Separate TV License for a room rented on Mon-Fri?

gettingready

macman wrote: »

I feel I'm banging my head against the wall here.

So am I.

I do not care what their "regulations" say -they are simply stupid.

Again - I do not watch a TV here. At all.

BUT - for the sake of an argument. Let's say I have 1TV in my main home,covered by my one TV Licence, for my main home. I take the telly away 2 block/100 miles (whatever) from where I normally live and I have to pay another TV Licence?

Can's you see how stupid this is?

I have a mobile phone, my contract is for my mobile phone - regardless of where I use it from. Should be the same with TV License.

It is the stupidity of the rules you so defend that make my laugh at the whole issue

gettingready

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

Is the TV in the kitchen or bathroom?

There is no TV whatsoever at all.

It is just about the rules about having/not having one that I question in the scenario that I described.

Cornucopia

You think this is crazy - this is just the tip of the iceberg as far as BBC/TV Licensing is concerned. My part of the Legally Licence-Free community submitted a document with around 60 complaint points to the recent Government review. TV Licensing is a shocking and shameful "organisation" - and yes, one of the complaints is that they are not a real independent agency - they are simply part of the BBC.

Their rules are their rules, although some of their rules are more rigorously enforced than others, and not all of them have a basis in Law.

As has been mentioned, not everyone requires a Licence, and in particular, you don't need one if-

- You don't have a TV or any other means of watching/recording TV broadcasts or streaming TV live over the internet.

- You do have a TV or other device, but never use it for watching/recording TV broadcasts or streaming TV live over the internet.

- You have a Licence at your main property elsewhere, and you watch/record on a device powered solely by its own internal batteries (whilst in use for watching TV).

So there are 3 options there to enable working around the TVL rules.

If you want to "get into it" with them, that's certainly possible, but I can tell you that they are incredibly secretive, belligerent and they have no common sense... but I'm guessing you are getting that impression from them already. The Law and their rules are also surprisingly complex for such a simple thing, and they also do their best to obfuscate them.

Kurtis_Blue

gettingready wrote: »

There is no TV whatsoever at all.

Really? Just plain crazy to get upset about that then.

Do you not ̶w̶a̶t̶c̶h̶ read the news?

gettingready

I read the news, sometimes, on the net/in papers.

Crazy? Nah... just bored as live 2 min away from work place, cut down on a 5 hour a day commute so have time for contemplating rubbish like that

almillar

I have a mobile phone, my contract is for my mobile phone - regardless of where I use it from. Should be the same with TV License.

That's just a terrible example. If you had 2 landlines, would you expect to only pay for one? TV Licences have always been about 'households'. You've got the 'luxury' of being able to live in to places and this is one of the costs associated with it. You'll also have two sets of electricity, rates etc to pay.

There is no TV whatsoever at all.

So you're not one penny out of pocket then!

macman

What he said above. The system is household based and therefore cannot be portable-it has to be one or the other. And, since the cost of a licence is £145.50pa, should you need one, that would be (I hazard a guess here) less than you spend per week to rent a second property and avoid a longer commute?

gettingready

You'll also have two sets of electricity, rates etc to pay.

Nope, everything else is includec in rent.

And, since the cost of a licence is £145.50pa, should you need one, that
would be (I hazard a guess here) less than you spend per week to rent a second
property and avoid a longer commute?

Whatever rent I pay to avoid long commute is still an extra on top of my normal home bills - just to be able to work where I do, so all is extra.

I am not renting second property. Jezzzzzzzzzzzzzzz - it is a room. I share bathroom/kitchen. Hardly ideal but still costs the money of course. The monthly rent combined with weekend tickets home and back equals to what I would have to pay for weekly travelcard/railcard/bus combined but saves me 5 hours per day commute so I put up with living in a room.

All bills are included - just the TV License is a completely different issue and that is just plain stupid.

Again - I do not watch TV, just the issue came up and I started wondering about insanity of the TV LIcensing rules, that is all.

You've got the 'luxury' of being able to live in to places and this is one of
the costs associated with it.

Ermm....thanks for "" as luxury it is not - that is for sure...

Again - I have no telly, have nop desire to have/watch telly in my rented ROOM (not a second property, a ROOM) - just amazed by the TV Licensing Rulezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

macman

You are renting a second 'property'. The fact that it isn't a wholei detached house or flat makes no difference. The law says that you have a separate dwelling unit and that requires a separate licence if you want to watch TV. It could be a lockable broom cupboard under the stairs and a licence is still required.
Agreed, the current licencing system has many inconsistencies, but what you are proposing by way of a 'personal' licence is quite unworkable.

gettingready

macman wrote: »

It could be a lockable broom cupboard under the stairs and a licence is still required.
.

And THAT is completely crazy. Because I can make phone calls from any broom cupboard in UK and do nto have to pay a separate line rental/contract for my mobile.