lol tvlicensing
- Thread starter arknor
- Start date
You think that would pass? It wouldn't. That's worse than council tax, so basically you want people to pay a private company money for living in a house? Are you ****ing ridiculous?
you could have a sky subscription and only use skygo for the on demand stuff
If you ever did actually get taken t court you are likely to find it hard to argue that you don't watch live tv yet have a tv subscription
Erm what?
They have already mentioned the fact that technology now makes it more viable to watch things on the go (mobiles/tablets/PC's), so they either make it compulsory (sorry modernise it) to stop all this BS, or they do away with it.
Simple.
I filled out a declaration online about a week ago stating that I don't watch T.V when it's being broadcast live. They just sent an email back saying thanks for letting us know, we will write to you in 2 years and ask if you still don't need a licence.
Easy, no mention of coming into my house and examining my pc for evidence or anything. Even if they wanted to, they have no more right to enter your house than the man on the street (unless they get a search warrant).
In my opinion, just go to their website and fill out the form? It takes a few mins and is all dealt with then for a couple of years.
Easy, no mention of coming into my house and examining my pc for evidence or anything. Even if they wanted to, they have no more right to enter your house than the man on the street (unless they get a search warrant).
In my opinion, just go to their website and fill out the form? It takes a few mins and is all dealt with then for a couple of years.
I doubt you would get taken to court just because you have a TV subscription.
There seem to be two ways you can end up in court:
- An inspector catches you watching live TV. (Example: Inspector walks up to your property and happens to see you, through a ground floor window, watching live TV).
- An inspector knocks on your door and you "confess" to watching live TV without having a licence. (This is how almost everyone is caught).
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 9,445
- Location
- Around Town
you could have a sky subscription if it is free for the year 
The TV part of my Virgin package is free, it's not there by choice as i phoned them to cancel it a couple of years ago and planned to just use freeview at the time, they chucked me on the free M package and told me to keep the box instead to keep the BB and TV package price down.
They'd have a hard time using my subs in court if i stopped paying the TV license
They'd have a hard time using my subs in court if i stopped paying the TV license
That would just open the flood gates for any private company to come up with something and make it compulsory.
Its the same as any other service TV or otherwise, if you want it you pay for it, if you don't your obtaining services dishonestly and they are fully within in their right to come after you.
Yes, but not everyone does and therefore why should some people have to pay for a service they're not receiving? The current legislation this is enforced under is the Communications Act 2003, so this isn't an old legislation. Whilst iPlayer was only initially released in 2007 it's irrelevant as the legislation is to cover live TV, not pre-recorded, or watching things online.
The TV part of my Virgin package is free, it's not there by choice as i phoned them to cancel it a couple of years ago and planned to just use freeview at the time, they chucked me on the free M package and told me to keep the box instead to keep the BB and TV package price down.
They'd have a hard time using my subs in court if i stopped paying the TV license
I don't have any virgin tv channels or box at all as seen on my bill on I believe page2 after someone tried to be a detective hoping to catch me out
so it's clearly possible to have no TV service at all with virgin but it likely would cost them money to remove your free channels and I guess whilst you still have a box theres always the chance you could upgrade again where as if you have no box at all you probably wouldn't miss anything or be tempted
Last edited:
Why not ring the local police station and just reassure them you've not committed a crime recently? Make sure they know that you're doing what they ask.
Because about 3mins, 4p and not being a **** will sort everything?
I'm being a **** for not offering up the types of information companies pay for?
are you ****** serious?
have you ever heard of a "data broker"?
I should not be pressured into proving I am not breaking the law.
It is for them to determine I am breaking the law and if they are unable to do that without me giving it to them on a plate then they should stop hassling people and treating them like criminals.
as I said even the CPS don't automatic take you to court unless they have enough evidence to potentially get a conviction and thats even if you have been arrested for a crime!
the BBC get away with bully tactics and threats because loads of people like you are prepared to bend over for them even if you are doing nothing illegal
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
So its ok for Apple to send me a letter asking why I haven't bought an Apple device, and if I refuse to respond its okay for them to take me to court to find out why I haven't bought an Apple device?
What makes the TV licence any different. If I need one, I'll buy one, no one has the right to ask me why I haven't and no one can automatically treat me like I'm breaking the law by assuming I both don't have one AND need one because I do watch live TV.
No one has a right to take you to court to understand a situation... thats absurd. They have no right to know why I don't have a tv licence, they can take me to court to try andprove I do require a licence and don't have one, they can't do it on a whim with the sole intention of finding out if I need one or not.
Either way, while I don't assume that this kind of thing will all lead to 1984 style situations, I still feel very uncomfortable with the ease with which people accept they must hand over information when asked by anyone without ANY reason for having that information. YOU should get to choose who you give any of your own information to, how much of it and when. You can't harass everyone hoping to catch one bad egg, you can't treat everyone as guilty with no proof.. the police can't do that, let alone an agency with zero authority over anything at all.
Every time you randomly give up information WITH NO NEED and for no purpose, you simply make it easier for more people/companies to ask for more information and you do eventually end up with a society which will struggle to keep the right to privacy if everyone gives it away without thinking for so long it becomes normal. The simple fact is the TV licencing thing is PROOF this is the case, because an agency with no authority to act or demand anything routinely barges into peoples homes with most people unaware they have no authority, its become so normal most people give in instantly without thinking they can simply tell them to **** off.
EDIT:- whats the legality of watching live streams of say football illegally? Do you need a tv licence to do so because its a live broadcast, or does the fact its illegal mean its not covered. slightly more seriously, is the tv licence only for specific live broadcasts from English sources, IE is it for any normally accessible live broadcast in the UK, do you need one if you use a sat box and get some eastern European tv package for sports or whatever?
Last edited: