^^ Well check the Ofcom link now and you will find the info updated today at 06:34 am !!! (could be again by the time you read this). Pretty sure that no one did that manually.
One of the reasons for striking-off a company is the late filing of an Annual Return - there is no financial penalty as in the case with Company Accounts which do not have to filed for some months yet. Do not be fooled by the simple fact that it was only one day between the filing of the return, the publication of the striking-off notice and the removal of the threat. All the background events would have 'brewed' several weeks previously.
We can only conject if the licence really is still active even if the 'hard facts' show it to be or if someone like RLC broadcasts under that licence. There indeed was a tenious link between the two when, at the end, Sin where showing some pre-recorded RLC material.
Only time will tell and even then we may never know the real truth.
(05-04-2016 10:18 )DB83 Wrote: [ -> ]^^ Well check the Ofcom link now and you will find the info updated today at 06:34 am !!! (could be again by the time you read this). Pretty sure that no one did that manually.
.
That's not always been the case recently when i have checked, the updated info date hasn't been the same has the present date .
For example i posted in a previous post dated 25/1/2016,
http://www.babeshows.co.uk/showthread.ph...pid1826262 that the info had been updated that day, which was actually wrong as my bestie "admiral decker" pointed out it was actually shown as being updated on the 22nd not the 25th, the 22nd was shown has the last update for a few weeks .
I have been regularly checking, and the info update date definitely has not been the same date that it was when i checked, although at times this is the case as it is now, the update date shown went a month or so not long ago without being changed, this was the case with all the licenses not just Sin TV .(maybe they had a blip in their systems ?)
I thought they might have intended to hand the licence back. but obviously that's not been the case so far .
At present the licence is still definitely valid and up to date, it wouldn't be shown on Ofcom's list of current licensed channels if it wasn't
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/radiolice...t-main.htm
In fact channels are sometimes removed from Ofcom's list of current licensed channels before the channel actually goes off air .
(05-04-2016 11:02 )Dave_A Wrote: [ -> ]At present the licence is still definitely valid and up to date, it wouldn't be shown on Ofcom's list of current licensed channels if it wasn't
I think you're jumping to a conclusion here.
Licence holders are often found "in breach" by Ofcom for not paying the renewal fee and if they continue not to pay their licence is ultimately revoked. But in the meantime, despite the non-payment, the details continue to be shown on Ofcom's list of current licensed channels.
I'm only guessing, but I suggest that most likely Sin TV haven't paid the renewal fee and that Ofcom will eventually revoke their licence.
(05-04-2016 14:50 )admiral decker Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2016 11:02 )Dave_A Wrote: [ -> ]At present the licence is still definitely valid and up to date, it wouldn't be shown on Ofcom's list of current licensed channels if it wasn't
I think you're jumping to a conclusion here.
Licence holders are often found "in breach" by Ofcom for not paying the renewal fee and if they continue not to pay their licence is ultimately revoked. But in the meantime, despite the non-payment, the details continue to be shown on Ofcom's list of current licensed channels.
I'm only guessing, but I suggest that most likely Sin TV haven't paid the renewal fee and that Ofcom will eventually revoke their licence.
I am not jumping to any conclusions concerning the licence being up to date and valid, it is according to Ofcom , i am just posting how things stand according to Ofcom details at present concerning their licence, as it stands at this moment in time their licence is still valid, updated and usable and shown in Ofcom's list of current licencees (this may or may not change in the future)
It could still be used this very day in order to broadcast teleshopping services on TV (if they had a channel slot)
At present it has not been revoked, or was mentioned in Ofcom's last broadcast bulletin that mentions new investigations started etc, non payment of fee investigations etc are included in the investigation list if there has been any .
If they have not yet paid their annual licence fee of £2,000 then obviously Ofcom will start investigation proceedings and will eventually revoke their licence i(f they don't pay it), this will be mentioned in Ofcom's broadcast bulletin .
What i can't understand is, why have they not handed back their licence to Ofcom if they don't intend to pay their fee ?, they are not using it or broadcasting anything, why wait to have it revoked ?, surly they would have nothing to lose by handing it back .
This link here shows when Sin TV was first licensed in March 2015
http://licensing.ofcom.org.uk/tv-broadca...tes/032015
Check out the number of Licences that were handed back etc in that month .
Why go through the process of having a Licence revoked and all that would entail including probably not be able to obtain a new one in the future, when they could just hand it back with no hassle ?.
(edit) to answer my question, maybe Sin TV are just stupid ?
Well I for one am sure the info presented at Ofcom is not accurate or they have not been appropriately informed.
Mr Orgen resigned as director of the holding company many moons ago and one would naturally expect he is not involved in the business in any way. Yet his name still shows as the contact. That itself qualifies as a 'breach'.
As for the current 'discussion', if a licence is renewable after 12 months, any breach for non-payment will happen if not this month but next.
Just wait and see.
(05-04-2016 15:33 )Dave_A Wrote: [ -> ]What i can't understand is, why have they not handed back their licence to Ofcom if they don't intend to pay their fee ?, they are not using it or broadcasting anything, why wait to have it revoked ?, surly they would have nothing to lose by handing it back .
They would have nothing to gain either, would they? It's important to hand a licence back if it contains certain conditions of broadcasting, such as providing a certain amount of local programming for example. If a broadcaster doesn't want to continue in business then it's important to remove the broadcasting obligations they have agreed to by handing the licence back. This wouldn't apply to Sin TV, who wouldn't have had any such conditions attached to their licence. Sin TV were always free to stop broadcasting at any time, without fear of any repercussions.
(05-04-2016 17:31 )bigglesworth Wrote: [ -> ] (05-04-2016 15:33 )Dave_A Wrote: [ -> ]What i can't understand is, why have they not handed back their licence to Ofcom if they don't intend to pay their fee ?, they are not using it or broadcasting anything, why wait to have it revoked ?, surly they would have nothing to lose by handing it back .
They would have nothing to gain either, would they? It's important to hand a licence back if it contains certain conditions of broadcasting, such as providing a certain amount of local programming for example. If a broadcaster doesn't want to continue in business then it's important to remove the broadcasting obligations they have agreed to by handing the licence back. This wouldn't apply to Sin TV, who wouldn't have had any such conditions attached to their licence. Sin TV were always free to stop broadcasting at any time, without fear of any repercussions.
Well I would have thought they would have had something to gain, keeping the right side of Ofcom and not being involved in possible non payment fee in breach investigations etc.
surely it would be beneficial to hand back their licence and go out with their reputation intact, instead of getting the wrong side of Ofcom and having their licence revoked for non payment of fees (as admiral decker suggests may happen)
If that is about to happen of cause .
(05-04-2016 15:33 )Dave_A Wrote: [ -> ]their licence is still valid, updated and usable
As DB83 has pointed out, Sin TV haven't updated their licence details for many months.
^
True, but according to Ofcom details, the licence is still valid and updated, so in Ofcom's view it is still usable for the time being if required, until Ofcom say they can't and revoke it .
What I'd like to know if there is any way of knowing if Sin TV actually paid OFCOM the money at any point? Then if they haven't OFCOM have been pretty slow in my view, in launching a non payment and recovery of licence if that is a better way to describe it.
But seriously why hold on to a licence if you have no intention of making any use of it? surely why hold onto a slot when you are not broadcasting?