Fined £275 for watching YOUTUBE

buglawton

Did we ever establish if OP proved he or she was actually fined, why and how?
or was it just troll bait (effective as it seems).

[Deleted User]

bazster wrote: »

What are you, his Dad?

No, I'm a member here, and as such, I have just as much right to make statements/ask questions, as anyone else!

Any chance of you answering the question?

[Deleted User]

buglawton wrote: »

Did we ever establish if OP proved he or she was actually fined

How do you propose he/she prove it?

marleyboy

The_Safordian wrote: »

I did answer it but you have chosen not to accept it like a good BBC "person"

Would you care to answer it again with a simple Yes or No?

I only ask because I must have missed the post where you answered the question.

I reluctantly buy a TV licence and I never watch the BBC, but choose to cover myself in case I do. The BBC licence may well be scrapped eventually and I pray for the day it does, even if this means enduring commercials on the BBC.

Nobody on here wants to pay for a TV licence, but in accordance with the option of BBC, we pay it.

As has been mentioned above, we have constant repeats and cheap and tacky programmes on the BBC, many of us gripe over it but still pay for the licence anyway, giving us a reason to justify complaining about it.

Just because members disagree with you over it, does not make them BBC staff members or Trolls. A Troll is someone who constantly attacks other members for not sharing their opinion on a matter, rather than the simple approach of just disagreeing with them.

Sounds familiar?

bazster

The_Safordian wrote: »

They do it everyday to millions of people. Last year they sent out 85 million threatograms

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4172233/BBC-blows-13m-on-TV-licence-threat-letters.html

This guy had to take them to a High Court just so they'd leave him alone

http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/index.php/topic,5093.0.html

But you keep doing the BBC's PR

Marvellous! As evidence you adduce a report in that well-known and authoritatative organ of record The Sun, and some stupid thread on an internet forum!

Way to go!

And, short though The Sun piece is, you still couldn't read it correctly! Have another read of it and see if, this time, you can figure out what period those 85 million letters were really sent over!

I received many letters during the many years I had no TV. I ignored them (better things to do) and as a result had numerous visits. They were invariably polite, and went away as soon as I pointed out I had no TV. No threats, no intimidation, no harassment. No problem.

The_Safordian

spammer wrote: »

Er, I think you'll find it was you who did that...except I notice you've dropped the "essential" bit now!

I'd say our roads, health, education etc is vital myself unless you'd rather have all those things made redundant for just one broadcaster....................yep I think YOU would

spammer wrote: »

There you go again, pretending that you know anything about me.

You are telling me a lot about yourself by your postings.

spammer wrote: »

You haven't said you don't either. Come on, own up, are you a criminal or just a troublemaking troll?

Why do you wish to get so personal and how many forum rules do you wish to abuse?

Rather ironic you of all people call someone a troll lol I have no issues with this subject matter while you and a few others want it gone for some strange reason, comrade.

spammer wrote: »

I'm not your pal, pal.

Ok comrade.

spammer wrote: »

And based on my own experience of dealing with occasional, polite enquiries from TV licensing officials

Oh you've suddenly delt with them in the past now, oh and I believe you mean Capita Salesman and not "TV licensing officials"

spammer wrote: »

over many years of non-TV-ownership

LOL but why if the BBC is so great and it is great because you wouldn't be doing this now if it wasn't

spammer wrote: »

I am of the opinion that any difficulties you experience are of your own making. Which is easy to believe given your near-deranged behaviour here. Pal.

No I can asure you I do not ask them to come to my door or send me the threatograms, comrade.

spammer wrote: »

Well I'm pretty sure you are...

Well you've been pretty wrong so far

spammer wrote: »

You may choose to think I am a Nazi, if you wish. Or a Guardian-reading lefty. Which is it? You seem to be somewhat confused.

OMG you don't even know the history or what it stands for do you, hardly a shock to ignore the truth though

bazster

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

No, I'm a member here, and as such, I have just as much right to make statements/ask questions, as anyone else!

Any chance of you answering the question?

You can ask, but you have no right to demand an answer.

marleyboy

buglawton wrote: »

Did we ever establish if OP proved he or she was actually fined, why and how?
or was it just troll bait (effective as it seems).

One suspects a little baiting, particularly with the Youtube clip argument, which is preposterous .

The_Safordian

bazster wrote: »

Marvellous! As evidence you adduce a report in that well-known and authoritatative organ of record The Sun, and some stupid thread on an internet forum!

Comrade, the source is the FOI so your friends at the BBC must be lying then?

bazster wrote: »

And, short though The Sun piece is, you still couldn't read it correctly! Have another read of it and see if, this time, you can figure out what period those 85 million letters were really sent over!

Well I get 12 or more a year myself and there are around 7 million without a BBC TV Licence so you do the math, comrade

Nilrem

buglawton wrote: »

Did we ever establish if OP proved he or she was actually fined, why and how?
or was it just troll bait (effective as it seems).

I think when more details were posted it turned out the actual fine was £200, with 60 costs and 15 for the victim surcharge (one of those lovely sounding extras the government like, that is actually very misleading, as iirc it doesn't go towards the victims of crime).

[edit]
I'm not actually a great fan of the LF as it stands, but I don't for one second kid myself if the BBC were to go so would the TVL, as road fund licence doesn't get ringfenced for roads, and even at the moment the TVL doesn't all go to the BBC, instead the government is using it to pay for other things as well (I would imagine if anything if the TVL were to go, it would be replaced by a broadcast or broadband tax that went straight to the treasury and probably never seen again).
We'll be paying for the world service out of the TVL next year from memory, and the excess from the digital switchover scheme, which was funded by adding a levy to the TVL was not given back to TVL holders like the BBC wanted, but instead put to one side for another government scheme.
So in the meantime, I just enjoy the benefits of the TVL, namely having at least one broadcaster in the UK that is advert free, free from having to worry about ratings all the time, and can tell the truth about products that are not up to scratch without worrying about how it'll affect the bottom line (I dislike Clarkson a fair bit, but like the fact he does say a car is rubbish if it is/doesn't live up to the marketing).