Do I need to inform that I don't need a TV licence?

Chief_of_Staffy

Next year I think I'll set up an amp in the garden and play my guitar through it. I will charge my neighbours an annual fee if they elect (for some strange reason) to listen to me. Any that don't pay but leave their windows open, I'll sue through the courts, and those that close their windows and clearly have no interest in listening to my appalling cacophony I will bombard with threatening letters. On occasion I'll send people round to demand entry to their houses in order to ascertain if they can hear my guitar through the walls. I think this is a great business plan that has something for everyone.

Cornucopia

B0bbyEwing said:

Out of interest, what's so special about BBC player that you need a licence? 

No need for it, C4 or C5 catchup etc but iPlayer you do. 

Why that and not the others? 

iPlayer (for BBC TV) was added to the Licence in 2016 as part of the horse-trading with the government of the day.

The BBC were keen to close the previous exemption whereby people without Licences were lawfully able to consume BBC on-demand content.   They claimed that 1 million households(?) were doing this, and they believed that the majority of those would buy licences when the exemption was removed.   They were wrong on the last point, and possibly on the size of the group, too.   AFAIK, they have never been held to account on the issue.

In return for changing the rules around iPlayer, the government transferred the costs of the Over-75s free Licences to the BBC, and gave them discretion on the scope leading to the current restrictions.  

Nick_C

B0bbyEwing said:

Out of interest, what's so special about BBC player that you need a licence? 

No need for it, C4 or C5 catchup etc but iPlayer you do. 

Why that and not the others? 

If you use BBC iPlayer, then you are watching BBC content.  It is only right that you should pay for it.  C4 catchup etc is paid for through advertising.  

forgotmyname

Nick_C said:

B0bbyEwing said:

Out of interest, what's so special about BBC player that you need a licence? 

No need for it, C4 or C5 catchup etc but iPlayer you do. 

Why that and not the others? 

If you use BBC iPlayer, then you are watching BBC content.  It is only right that you should pay for it.  C4 catchup etc is paid for through advertising.  

WRONG!   S4C on demand is on Iplayer AND totally FREE to use without a licence.

Google's AI answer gets this wrong also but that is not surprising when you look at the TV Licencing website.

"You must be covered by a TV Licence (including a free TV Licence) to use BBC iPlayer. This applies to any device you use. You don't need a licence to watch S4C programmes on demand"
Copied from the TV licencing website.

They have to get in first with the "YOU MUST" before the next sentence contradicts themselves. Oh and a rabbit hole
of misleading statements about what that actually means for S4C users. Waffles on about the website which was not the question asked.

phillw

I told them and never received any hassle.

Everyone I know who refuses to tell them, instead just moans at me at the number of letters they get.

Do whichever you want.

phillw

Cornucopia said:
They claimed that 1 million households(?) were doing this, and they believed that the majority of those would buy licences when the exemption was removed.   They were wrong on the last point, and possibly on the size of the group, too.   AFAIK, they have never been held to account on the issue.

If only a few people were watching iPlayer without a license and now they either don't watch it at all, or bought a license. What exactly are you holding them to account for?

I only bought a TV license, so that I could use iPlayer. I don't watch live TV or record it ever.

Cornucopia

phillw said:

Cornucopia said:
They claimed that 1 million households(?) were doing this, and they believed that the majority of those would buy licences when the exemption was removed.   They were wrong on the last point, and possibly on the size of the group, too.   AFAIK, they have never been held to account on the issue.

If only a few people were watching iPlayer without a license and now they either don't watch it at all, or bought a license. What exactly are you holding them to account for?

I only bought a TV license, so that I could use iPlayer. I don't watch live TV or record it ever.

That they negotiated a deal with the then government based on a flawed expectation of the number of Licences that would be sold.   The deal they did has cost many over-75s their free Licences, so it was by no means a trivial decision to make.

B0bbyEwing

Still pestering....



So, having already told them that I don't need a licence 12 months ago, they're saying if I don't tell them again that nothing has changed then an officer "could" visit me to check. 

Although how much checking they'll be doing when I say no you're not coming in, I don't know.

But then if you fill out the form & tell them nothing has changed they tell you that an officer may come round to check.

So basically it doesn't matter what you do, you may get a visit.

And if they visit then they may will be told to be on their way.

Nick_C

One thing that annoys me about these letters is that they are so badly written, and from (the agents of) an organisation that was created to educate and inform.

"As your claim expired on 31/10/25, this address is now unlicensed".  What nonsense.  The address was already unlicensed.  And you haven't made a claim that has expired.  

The inability to use the English language clearly and correctly is one reason why I decided to stop funding the BBC.  

Cornucopia

They are living in, and trying to construct for the Public, a fantasy world in which their word-play creates an enforcement system that the Public are "required" to follow.

TBF, if they were to express these things in plain English, it would get pretty convoluted pretty quickly...

"That thing that you did for us 12 months ago, that wasn't legally required and didn't have any meaningful effect outside our fantasy world has now fantasy-expired.   To avoid us doing the thing we are threatening, which you can already ignore at your discretion, please do the non-mandatory thing again.   Whether you do the thing or not, we will threaten you with further action that you can ignore, and we probably won't actually do anyway".

I wonder what John Reith would make of it all?