Do I need to buy a license if I dont terrestrial TV?

AG47

How can you make that declaration? I have written to them declaring I'm not interested in services that I need a licence for, and I asked them to confirm this declaration but I still get the computer generated letters

Cornucopia

I think the Public's reaction to the child abuse scandal is complicated, and includes:-

- An element of "benefit of the doubt" or "suspension of belief" regarding BBC management knowledge and involvement at the time of the offences, and a sense that the problem is solely historic (even though Dame Janet Smith's inquiry said that the present-day BBC could still harbour child abusers). OTOH, there is reassurance from the living offenders being progressively dealt with by the Authorities, so justice in those cases is being done.

- An element of apathy - not being willing to sacrifice live TV, or even not being willing to find out how to be legally Licence-free. (Just assuming that a TV Licence is to own a TV, when it's actually for TV reception).

- An element of fear of TV Licensing, whose fake authority seems to be thoroughly a part of the Briitsh psyche.

- Lack of principles - I don't mean that in a nasty way, but few people seem to be willing/able to take a stand even when they passionately disagree with something.


Personally, I think catch-up is fantastic, and when I go to friends/family who still watch linear TV, it is a very strange sensation to be limited to what the Broadcasters see fit to schedule at that particular time. I also like that (as a general rule) there are fewer ads on the catch-up services compared to live. Whether that will continue (as viewer numbers increase) remains to be seen.

Xbigman

But the illegal activities within the BBC are not sanctioned by the BBC and it was ultimately individuals that committed the offences.

I was undecided about ditching live TV when my TV licence ended at the end of June but it was the left wing bias of the BBC, the gleeful knifing of Theresa May/commiserating with Labour on election night and the Martin McGuinness Funeral coverage that finally caused me to decide. And those are all sanctioned by the BBC.
But if I hadn't already been thinking about it the above would not have been enough on its own.

I already received my licence by email so they already have my email address and name and you don't need to fill out the telephone number field so I made the online declaration. Automated receipt reply within hours and a email the next day that I am on their database as 'no licence required'. All very painless so far. Only time will tell if they really do leave me alone as promised.


Darren

Cornucopia

Xbigman wrote: »

But the illegal activities within the BBC are not sanctioned by the BBC and it was ultimately individuals that committed the offences.

I would say it was somewhat more nuanced than that. Yes, I agree that any organisation, especially one of the sheer size of the BBC is likely to have its fair share of criminals of one sort or another.

However, in the case of the child abusers, the BBC always had a duty of care towards its child guests and audience members, and although attitudes towards sexual abuse of adults have undoubtedly changed over time, I don't think that is true in the case of children. If I/my parents had even suspected Jimmy Savile or Rolf Harris at the time when they were being presented as wholesome family entertainment, we would have been horrified.

Also, I seem to recall that Nick Pollard (who led the inquiry into the Newsnight handling of the Savile scandal) is on record as saying that the level of cooperation he received from BBC Management was not as good as it should have been. (Which in the usually guarded language of such things is fairly damning).

In the case of the misdemeanours of TV Licensing, they are a matter in many cases of public record, either because they are documented in videos or because they have been formally reported to the BBC (who have generally done nothing). Unfortunately, their governance model is engineered for broadcasting, not law enforcement so actually getting these things resolved is, in the final analysis, proving extremely difficult. On which basis, I would advise anyone dealing with them to exercise extreme caution (depending on the circumstances).

Only time will tell if they really do leave me alone as promised.

Where/when did they promise to leave you alone? AFAICT that's not what they say at all.

Tom99

[FONT=Tahoma, sans-serif]You just advise them online then they will send you a notice saying they will not contact you for two years.[/FONT]

Cornucopia

Unfortunately, that's not what they say. (Whether they actually do what they say is another question entirely).

TV_Licensing wrote:

TV Licensing reserves the right to visit addresses which have claimed No Licence Needed. This is because, although the majority of No Licence Needed claims received by TV Licensing are genuine, latest figures show that almost one in six such

After an individual has made a No Licence Needed claim to TV Licensing, written acknowledgement and an explanation of the NLC process will be sent to the individual. The address will be given NLC status, mailings to the address will cease for a specified period of time and the premises will become available for visiting in order to confirm that a licence is not needed.

TV Licensing will visit a sample of NLC addresses to confirm that a licence is not needed.

NLC = No Licence Needed "Claim".

In reality, there is no legal meaning behind these claims/declarations of "no Licence needed" or TVL's demands for or receipt of such a claim. It is simply an administrative activity that individual citizens can choose to participate in ...or not (though you won't generally see this stated in BBC/TVL documentation).

I appreciate that enforcing an offence that takes place inside people's homes is fundamentally difficult, but it also requires fundamental sensitivity. The abuse of law and language that BBC/TVL uses is simply not an appropriate starting point for this task, nor indeed any task in which a public authority engages with its Public.

Xbigman

They reserve the right to visit me but will otherwise not contact me by email, phone or letter. Thats my definition of leaving me alone.



Darren

Cornucopia

Xbigman wrote: »

They reserve the right to visit me but will otherwise not contact me by email, phone or letter. Thats my definition of leaving me alone.

Okay - let's hope that they do.

From my POV, though, they are simply agreeing not to do something that they shouldn't ever have been doing in the first place. It's something of a disingenuous and manipulative gesture on their part.

Geoff1963

TV detector man at a property : "Can I see your TV licence ?"
Occupant ( handing over a piece of paper ) : "There you go"
TV detector man : "But this is a black and white copy of last year's"
Occupant : "So are your programmes"

silverwhistle

Geoff1963 wrote: »

TV detector man at a property : "Can I see your TV licence ?"
Occupant (Me)

What a stupid question. Goodbye.