How to get out of paying TV license (yes, REALLY)

The_Safordian · 24 April 2012 at 2:13PM

almillar wrote: »

The Safordian - thanks for the correction - I'm sure I've heard though that the Licence fee goes towards the broadcasting infrastructure - even some transmitters are privately owned - is that a lie?

No the broadcasters pay to have their signals on the transmitters so if the BBC TV Licence went tomorrow everything would still be here

___________________________________________

Latest news: This innocent taxpayer had the BBC goons issue a search warrant on him today. As you can see he was not breaking any laws so the BBC has yet again committed perjury in order to obtain a search warrant

http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/advice-centre/goons-came-with-search-warrant/msg34183/#msg34183

JimmyTheWig · 24 April 2012 at 2:40PM

udydudy wrote: »

We are not blind nor over 75 and for a period of 9 months officially did not pay the licence fee. Though just to be safe I wrote to the licensing authorites by email to inform them that I do have a TV and recording equipment and and using them to watch only recorded programmes.

They replied letting me know that as long as I did not watch live TV or connect a TV antennae to the equipment I was ok. I might still have the reply email. If I find it I will post it here once I get home.

So are you saying that, unless you connect further cables, etc that you can't watch or record live tv with your equipment?

Where do you get the recorded programmes from that you watch on your tv?

almillar · 25 April 2012 at 12:52PM

Right, so the BBC pays for its transmissions on this equipment, out of the licence fee then?

The_Safordian · 25 April 2012 at 3:47PM

almillar wrote: »

Right, so the BBC pays for its transmissions on this equipment, out of the licence fee then?

The BBC does yes but others don't

raider · 25 April 2012 at 4:58PM

Six years of threatening letters by not paying a TV License.

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/

almillar · 26 April 2012 at 12:41PM

So money goes from my licence, to the BBC, to these equipment owners. I never said that the Beeb owned the equipment, but it's certainly true then that licence fee money helps pay for it?

The_Safordian · 26 April 2012 at 1:56PM

almillar wrote: »

So money goes from my licence, to the BBC, to these equipment owners. I never said that the Beeb owned the equipment, but it's certainly true then that licence fee money helps pay for it?

Oh right do you expect the BBC to get everything for free while they waste hundreds of millions each year on themselves?

So ITV,CH4, CH5, Sky, Virgin, BT etc etc pay for their services to be broadcast but your beloved BBC should be the exception...................very communist of you.

Tell you what abolish the BBC TV Licence and lets see them compete on an equal playing field....................I'll bet you £500 that the waste stops then too!

Nilrem · 26 April 2012 at 2:13PM

Can I just ask what waste in particular?
I keep seeing it mentioned, but rarely if ever is there any substance to the claims once you look past the Daily Mail's headlines (things like expenses tend to be very low and well within the norm for any company that needs to what the BBC is meant to).

Nilrem · 26 April 2012 at 2:32PM

Tina20 wrote: »

Tv licence is daylight robbery, paying the BBC a ridiculous amount of money to watch TV that's not even produced by them, and to fund their radio channels which you might not even listen to.

CRAZY

How on earth is this a real LAW?? :mad:

Erm I may be wrong, but much of the content on the BBC channels is produced specifically for them, and quite a chunk of it wouldn't be made by commercial operators whose sole motivating factor is how profitable they'll be (IE how many viewers they'll get, so they can sell advertising).

The BBC isn't perfect, but it's the only broadcaster in the UK that isn't driven purely by viewer numbers and commercial requirements - just look at how ITV has cut back it's PSB content in the past 10 years.
Or look at what has happened to Commercial Radio over the last 15 years - I remember when my "local" commercial station employed DJ's, and covered local events.
Now it's amazing how the "local" DJ remains the same across about 3 different stations run by the same network, as does the playlist and articles when I travel any distance (I can travel 100+ miles and the DJ on the local station remains the same, as does the content, with just the jingle/station name changing).
The only thing "local" on my "local" commercial radio station these days is the adverts, and maybe a couple of minutes of news every couple of hours (often suspiciously similar, but delayed to the BBC local radio news).

Personally, for the price of the TVL, it seems much better value than say a Sky sub given the amount and range of new content it gets you

I dread to think what depths the commercial stations would drop to without having to compete with at least one FTA provider that isn't just about getting the highest number of viewers, for the lowest possible cost.

The_Safordian · 26 April 2012 at 4:02PM

Nilrem wrote: »

Can I just ask what waste in particular?
I keep seeing it mentioned, but rarely if ever is there any substance to the claims once you look past the Daily Mail's headlines (things like expenses tend to be very low and well within the norm for any company that needs to what the BBC is meant to).

How to get out of paying TV license (yes, REALLY)

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free