We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

TV Licensing - Do I Need to Remove Antenna Cables from room?

Options
11011121416

Comments

  • If you already have reasonable broadband, like most of us here will, then the additional cost of viewing commercial catch-up services from ITV, C4, C5 and UKTV is £0. You can't get better value than that.
    Precisely. Until last year, I watched one Channel 4 programme per week, for about six months of the year (as that show has now finished, I now watch no programmes at all), so why would I pay £154-50 per year, to watch 12 hours of programming, when I can get it for free, on All4 catch-up?
  • I can tape what I want for £0
    You can tape catch-up?
  • Cornucopia is the guy to answer that about BBC subscriptions but possibly if that happened then ITV would follow suit and we would all end up paying more.
    Every channel in the world could go subscription, and it wouldn't cost me a penny more than I currently pay, ie. £0-00.
  • Hopefully the BBC can find a way to trap the fiddlers without contravening their "human rights " lol
    You think people's human rights are something to laugh about?
  • I marvel about how many people are dragged to a Magistrates for tv licence fiddling (14500 a year approx ) to , hopefully get a criminal record due to the excellent hard working Capita men.

    14,500 doesn't seem very much, considering there are over 4 million unlicensed addresses in the UK.
    Maybe it's because, many of the unlicensed addresses are in fact LLF.
  • According to BBC figures (which have some caveats) they estimate "evasion" to be as high as 7%, or around 1.9m households.
    Even based on those (estimated) figures, more than half of unlicensed addresses are LLF.
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 0 Newbie
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Debt-free and Proud!
    edited 11 March 2020 at 11:54AM
    Cornucopia said:
    Also "Bluster" means something quite specific - which is essentially glossing over legal details to obtain an unfair advantage using misleading, overbearing or ambiguous language

    Like this?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb-ygimvRkA

  • Personally I think you should drop the word "legal " from the moniker and just make it LF.
    Why? LF and LLF describe a category and a subcategory.

    LF describes an address which does not have a TV Licence, and LLF describes an address which does not have a TV Licence, because they do not legally require one.
  • and that is a fact that already 1.9 million are taking advantage of.
    It's not a fact, because the figure of 1.9 million is, by the BBC's own admission, the ESTIMATED evasion rate.
  • Cornucopia
    Cornucopia Posts: 16,477 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    Cornucopia said:
    Also "Bluster" means something quite specific - which is essentially glossing over legal details to obtain an unfair advantage using misleading, overbearing or ambiguous language

    Like this?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yb-ygimvRkA

    It's a good clip, and it illustrates many of the issues that people have with TV Licensing's approach.

    From a purely technical POV, I would say that this approach falls short of the principle of implied right of access - which is that a visitor states their business and allows the householder discretion over whether the conversation continues.   Without that implied right, he is trespassing.   He is also trespassing when he remains on the property after being invited to leave.  

    I can understand the gambit in that TV Licensing staff no doubt get short shrift at some/many addresses as soon as they announce where they are from.   However, the inflexibility of the approach is clear to see in that video, where TVL denied themselves the opportunity to engage with a resident of an address "of interest" by being dogmatic.   I don't buy the Data Protection excuse - I think this is just bluster.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.6K Spending & Discounts
  • 244K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 598.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 176.9K Life & Family
  • 257.3K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.