TV licensing rant

I thought you had to have a TV license if you had the facilities to receive the broadcasts and not if you had a TV or not (Ie an ariel on your roof requires a TV license).

Wasn't that how Rod Hull died; talking his ariel down so he didn't have to have a TV license?

Rod Hulls last words: "Emu, pack it in or we'll fall off this bloody windmill".
 
Holy thread revival batman! (Sorry, i didn't want to make a new post about a very old chestnut)

So i was just skimming through the 'TV Licensing No Licence Needed Policy' (there is nothing worth watching on TV, everything is on demand, whats the point) and caught these two extracts with regards to visiting addresses after being notified (you calling me a lier BBC? Enjoy my door being closed on your face):

(in 6.1) A methodology will be used to determine which addresses will make up the sample for visiting. This methodology is outlined in Appendix II.

(in 6.2) However, in some circumstances NLC addresses will be specifically excluded from the sample for visiting, in the interests of fairness. These circumstances are set out in Appendix III.
Click to expand...

Then referenced at the bottom

The BBC considers the information in the policy appendices to be confidential
Click to expand...

Anyway, i was just wondering, what is the legality of the BBC withholding this information from a public policy document? Could it be requested in a freedom of information act?
 
csmager said:
They could also tune into the intermediate frequency oscillator in the tuning circuitry, which almost certainly leaks straight back up through the aerial on the top of your house. They can even tell what channel you're watching doing that, and it doesn't matter if it's an LCD tv.

Get it from multiple points and you can even pinpoint where it is too (roughly).
Click to expand...
Does James Bond work at TVLA now?

If they can tell what channel your watching why do they have BARB which have a box hooked up to a few thousand TVs which record who is watching what for viewing figures?
 
I’d like for the TV License to be abolished. I don’t know anybody who thinks it’s a suitable way of paying for BBC services, in fact everyone I know resents it.

1. The TV License is not relevant in 2011

When the TV License was introduced in 1946, the BBC was the only corporation providing TV broadcasting. The TV License was an appropriate way to recover the cost of BBC services.

It’s 2011 now – there are thousands of TV channels, they’re all funded by advertising. There is no longer a direct correlation between watching television and consuming services from the BBC, yet we’re still expected to pay for a TV License.

2. Surely it’s illegal?

If the BBC can’t prove that people watch their shows, that’s their failed business model, their problem, not ours! Yet it seems they’re above the law, see this example:
  1. I send you a bill for services you didn’t request. You are under no obligation to pay me.
  2. The BBC sends you a bill for services you didn’t request. If you don’t pay you will be prosecuted.
So, if we remove whatever unreasonable law allows them to prosecute people in this way – then people won’t have to pay their TV License, and the BBC will have to find alternate sources of funding.

If I’m wrong, and any company can charge people for services they didn’t ask for, and prosecute them on failure to pay – let me know. I’ll start a dozen such companies tomorrow...
 
hawker1986 said:
Sky and the like are the real bar stewards, they take a stack of your money then make you watch adverts too, grabbing the money with both hands.
Click to expand...

Quoted for the truth it is, 20+ mins of adverts every hour and a considerable amount of repeats. Just two of the reasons (along with their excuse for a broadband "service") why our house is now a Sky free zone!

Back on topic - I agree that you shouldn't be forced to pay for a service you're not using such is case with the OP. From my own point of view I'd happily pay purely for their Formula 1 coverage and the script fest that is Top Gear :p
 
I just can't understand that you can buy an 60inch screen, but you can pay the £100od for a TV licence. LOL. Oh yeah, the principle.
 
Longbow said:
What does it matter?

You said that you are being forced to pay for a non requested service. This is not true. If you don't want to pay for the service, don't watch the broadcasts.
Click to expand...

I think he means if you have a TV but only watch ITV/C4/C5 etc. Why should he pay for BBC if he's not going to watch them?
 
krisboats said:
Because the bbc own the broadcasting systems that solely (or at least used to) transmit the other channels.
Click to expand...

To clarify, yes I'm talking about watching TV without consuming any BBC services at all, thereby not owing them anything, but being forced to pay anyway.

I'm not sure if the BBC own terrestrial analog transmitting systems, they may do. Whether they'll also own the systems after the digital switchover, I imagine they've covered themselves for that.

However, they definitely don't own any/all sattelites, or the internet.
 
The investigators they hire are often bailiffs, but they are not a bailiff when doing TV licensing work. They have an implied right of access to your property in order to reach your front door, that's it. If you ask them to leave, they have to go. Don't enter into any other discussion with them, just say "Please leave my property."

As for the letters, do what every other non-TV owner does. throw them away with the rest of the spam, or if you really want, save them for when they send you a pre-paid envelope and mail them all back.
 
Lol whut?

Still cant believe there are people paying their TV license, and getting in a fluster over a couple of silly letters.

Ive not paid for it my entire life, and I dont intend to start either.

Not when there is crap like Rastamouse, and garbage like BBC3, BBC4, and BBC-Hindu etc etc.
 
BBC tv is a joke. Crap shows apart from the documentaries (which I don't watch live). Produce series akin to the likes of American shows such as Dexter, Breaking Bad, Sons of Anarchy and House M.D and then I'd happily use their services and pay a fee.
 
TV licenCe! Sorry, but it's doing my head in reading the American spelling throughout the thread. :p

Anyway, despite the TV licensing company's complete awfulness, the BBC programming is still worth the licence fee. When we have 20 minutes of advertisements every hour and a general drop in quality we will miss it, but it will be too late then.
 
Wow, Didnt realise how old this thread was. :p

On topic however, I just went online and filled in a NoTV form.

Told them I only watch DVDs and play games. And I've heard nothing since.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom