TV Licence

neil9313

intranix wrote: »

I've not paid for a TV licence for over 10 years now. They've even stopped bothering to send me their unsolicited sales literature :P

I do not pay out of principle, I disagree with the *way* the BBC are funded.

Dont belive you! Fibber

intranix

neil9313 wrote: »

Dont belive you! Fibber

nice for you :cool:

patman99

You still need a licence to watch iplayer.
The only legal way around not having a licence is if someone with one records programs for you, and then gives you the tape/disc for you to watch at your conveniance.

BTW, TV detector vans CANNOT detect LCD/plasma tv's or freeview boxs (my b-in-l works with a former detector van driver who told him this), that is why you have to provide your name and address when purchasing TV receiving equipment.

superscaper

patman99 wrote: »

You still need a licence to watch iplayer.

Please don't perpetuate misinformation. You ONLY need a TV licence to watch TV as it is broadcast. It has nothing to do with owning TVs etc. On demand services do not fall under this. You do not need a TV licence to watch on demand programmes on BBC iPlayer. And for anyone else wanting to perpetuate urban myths, let's see what the BBC themselves have to say:
http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/help/about_iplayer/tvlicence

neil9313

intranix wrote: »

nice for you :cool:

I dont to be honest, you are just waffling. The most Capita will ignore you is about 2 years!

neil9313

patman99 wrote: »

You still need a licence to watch iplayer.
The only legal way around not having a licence is if someone with one records programs for you, and then gives you the tape/disc for you to watch at your conveniance.

BTW, TV detector vans CANNOT detect LCD/plasma tv's or freeview boxs (my b-in-l works with a former detector van driver who told him this), that is why you have to provide your name and address when purchasing TV receiving equipment.

Complete rubbish

greyster

I dont watch live broadcasts, I have a TV for TV DVDs and computer games.

On occassion I watch non live TV on iplayer, but rarely.

Been at my current property for 2.5 years. They've sent me 11 warnings (each with different wording, different letter styles, some more threatening than others) but I know its all scaremongering, so it just goes in the bin. Last week after 2.5 years, they tried knocking at my door ("I told you we would call, letter was left" when I was at work to inspect me. I was impressed they managed to get into my block of flats but then I realised the front door didn't lock properly. I sorted that quickly with my landlord :rotfl:

Anyway today, I re-did the I don't need a license form on their website... but it is pretty pointless because they still need to visit and inspect at some point. Infact, it appears they want to do inspections every couple of years... sounds fun.

With the front door locked now, the fact I'm on top floor, and that I'm not always in the evening... I can't see myself ever meeting one of these guys. They need to make an appointment with me I think... which is shame because I am unavailable for appointments.

joeypesci

I was just listening to Any Questions and Daniel Hannan said on it he's got rid of his TV and watches everything on line now. He said it's funny that he now gets threatening letters from the TV Licensing Authority. He suggested it's dependant on an element of bluff. Which suggests to me, they've seen he now doesn't have a licence so are sending him letters on the off chance he is watching TV illegally and even if not, that they'll scare him into paying anyway.

This sounds like racketeering to me.

That can't be right, they shouldn't be doing that unless they have proof, surely.

will-in-estoril

jimkenyon wrote: »

What you fail to mention is that with sky you have the choice. With BBC you don't - you have to pay. BBC then use the licence fee to see off the competition.

That is far too simplistic. Which competition has the BBC used the licence fee to see off? Choices also run much deeper than one of having to pay: choice is also about content and variety. $ky has had 20 years in the pay satellite business. What quality drama has it produced? How has it educated? $ky has an effective monopoly in the pay tv market: it has used its position to try and see off competition, notably its access charges to Virgin Media and its acquisition of a stake in ITV, which, thankfully, has backfired spectacularly.

The BBC has also resisted in bidding for the rights to certain live sports: a great example is the EPL, where it has the rights only to limited highlights, nevertheless making top flight football available to all free to air with 'Match of the Day'.

In respect of regional news, no other broadcaster apart from the BBC seems particularly interested any more. The old regional ITV franchisees were, but are sadly no longer. Granada, Thames, ATV etc all coexisted with the BBC in a duopoloy; yet conversely, in a more deregulated market ITV plc says that it cannot afford regional programming. As for $ky, when have they really been interested in anything home grown, let alone regional? The bottom line is that the BBC provides choices commercial broadcasters cannot or will not provide.

The BBC is a worldwide name or brand. There is not a single other national broadcaster which can come close: not TF, RAI or TVE.

Sure, the BBC is not perfect: BBC3 TV remains rather suspect, for example. Yet the alternatives do not bear thinking about.

joeypesci

This page is shocking

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/Evasion%20rates.htm

All the fake signatures and then the article to the paper, asking the upset reading to call the BBC up to confirm they don't have a licence, but asking them to call the premium rate number.