majority of us respect you for everything you do and the same applies to BBB. you both have unique experiences and knowledge in what you do best and we are all grateful for it even if some do take it a little to seriously sometimes. Thanks to you my tv aerial / birdy perch, is now redundant and removed from the house as as I said before the car roof and driveway is birdy shite free for the first time in 23 years. It cant be very easy trying to be all things to everyone out there. people emailing you for something someone else has put up on you tube is daft, why dont they comment on BBBs youtube comments page or email him? its no better than telling tales to cause possible friction. perhaps they are scared of the Barrister😂, there does seem to be a degree of scaremongering in the thumb nails and descriptions on youtube of late just to provide a hook to lure you in to watch a lot of videos, even some youtubers have been slightly missleading in their information around The Digital Identities but BBB outlines that there is no specific law at the moment that says you absolutely have to have a digital identity, whilst everyone else seems to think we do and we are completely doomed, so its swings and roundabouts in many ways, the important thing is to rember to switch off your bloody phone or laptop or computer and go and get a life occassionally thats whats really important in the end. ( says I at 11.20pm on a Tuesday Night)🤣

[@kensweet6022]

Jon, you sir, are 100% correct!

[@kbeesmot9928]

Jon, the blurb you read out out 2:50. That if a TV is installed and set up to receive live broadcast you need a licence, regardless whether or not you intend too watch it. "a TV Set is not a receiver unless INSTALLED or used for such purposes." You then go on to say why BBB just couldn't have said that. Then you contradict that in your next sentence, saying it isn't based on the equipment it is what you used it for. Here is the confusion, is it the bit you say "Unless it is installed for such purposes", or "What you use it for". For me, if the aerial is connected and the channels have been tuned in, as per that statement you read a licence is required. Even if I do not use it for live TV. For me, this is a very grey area. My argument would be, that I have a wall mounted TV, and I plugged the aerial in, as if and when in the future I chose to buy a licence and watch live TV, I wouldn't need to bugger about taking the thing off the wall as the tele is a 72 inch model and a two man lift.

[@robin9342]

The law is clear. If you use any device to watch (or record) any broadcast channel or to use iPlayer (aka a television programme service), then you need a TV licence. The law also includes installation for that specific purpose, so no - you cannot plug in an aerial and tune in TV channels without a licence, even if you don't watch them. It even says that you must have a licence if you "intend" to install a TV receiver, though quite how they would prove that one, I don't know.

[@lesliewelch6551]

You should contact BBB and get him to do an update to inform the people what the truth is in simple form, not legalize. As you said ignore them and say nothing.

[@peterjameson321]

You make great videos CJC and it's a great shame that your followers are calling you out after watching BBB's video. You both give out fantastic advice and those bugging and telling you that you're wrong did not get BBB's meaning as he is on your side. All he was saying is that to get a search warrant a TV licence "officer" (goon!) has to present reasons for suspicion to a magistrate. He pointed out that the possession any device capable of receiving live TV broadcasts COULD be regarded as suspicious. He did not say that it WOULD be or that a magistrate would grant a warrant. What he said bears out what you have always said, "Close the door on them"

[@booboyBL]

I have seen the BBB video you mentioned, and I perfectly understood his explanation. It wasn't in very simple language but was easily understandable, unless your English is poor. You are NOT wrong, and all the hate mail you received must have been from people who misunderstood BBB's video. I suggest they watch it again and then come back here to apologise to you.

[@thebaldyhippy]

What BBB was talking about is if a goon with a search warrant shows up, you have to show compliance and help them to log into your devices by supplying passwords/biometrics etc. or you will face obstruction penalties. A court is not going to issue a warrant because someone has committed the crime of videoing on their mobile, this is not evidence of watching live broadcasts or iPlayer. But with a warrant, they can do what they like with your electronics.

[@spm36]

Show compliance is utter BS, obstruction also, the warrant is power of entry alone, no warrant would state you are legally obliged to help them in any way, say nothing, help them in no way whatsoever and sign nothing

[@spud7823]

@@spm36 challenge the warrant, there will have to be a affidavit attached, statement of fact, and a complainant..

[@MikeEves]

You can choose to ignore them, you don't have to comply. It's a meaningless civil warrant.

[@spud7823]

@@MikeEves Mike, there will have to be a mechanism to action a warrant, a affidavit, or they would be dishing them out like smarties..

[@robin9342]

@@MikeEves No, you can't. The warrant is issued under criminal law.

[@icecreamforever]

Tosh, of course you can plug an aerial into a TV. I'm perfectly entitled to listen to the radio on my TV.

[@pointer2null]

Probably the best way to explain this is to the use the exampe of a VCR: Back in the day of the Video Recorder, you had one and if it was plugged in, tuned in and connected to a TV aerial you would need a license (You have a device capable of recording live TV) even if you didn't even have a telly! BUT if that VCR was NOT connected to an aerial the you DIDN'T need a license (cause you only watched rentals from Blockbuster). So the same with a phone, xbox, computer, etc - the analagy being that if you install software (or activate/set up pre-installed software) then you need a license. If you haven't installed, activated or setup the software then a PC, Phone, etc is just that - a computer or a phone and they don't need a TV license. It's what you do with it that is the important bit.

[@djfmitv]

Well said Jon - 'Triple B' should remember those important points you raise here. Another flaw in BBB's video, is that he refers to the GUIDANCE he received from the BBC/TVL/CRAPita, as 'LAW'. Whilst there are many 'laws' that rely on guidance for interpretation, Guidance is NOT 'LAW'. Unless it is specifically in the ACT, then the guidance is just that. That's a big rookie mistake BBB has made, which is easy to see if all he knows is Legalise language that blindsides many that claim to 'practise law' like him. Keep up the good work Jon and don't listen to the Trolls under the BEEB Bridge :)

[@naemasufi]

You have the trust of us of us all.

[@colinsizer8471]

Ok, what's so hard to understand 🤔 no tv receiver. No need for a license. It's that simple, I have an ariel but it's wrapped up and not connected to the tv. Still don't need a license. My tv isn't even tuned in. What's wrong with people? Jon you do a grand job and make it as simple as can be to understand 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@j0hnf_uk]

The idea that a licence being needed when owning equipment capable of receiving live television is archaic to say the least. If this were the case, then everyone with a smart phone would have to own one! Even those who have zero intention of ever using it to watch live TV via the appropriate app. And, this is the quandary that TV licencing are in, at present. Add in to the equation that more and more people are opting out of paying for one due to televisions no longer being limited to receiving that which must be paid for by the licence, which makes the situation even more tenuous. But licensing continue on with their bombardment of threatening letters in the hope it's enough to sway those who are uninformed that it's better for them to, 'be on the safe side', and just buy a licence anyway. Something I'm sure the BBC have been relying on for years to ensure the revenue they've become exceedingly comfortable with receiving, to the point where they feel free to squander it in any manner they see fit, as evidenced not only by the many reports of expenditure away from producing programmes, but also the overall down-turn in the quality of the programmes themselves.

[@chrisamies2141]

The BBC should have rolled the TV Licence into general taxation 20 years ago - when pretty much every household had at least one television. They're now going "Oh *** what do we do now?" when it's far less clear-cut. I got rid of my TV and have a laptop and a smartphone, either of which could receive live broadcasts - but they weren't purchased for that purpose and won't be used for it. I thoroughly expect to get a threatening letter about it any day now.

[@ExcitedWhaleEye-xx9qv]

I quite agree. My apologies as I questioned the BBB on a few of his statements and he has never replied and caused a lot of confusion. It has resulted in the following action on my part. My TV’s are not connected to an aerial plus I do not watch the BBC or live TV and as you rightly say I can still receive live and BBC broadcast via the internet by the installed software. I’m now on their hit list for calls that I regularly record on my CCTV as I’m frequently away. I have prepared a letter stating that, I don’t watch Live or the BBC, I will not answer any verbal questions for obvious reasons but will answer any written questions with legal advice. The letter is to be taken as notice and will be objected to if this letter is used in any evidence submitted to obtain a search warrant as it does not bear evidence of breaking the current law of Watching a live Broadcast only assuming it. The letter also states that all rights of entry are now withdrawn to any connected with TV licensing and request an immediate vacation of my property reminding them that all movements are recorded by 5 Cameras as in previous calls and all illegal actions will be submitted as evidence of an invasion of privacy and attempting to obtain illegal or assumed evidence. Finally I will refuse to “Grant” access into my property and any force used will be contested by legal representation and compensation for damages and cost against the individual and sue the T V licensing company for claiming assumed evidence as actual evidence which I considered as a liable accusation. In the event of any police presence and their insistence of opening the door I will remind them as far as I’m aware they are there only to prevent any disturbance of the peace. I wold be quite happy to allow entry to the officer to inspect my property but not the TV licensing authority as their application was based on assumed evidence with out any proof of my watching live TV and there is no regulation to say I cannot have equipment in my possession to do so as I require that equipment to watch my streaming on demand programmes when in hotels etc. my apologies for this long reply but I have tried to cover all legal aspect in the event they call when I’m in and refuse to open the door and pass the letter through the letter box. One final point I would like to clear up which you could possibly answer does anyone know if the TV Licensing Authority extends to UK citizens watching live TV and BBC programs when abroad and no TV licence is required.

[@fatbikemontage2931]

The confusion here is on the definition of what a “Television Receiver” is when it comes to what can be inspected as part of a TV Licensing search warrant. BBB was making the judgement that it means any and all devices capable of being a TV Receiver, which by that definition includes Laptops, Computers, Tablets and Smart Phones, and I guess even some Alexa devices or similar. However, in practice, TV Licence Officers never look at computers or other computer devices. The legislation poorly worded seems to indicate they can look at things like Firesticks, or Apply TV boxes, or look at installed apps on the smart TV. I guess that would be fair. What wouldn’t be correct in my opinion, is for the search warrant to make me unlock a Laptop for example so they can look at it. The primary purpose of a Laptop is not as a TV Receiver, though if the laptop was connected to a TV by say an HDMI cable maybe that could be right. The offence is in not giving “all reasonable assistance” (a very woolly legal definition subject to different interpretations) to test TV Receiving equipment, which I think simply providing the TV Remote and other remotes so the TV can be inspected. Unless the TV Licensing officers enters the house whilst a live TV or iPlayer broadcast is actually playing. All they are doing is showing you have the capacity to watch licence-able content. Then using that as evidence that an offence might be committed. My experience in looking at TV Licence cases, is where the homeowner has pleaded not-guilty, and they have no signed form basically admitting guilt, the cases are dropped before trial. The standard for a conviction (or at least should be) is that they prove that you have contravened the law, not that you had the capacity to. Every smart device with a screen has the capacity to watch live TV or BBC iPlayer. For anyone worried, please keep reiterating that Search Warrants require TV Licensing to show the court that there is a high probability and they have evidence that an offence is being committed and a search warrant is the only way to obtain the evidence. The no contact advice remains the most effective way to stay legally licence free. Never talk to them, allow them into your home (without a warrant) and if they do get a warrant, tell the police to remain silent and not interfere whilst recording the entire process, do not speak to them. You have the right to remain silent. Show them the TV or TV’s and hand them the remote. Over and above the “all reasonable assistance” part of the Communications Act, there is a fundamental right not to have to incriminate yourself, and you can’t be ordered to do so.

[@martincallow5524]

The problem is simple! People hear but don't listen! BBB on his video states he doesn't have a tv licence because he doesn't have time to watch TV because he's busy! If he does get the time he watches netflix he still has all the equipment to watch TV.

[@martincallow5524]

Sorry forgot to mention the video that BBB says he doesn't have a tv licence or needs 1 is BBB TV licence traps to watch out for! Hope this helps

[@carlvaz]

Jon, I had seen the video by the Barrister of the phone being sufficient reason for a warrant and I must say that I was startled. I am very glad that you have clarified this and it is always a pleasure to listen to you! I find the Barrister very legalistic and concerning his moaning about toxic comments, he came across to me as a high and mighty lord who the viewer should listen to on bended knees. I had actually switched off after seeing the first few minutes of that video and refused to go down on my knees and make obeisance with my head touching the floor. If this condescending Barrister cannot take the comments then personally he can hoppit, for all I care.

[@blackraven3720]

BBB point was that some devices including TVs have pre-installed software that makes them into a tv receiver, so as long as they have a internet connection they are already installed for live TV even if your not using for that, BBB point is don't show of devices that can potentially be used as receivers as that can become evidence that could later lead to a search warrant.

[@letshaveago2201]

Sorry to hear you got the shit end of the stick mate, people need to wake up and listen.

[@jwsuicides8095]

Sorry you got a backlash on this. x

[@ChilliJonCarne]

i dont mind a bit of backlash, its just all of them seem to have understood it wrong