TV License - Not Guilty?

[Deleted User]

truth-hurts wrote: »

You may have noticed some people don't wish to see the BBC put in a bad light here

No doubt they are "Beeboids":D

Cornucopia

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

One thing I have noticed is that as we lose one violently anti-TVL licence poster a new member joins using exactly the same language and promoting the same website...Hmmm

You can't put a price on free speech.

Many well-informed and rational people, once they understand what the BBC's policies and procedures are for the enforcement of the Licence Fee, object to them. They are largely indefensible.

On a Money-saving forum why would we not want to encourage:-

a) People to save money by making a legitimate choice not to have a TV Licence if they do not need one?

b) People to stand up to "TV Licensing" within the bounds of what is lawful?

c) People to resist the efforts of the authorities to treat them badly/unfairly/unlawfully?

I see this as very closely allied to the private parking debacle (except that in that area of discussion there seems to be little dissent to the view that the PPCs and the Authorities which permit the PPCs to operate are in the wrong). I can see no rational reason for believing anything different of the BBC in respect of Licence Fee enforcement.

spacey2012

As a money saving forum, the advice not to sign a TVL 178 on a door step has nothing to do with the BBC.
It is good sound genuine advice that can save thousands of people a month a lot of money.
Those that do not "get it" that if you sign the TVL 178 you will be found guilty either need to shut up or go spend a day at magistrates court seeing how fast the process is once the signed TVL -178 is shown the the magistrates, that is the end of all your excuses and explanations unless you want a trip down to the cells.
Never sign a TVL-178 form or it will cost you a lot of money.
Good sound money saving advice.

Cornucopia

Not sure what your issue is here - with my post or with Spacey's.

For a variety of reasons, the BBC/TVL process is unfair/badly managed/unjust and ultimately probably unlawful.

Why is this an issue that shouldn't be covered here, where a proper understanding of the failings of the system can help people achieve justice and save them money?

What is the difference between this issue (which people often seem to mock) and the PPCs (where there is pretty much a universal consensus)?

pineapple

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

One thing I have noticed is that as we lose one violently anti-TVL licence poster a new member joins using exactly the same language and promoting the same website...Hmmm

Fair point (maybe) but please don't tar us all with the same brush. UK is not the only country to charge for viewing and personally I would not recommend TV Licence evasion as a point of principle. If only because people like me end up paying for those who avoid paying their dues as a lifestyle choice. :mad:
But people do need to know the legalities - especially given the reputation of the Capita hirelings. I expect my ancient CRT to give up the ghost soon. In which case I will probably stop watching live TV. I am grateful therefore that I am reasonably clued up.

Cornucopia

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

Then why not start a thread rather than take everything else off topic with your own unasked for and irrelevant to the thread rambling views.

Virtually every thread here rambles. Why should this one be any different?

Anyone would think that the subject matter is special in some way.

[Deleted User]

truth-hurts wrote: »

↑↑↑ I'm sure others will put the picture together for themselves ↑↑↑

Yes, they'll see that you are "TheWise1" using a different user name!:D