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

The_Safordian · 26 April 2012 at 4:05PM

Nilrem wrote: »

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.

Your opinion, I can get Virgin Media for £12 a month and that includes a phoneline which is much better value. Your left-wing broadcaster would sink if the Public was given a choice

Nilrem · 26 April 2012 at 4:29PM

Nice list from a not at all biased site.
Most of the items listed there are fairly normal and not at all unusual, many aren't even waste,such as the stolen gear, any company that has to issue staff with equipment to do their job, and then send the staff out will lose some of that every year - you can't help it unless you want every mobile, laptop, and bit of camera gear handcuffed to their wrists at all time.
Many of the other are pretty much normal in any industry with freelancers - many presenters are freelance (it makes it much easier to get rid of them when you don't want their services any more), and many such freelancers and contractors in any industry are setup as small companies, as it allows them to claim tax back on buisiness expenses (IE if someone worked directly for a company and required tools/equippment to do the job, they would get them from the company usually, a freelancer doesn't get those, but if they become a one man company, they can write them off in the same way).

Another is a non story about the BBC giving away Glastonbury tickets to stars, when the article mentions that the BBC were given the tickets by the organisers of the event, and gave some to staff who were covering the event, and goes on to have a dig at the BBC using "an army" of 263 staff to cover the event (IIRC a figure that included everyone involved, including subcontractors who were there to do things like run the electrics in before, and after), whilst not giving any comparible references to other events staffing levels (IIRC Sky use 120+ for a 90 minute football match, at a venue that doesn't have to be built from scratch, and is for a single set of cameras and one broadcast).

Some of the others in that list are quire amusing, such as the move to salford, a move that was, from memory forced upon the BBC, and the BBC under legal obligations has to offer to help cover costs for staff who are moving, in the long term the move should save money, but in the mean time they have to get the trained staff to move, and relocation allowances are normal in any industry under the circumstances - well any industry where the staff tend to have unusual skills that you can't pick up in a couple of weeks of training.

I've read most of those stories when the DM published them, and asked myself more than once, whether the DM's writers had ever worked in the real world

I'm surprised there isn't a link about the fact the BBC is sending more staff than team GB is sending athletes to the Olympicss (a bit of nonsense that ignores the fact that the BBC is covering events that team GB may not be in, and that it takes more than one or two people to cover any single event, whilst most events will have at most 2-3 British athletes at any one time).

I actually like reading the Daily Mail's rants about the BBC (or anything else), especially when they get reposted without question as facts on some sites

It's amazing how well the Mail can write articles that say huge amounts without any context, and often with the truth being acknowledged as being completely different to the headline and bulk of the article in the last line (it's like playing where's waldo, especially when BBC or court* related articles).

*Especially if you try and guess what court case the mail is referring to, it can often be very hard to match up anything bar the odd name with the official court transcripts (which in many cases are posted online by the department of justice)..

Kurtis_Blue · 26 April 2012 at 4:48PM

The_Safordian wrote: »

Ah showing your colours, people who dislike the DM tend to be liberals who object to certain articles being published, rather like censorship.

Anyway I'm glad to help you.

https://www.loadsofnonsenceIdidntread.com

Please let me know if you'd like me to post more

Did you bother to read those before linking? for example your waste included:
"In total, the BBC has paid £496,551 to external consultants to help it formulate proposals designed to save about £700m"
If you are not going to d your own data collection its better form to reference more than one source especially if your main/only source has bias.

The_Safordian · 26 April 2012 at 4:59PM

Nilrem wrote: »

Nice list from a not at all biased site.

The site campaigns for the abolition of the BBC TV Licence and helps those who get harassed,threatened and intimidated by the BBC but the articles are all genuine and include links to their sources of information.....................all of it can be backed up if you wish to try any BBC tricks

Nilrem wrote: »

Most of the items listed there are fairly normal and not at all unusual, many aren't even waste,such as the stolen gear, any company that has to issue staff with equipment to do their job

Theres millions being wasted there and only someone with a connection to the BBC would try brushing those off

Once again I have lots more examples like the millions wasted on taxis but I have a feeling you wont take me up on that offer

I hope others have noticed how he tries to compare it to a commercial company even though the BBC plays the public service card.....................also commercial companies would not waste anything like what the BBC does, its suicide

The_Safordian · 26 April 2012 at 5:10PM

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

Did you bother to read those before linking? for example your waste included:
"In total, the BBC has paid £496,551 to external consultants to help it formulate proposals designed to save about £700m"
If you are not going to d your own data collection its better form to reference more than one source especially if your main/only source has bias.

Nilrem · 26 April 2012 at 5:17PM

The_Safordian wrote: »

The site campaigns for the abolition of the BBC TV Licence and helps those who get harassed,threatened and intimidated by the BBC but the articles are all genuine and include links to their sources of information.....................all of it can be backed up if you wish to try any BBC tricks

Most of the items listed there are fairly normal and not at all unusual, many aren't even waste,such as the stolen gear, any company that has to issue staff with equipment to do their job

Theres millions being wasted there and only someone with a connection to the BBC would try brushing those off

Once again I have lots more examples like the millions wasted on taxis but I have a feeling you wont take me up on that offer

I hope others have noticed how he tries to compare it to a commercial company even though the BBC plays the public service card.....................also commercial companies would not waste anything like what the BBC does, its suicide[/QUOTE]

not sure what's happend with the quotes there

Can I claim my fiver now.

I KNEW that would be your response, I've "met" TVL resistance posters on other forums, and it's almost always their default response when someone "defends" the BBC by pointing out the holes in their arguments.

I suspect your next line will be to claim I work for Hedgeborn and Fishes (or whatever their name is), as part of some secret undercover BBC mole

Would the millions "wasted on taxis" include the ones used to get staff home safely when public transport has been on strike but they've still needed staff in at odd hours?
Or the Taxis used by staff to courier equipment when they need it in a hurry, or need to reach a location in a hurry to cover a story and don't have their own cars?
Or the taxi's used by a BBC exec who was overseeing a massive building project in Wales, but had to be in London on a regular basis?* (IIRC at the same time her husband had terminal cancer).

How about the "fleet of BMW's" that the BBC own, when it turns out the BMW's are things like BMW commercial vehicles (IIRC they make some quite reliable transit and mini vans).
They may have been Mercedes, but I think they were BMW's.

Or the masses of "properties" the BBC own all over the place, where a lot of them are "properties" for accounting purposes only (things like the rental of space in a theater for a network connection, or an office in a council building)

As I say I've "met" TVL resistance posters before.

*Several of the dates for that one coincided with trains that took 8+ hours, rather than the normal 4.

The_Safordian · 26 April 2012 at 5:48PM

Nilrem wrote: »

Can I claim my fiver now.

You wont get a penny here because I've never given the BBC anything.

Nilrem wrote: »

I KNEW that would be your response, I've "met" TVL resistance posters on other forums, and it's almost always their default response when someone "defends" the BBC by pointing out the holes in their arguments.

I knew by your pitch like responses and wording that you were one of the BBC clique from DS, always in denial and refusing outright to say one bad thing about your pay masters

Nilrem wrote: »

I suspect your next line will be to claim I work for Hedgeborn and Fishes (or whatever their name is), as part of some secret undercover BBC mole

Tell us something the BBC does wrong. Here we've proved that millions gets wasted and you wont even acknowledge it. Most people who are pressured into paying the BBC would be appalled but not you

Nilrem wrote: »

Would the millions "wasted on taxis" include the ones used to get staff home safely when public transport has been on strike but they've still needed staff in at odd hours?

I work shifts but guess what, I have to make my own why there and back home like most members of the British Public :mad:

Nilrem wrote: »

Or the Taxis used by staff to courier equipment when they need it in a hurry, or need to reach a location in a hurry to cover a story and don't have their own cars?

Again business usually supplies vehicles for that and I believe the BBC does have them

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radioassets/photos/2008/8/27/46634_2.jpg

Come on lets hear the next excuse

Nilrem wrote: »

Or the taxi's used by a BBC exec who was overseeing a massive building project in Wales, but had to be in London on a regular basis?* (IIRC at the same time her husband had terminal cancer).

Once again what stopped him getting the coach,train or even a flight would have been cheaper than a £600 taxi fair!

Nilrem wrote: »

Or the masses of "properties" the BBC own all over the place, where a lot of them are "properties" for accounting purposes only (things like the rental of space in a theater for a network connection, or an office in a council building)

Eactly they've never heard of condensing things....................well that will change once the TV Licence is scrapped.

Nilrem wrote: »

As I say I've "met" TVL resistance posters before.

You did stand out a mile but now people here can see how obsessed with the BBC you are and decide if a normal member of the British Public would act like you do..........................remember this person wont say one bad thing about them

Mrs_Arcanum · 26 April 2012 at 6:13PM

Nilrem wrote: »

Nice list from a not at all biased site.
Most of the items listed there are fairly normal and not at all unusual, many aren't even waste,such as the stolen gear, any company that has to issue staff with equipment to do their job, and then send the staff out will lose some of that every year - you can't help it unless you want every mobile, laptop, and bit of camera gear handcuffed to their wrists at all time.
Many of the other are pretty much normal in any industry with freelancers - many presenters are freelance (it makes it much easier to get rid of them when you don't want their services any more), and many such freelancers and contractors in any industry are setup as small companies, as it allows them to claim tax back on buisiness expenses (IE if someone worked directly for a company and required tools/equippment to do the job, they would get them from the company usually, a freelancer doesn't get those, but if they become a one man company, they can write them off in the same way).

Another is a non story about the BBC giving away Glastonbury tickets to stars, when the article mentions that the BBC were given the tickets by the organisers of the event, and gave some to staff who were covering the event, and goes on to have a dig at the BBC using "an army" of 263 staff to cover the event (IIRC a figure that included everyone involved, including subcontractors who were there to do things like run the electrics in before, and after), whilst not giving any comparible references to other events staffing levels (IIRC Sky use 120+ for a 90 minute football match, at a venue that doesn't have to be built from scratch, and is for a single set of cameras and one broadcast).

Some of the others in that list are quire amusing, such as the move to salford, a move that was, from memory forced upon the BBC, and the BBC under legal obligations has to offer to help cover costs for staff who are moving, in the long term the move should save money, but in the mean time they have to get the trained staff to move, and relocation allowances are normal in any industry under the circumstances - well any industry where the staff tend to have unusual skills that you can't pick up in a couple of weeks of training.

I've read most of those stories when the DM published them, and asked myself more than once, whether the DM's writers had ever worked in the real world
I'm surprised there isn't a link about the fact the BBC is sending more staff than team GB is sending athletes to the Olympicss (a bit of nonsense that ignores the fact that the BBC is covering events that team GB may not be in, and that it takes more than one or two people to cover any single event, whilst most events will have at most 2-3 British athletes at any one time).

I actually like reading the Daily Mail's rants about the BBC (or anything else), especially when they get reposted without question as facts on some sites
It's amazing how well the Mail can write articles that say huge amounts without any context, and often with the truth being acknowledged as being completely different to the headline and bulk of the article in the last line (it's like playing where's waldo, especially when BBC or court* related articles).

*Especially if you try and guess what court case the mail is referring to, it can often be very hard to match up anything bar the odd name with the official court transcripts (which in many cases are posted online by the department of justice)..

And all this excludes the fact the BBC make quality programmes the majority want to watch. Were they to stop the costs for other service providers would go up. Or if the BBC had to get advertising to fund themselves, smaller narrow interest TV channels would be gone.

The_Safordian · 26 April 2012 at 6:22PM

Mrs_Arcanum wrote: »

And all this excludes the fact the BBC make quality programmes the majority want to watch. Were they to stop the costs for other service providers would go up. Or if the BBC had to get advertising to fund themselves, smaller narrow interest TV channels would be gone.

LOL that again is opinion and seems to be the BBC's best defence.

I have no interest in BBC programming. You stating other providers would put costs up is complete and utter rubbish and you also forger the genuine free to air channels.

Virgin Media's basic package now is cheaper than the BBC TV Licence and you get far more including a phoneline

But then again you have nothing to worry about do you. According to you and other BBC lovers its the best thing since sliced bread and therefore everyone would be queueing up to subscribe if it became voluntary

Nilrem · 26 April 2012 at 6:51PM

The_Safordian wrote: »

You wont get a penny here because I've never given the BBC anything.

I knew by your pitch like responses and wording that you were one of the BBC clique from DS, always in denial and refusing outright to say one bad thing about your pay masters

Tell us something the BBC does wrong. Here we've proved that millions gets wasted and you wont even acknowledge it. Most people who are pressured into paying the BBC would be appalled but not you

I work shifts but guess what, I have to make my own why there and back home like most members of the British Public :mad:

Again business usually supplies vehicles for that and I believe the BBC does have them

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radioassets/photos/2008/8/27/46634_2.jpg

Come on lets hear the next excuse

Once again what stopped him getting the coach,train or even a flight would have been cheaper than a £600 taxi fair!

Eactly they've never heard of condensing things....................well that will change once the TV Licence is scrapped.

You did stand out a mile but now people here can see how obsessed with the BBC you are and decide if a normal member of the British Public would act like you do..........................remember this person wont say one bad thing about them

I can think of a few who do, usually when they get fed up of rubbish being posted, or are a little bit annoyed already at something, and vent a little at the rubbish.

Things the BBC does wrong, well where do I start.
They pander to some vocal idiots far too much (the Taxpayers alliance, a misnamed group if ever I saw one), some religions, they are far to fast to apologise when anyone with half a brain can see that something said was a joke, they show some programs I despise (although to be fair with that, some people like them).
They don't show enough foreign language films, I used to like watching the odd stuff from other (non English) countries.

Once again what stopped him getting the coach,train or even a flight would have been cheaper than a £600 taxi fair!

Was that the women who was in charge of a major construction project, who had to shuttle to and forth from London to Cardif on a regular basis, and on several of those days there was no train, or the train could have taken 10 hours? (I actually looked up that one, including some historic train time tables as I was very bored).
I didn't check the times for air travel, but I suspect the number of flights from London to Cardiff is fairly limited.
The same woman who at the time had a husband with terminal cancer?

Also with regards to taxis, you think the BBC has permanent vehicles, and drivers available at any time of the day or night, in any part of the country?
The BBC does maintain a fleet of vehicles for equipment etc, but oddly enough they don't necessarily assign them to every journalist working for them, and sometimes someone (or something) needs to get from A to B, and a taxi is by the far the cheapest/most sensible way to do it.
A favourite story I've heard (from several places including tech sites), is of a company that contracted a jet to take a single PC from one country to another, excessive?
Not when the PC was a backup needed at a trade fair for a demo of some very expensive software.
Time and convenience is sometimes far more important than the cost of something like a taxi, for example a TV production can cost tens of thousands a day (from memory), what with things like equipment, location, props and staff (or worse they are under time pressure, as some of the equipment/key cast/crew/location are only available to use for a very finite time).
If something is needed unexpectedly on location, a £100 taxis suddenly looks like a massive bargain if it lets them do most of their planned filming for the day, rather than missing out on it (couriers are handy, but can be very hard to get to do same day deliveries, especially I'd imagine for larger items, taxis on the other hand are there by the dozen even in small towns).

It's a bit like the DM did an article from memory, all indignant that the "BBC flew star to Venice", which turned out to be the BBC had one of the Doctor Who actors do a bit for Doctor Who Confidential, at the same time they had a film crew getting specific shots for the background of the episode (so for the cost of a flight for one guy, they made a lot of additional use of a crew already out there).

Context, something the TVL resistance and Mail never take into account, especially when you consider than sometimes a taxi (even an expensive one) is much, much cheaper than someone missing a meeting, or having to attend an important meeting with no sleep, as opposed to at least 3-4 hours.
Or the cost of putting someone up for the night, and potentially missing an important meeting, or having to reschedule a meeting that others were already in the area for (IE the cost of one taxi saving the travel costs of many others).

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