TV Licence - do we have to pay it?

neil9313

neilmcl wrote: »

Assuming you have a TV then yes, you have to pay your TV license.

Thats not true, if you have or own a tv YOU DONT HAVE TO HAVE A LICENCE!

RobertoMoir

CaPPsiE wrote: »

Hi All,

I couldn't find the right area for this so feel free to move it if necessary.

I've been reading the information on this website which suggest that, with the right information to hand and correct procedures adhered to, we won't have to pay our TV Licence any longer: http://www.tpuc.org/stoppayingtvlicencefees

Can anyone shed any light on this as, like so many, I'd like to save my pennies and not contribute to the BBC's propaganda.

Thoughts?

Adam

Oh good. We haven't had a massive flame war about TV licences for at least a couple of months. I knew something was missing.

davidlizard

kpie wrote: »

I don't get why people have such a problem with paying the licence fee! You get so much value out of it - BBC news, BBC online, docs etc...
Better than all the crap ITV produces anyway.

The licence fee probably is good value IF you watch BBC. However, if like myself and countless others, you never watch it, then thats that is no value whatsoever. Its like having to pay Tescos for the privelege of being allowed to shop in Sainsburys.

A subscription based funding model would be a fairer way of funding this. Such a model does not prevent channels such as National Geographic from producing some quality documentaries.

Fully agree that BBC output is miles ahead of the crap ITV produce. However, ITV do not send abusive and threatening goons, dressed in full body armour, hammering on doors late at night to house to intimidate people with threats of "cautions under the police and criminal evidence act", court action and prison.

At least with Sky, I can choose whether to take (and pay for) or decline their services. Unlike the BBC.

Given the BBC takes almost £3BILLION in fees, they should at least be expected to produce a few half decent programs within that budget.

williham

davidlizard wrote: »

The licence fee probably is good value IF you watch BBC. However, if like myself and countless others, you never watch it, then thats that is no value whatsoever. Its like having to pay Tescos for the privelege of being allowed to shop in Sainsburys.

But Tesco doesn't pay for the upkeep of all sainsburys stores

System

And the BBC no longer own and maintain the transmission system They were forced to sell off the transmission services during Maggie's time.
The majority of masts are now owned and maintained by Arqiva who also have the responsibility of rolling out digital terrestrial TV.

ElvisPresleysCat

RobertoMoir wrote: »

Oh good. We haven't had a massive flame war about TV licences for at least a couple of months. I knew something was missing.

Thought it might start a bit of a war but really I just wanted to know more about the whole thing. There is a lot of conflicting information and I still don't know if it is actually illegal to watch TV without a licence. The website I cited states the TVL is a private company and there's nothing they can do.

Their detector vans, if they actually did work and contain any equipment would be inadmissible evidence in court the same as illegal phone taps, aside from that, they would need to scientifically prove that I was actually watching TV but how can they do that if I refuse them entry?

Even the 'threat' letters they send out are worded in a non-legal way and all too fluffy for my liking. There are the X number of people were caught last month/year in this area etc. but funnily enough the areas change and the figures remain the same. Dodgy?

Incidentally I don't actually own a TV, but I still wouldn't allow entry for someone I don't know that is not a bonafied official.

What I would like is a definitive answer on the legality of refusing to pay for a TV licence.



I'd like to cite one of the other posts and user's comments:

wrote:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=9444489#post9448393

neilmcl

CaPPsiE wrote: »

There is a lot of conflicting information and I still don't know if it is actually illegal to watch TV without a licence. The website I cited states the TVL is a private company and there's nothing they can do.

There is no conflicting information. The site you linked is talking bull with an obvious agenda. As stated you are required by law to have a licence to watch TV, fact. If yuu want to follow the advice in that site then feel free but you have been warned.

ckerrd

neilmcl wrote: »

There is no conflicting information. The site you linked is talking bull with an obvious agenda. As stated you are required by law to have a licence to watch TV, fact. If yuu want to follow the advice in that site then feel free but you have been warned.

Not quite right but pretty close.

If someone only watches catch up TV (e.g. programmes previously broadcast and then made available via the iplayer) then although they are watching TV they have no need for a licence.

neilmcl

ckerrd wrote: »

Not quite right but pretty close.

If someone only watches catch up TV (e.g. programmes previously broadcast and then made available via the iplayer) then although they are watching TV they have no need for a licence.

Pedant!

ckerrd

neilmcl wrote: »

Pedant!

Indeed. With so much conflicting info bouncing around it is easy to be one.:D