TV Licence - do we have to pay it?

MORPH3US

CaPPsiE wrote: »

and I still don't know if it is actually illegal to watch TV without a licence.

If that TV is live then YES IT IS ILLEGAL!

CaPPsiE wrote: »

Incidentally I don't actually own a TV,

In that case you don't need a TV licence..... jeez, you don't exactly help yourself do you.... how is that hard to figure out....

CaPPsiE wrote: »

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

See above.....

neilmcl

First of all you say this with everyone assuming you have TV and wondering whether to pay the licence or not.

CaPPsiE wrote: »

I'd like to save my pennies and not contribute to the BBC's propaganda.

Then this:

CaPPsiE wrote:

Incidentally I don't actually own a TV

Is this thread just one big wind-up or what. :rolleyes:

williham

!!!!!! wrote: »

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.

a portion of the money you pay to tv licencing is used for the upkeep of the masts and switchover to digital... I'm just saying it doesn't all go to the BBC.

jmadgin

I absolutely agree that no-one should have to pay a TV license there are now so many media transfer possibilities that the license fee is irrelevant. Also what do you classify as a TV? I watch IPlayer on my computer monitor (32 inch) in my living room, I don't have a TV but I can watch the bbc whenever I want! Is this illegal? No because it's not legislated for and not enforceable.

Here's some things to think about.

Does everyone that is able to watch IPlayer or a similar steaming media channel on thier IPhone have to pay a TV license?

If I have a streaming multimedia player in my house connected to the net such as the Netgear EVA9000 do I have to pay this fee?

If you want TV get Sky or Virgin or use the internet. No need to pay for the various redundant transmitters all over the place.

The BBC are milking £7.7 billion a year out of 90% of the UK public. This is a disgrace. Find as many loopholes as you can and exploit them to make a mockery of this tax.

whatmichaelsays

davidlizard wrote: »

If on the other hand, like me, you never watch BBC television or online, it is a total rip off - I can think of many other uses for £140/year rather than pay out for channels and services I neither watch nor want, but have to pay if I want to watch any of their competitors output.

£140/year, if invested in an account that paid 5% interest net, would over a period of 55 years (assuming paid from age 20 to 75) would have accumulated over £40,000, so its hardly cheap.

Presumably though, you watch the dross churned out by ITV and C4 and C5?

Well C4 is part government owned and therefore receives funding from the TVL.

ITV and C5 also benefit from the TVL through subsidised use of radio spectrum and transmission equipment.

So yes, even if you don't watch the BBC, you are still using services that are funded by the TVL (and there isn't a motorist or football fan in the country who hasn't once used BBC local radio).

Personally, I'm more than happy to pay the TVL. The BBC is the greatest cultural institution in the world, is the most respected media outlet in the world and produces some absolutely superb programmes - many of which are sold throughout the world. It produces content for audiences that, whilst not mainstream, are still valuable and important sections of society - innovating in ways that commercial broadcasters are either too frightened or stupid to do. After all, ITV's only criteria for making a TV show these days is "will it appeal to Cletus, Dwayne and Chantelle?" and "can we attach a premium rate phone number to it?". Yes, the Beeb might seem wasteful at times, find me a public sector department that isn't? People moan about how much Chris Moyles earns, conveniently forgetting that 8m people listen to his show - that's a huge number of people endorsing his show.

I'd much rather pay £140pa for the BBC than to see television descend into a feast of tiresome ITV talent shows, Fox News misinformation, Daily Mail sensationalist and mass-market shte that appeals to nothing other than the lowest common denominator.

Jakg

fozzeh wrote: »

Really? I calculate it at £27,972.78 if it stayed at £140...but that's just me being picky.

Assuming 5% interest and £140pa it works out to £42.240.19, but it's actually £142.50pa, so it's £42,994.48.

But maybe i'm just being picky...

kalaika

CaPPsiE wrote: »

...Incidentally I don't actually own a TV...

Not wishing to muddy the waters too much, but it should be clear that you need a TV licence if you watch or record live broadcasts using any equipment. This means on a TV, but also includes live broadcasts over the internet on a computer or console, on an iphone, etc.

jmadgin wrote: »

The BBC are milking £7.7 billion a year out of 90% of the UK public. This is a disgrace. Find as many loopholes as you can and exploit them to make a mockery of this tax.

I'm afraid your £7.7bn figure is a bit out:
"In 2007/08, the BBC issued 25.3 million licences and collected £3,369 million in licence fee income."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/review_report_research/tvl/tvl_report.pdf

Personally I happily pay the licence fee. For around £12 a month I help to fund and have the option of being entertained by:

TV - BBC1, BBC2, BBC3, BBC4, BBCHD, CBBC, CBeebees, BBCNews,
Radio - R1, R2, R3, R4, R5Live, R6, R7, local radio in every county in the country that covers local news, sport and weather.
Internet - BBC News and Sport websites as well as associted web content to the TV and radio stations above

as well as other specialist TV and Radio stations that I haven't listed here.

I don't watch/listen to all of the above, but it's great to have the choice and it's a pretty comprehensive list to be able to choose from really. The BBC may not be perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than any other broadcasting organisation, nationally or internationally.

AntMcD

I can't see how this is ever possible. As I understand the the license fee also covers radio broadcast as well as TV etc and I would guess that you have a radio in your house, car etc which basically ensures you have to pay.

cajef

AntMcD wrote: »

I can't see how this is ever possible. As I understand the the license fee also covers radio broadcast as well as TV etc and I would guess that you have a radio in your house, car etc which basically ensures you have to pay.

You have not needed a licence to receive radio broadcasts, it was abolished in 1971.

http://www.radiolicence.org.uk/costlicence.html

jmadgin

Agreed kalaika lol! I got my figures from a bit of dubious source!

However for all the arguing about how good or bad the BBC is surely this is the "MoneySaving" Expert site. I was just coming up with ways not to pay the license fee. Technology is moving too fast, in the next 20 years I genuinely don't believe there will be TV as we know it, never mind a license fee.