The olde TV licence

stopper said:
I can't imagine why people think they would ever need a tv license.
The BBC (or any corporation for that matter) has absolutely no right, to force anyone to pay for any thing, even if they are watching TV. The parliamentary acts (commonly mistaken as laws) just give them permission to chase us for money (create joinder/contract).
When will people wake up to this slavery bull ****.
Anyone who actually thinks they have to bow down to these corporations are just giving up their sovereign rights to life.
Watch tv all you want, just don't answer the door and don't reply to their letters, they can't do a damn thing to you without your co-operation or consent.
Click to expand...


Why do people believe in this freeman of the land nonsense when it is self evidently false?
 
Efour said:
Tell her to get a Video camera and to learn her "rights as a Freeman of the land," then get her to be smug and righteous and stick said device in peoples faces and tell them its your legal right all while being utterly unreasonable and borderline mentally ill.
Click to expand...

Alternatively telling them you are in the Plymouth Brethren might really work.
 
billysielu said:
TVL send threat letters as standard practice.

If they're "To the occupier" you can ignore them (as long as you don't need a TV license). In this case your goal is to not give them your name - or talk to them at all for that matter. They'll continue sending threat letters which can be ignored.

If they're in her name - eventually TVL will summon her to court
Click to expand...

No they won't. They'll threaten with court action, but without proof they can't take someone to court.
 
Strife212 said:
Why do people believe in this freeman of the land nonsense when it is self evidently false?
Click to expand...

Indeed. I've met a few of them who have tried to be difficult. At the end of the day if they don't give me their details when they're required to they leave me no option but to arrest them however much the protest how it's unlawful.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Indeed. I've met a few of them who have tried to be difficult. At the end of the day if they don't give me their details when they're required to they leave me no option but to arrest them however much the protest how it's unlawful.
Click to expand...

Yes the paradox. If you refuse to identify yourself to police then you must have something to hide. Then they will arrest you and force you in to the identification machine where they steal your dna your retina your finger prints all because you refuse to identify yourself, i don't know police sleep at night to be honest.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
Indeed. I've met a few of them who have tried to be difficult. At the end of the day if they don't give me their details when they're required to they leave me no option but to arrest them however much the protest how it's unlawful.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the video of the guy who got stopped by RPU then started arguing that his car wasn't a car but something else and that he wasn't driving it but being transported by it, and other such nonsense. No idea how people can behave like that in public.
 
How much would be saved in administration if the BBC was simply fully funded by taxation? At present a proportion of licence fee money does come from taxation (eg over 75's licences), so why not all of it?
 
I think they like the whole idea of having people searching houses. You can see when they knock they are very excited to search the houses. A large part of it i think is that the guys who go around searching houses get a kick out of it.

I think it is very risky to allow people to knock on doors like that, if they get a women by herself she could be at risk of being drugged by the capita employee, i know someone that was drugged by someone who came around to install their internet by putting something in to their coffee. I think it is a big risk for anyone to allow strangers in their homes like that and they want to go looking through your bedrooms and even these days they want to search your computer history.

This is even worse than Gestapo.
 
markweatherill said:
How much would be saved in administration if the BBC was simply fully funded by taxation? At present a proportion of licence fee money does come from taxation (eg over 75's licences), so why not all of it?
Click to expand...

Lets fund fishing licences out of general taxation too, oh wait that's not very fair as not many people go fishing, but many people watch TV.

How much is many though? where's the line to be drawn? say 1% of people don't watch TV in the UK, that's over half a million people potentially being forced to pay for a service they will never use.
 
I'm moving home and looking at cancelling my TV license as I don't watch live anymore. Can this be legally done however if you have the ability to watch live TV but choose not to?
 
Zatoichi.uK said:
I'm moving home and looking at cancelling my TV license as I don't watch live anymore. Can this be legally done however if you have the ability to watch live TV but choose not to?
Click to expand...


just pull out the tv aerial and coil it up, then fasten it with cable ties.

I gave up on british broadcast tv a long time ago and am merrily throwing unopened TVL threat letters in the bin monthly.

I read a lot about the whole process before deciding to cancel mine (i do not watch tv) and the worst that can happen is you *may* get a summons but apparently they drop the charges before the case is heard - basically they are counting on the summons itself to scare you into paying up, but you must physically appear at court ready to answer the accusation or else it seems you are deemed guilty in absentia.

I do not know the exact terminology but peoples experiences are all over the net if you want to research it further.

you are well within your rights to not pay for a licence if all you use the tv for is dvd, blu ray, ps3 etc - essential a giant monitor
 
Mittens said:
just pull out the tv aerial and coil it up, then fasten it with cable ties.
Click to expand...

You don't even need to bother with that - your assertion that you do not watch live TV and therfore do not require a TV license is enough.

I'd love to know how many of their successful 'convictions' are based purely on evidence gathering, rather than the accused voluntarily admitting they watched tv "I didn't realise I needed a license" - I suspect close to 0.
 
Atlas23 said:
I've always wondered if there was a device that would record live TV and play it back to you 1 second later, therefore making it not live, but still appearing live to the viewer
Click to expand...

You can't record live TV broadcasts, so delaying it doesn't help.
 
what is also very odd is if you buy a new TV you have to give your details to the shop and in the past when I have bought a new TV the shop also make it sound like its the TV you need the licence for and not for watching live TV .....
 
Simian said:
What about watching all these +1 channels!!???!!!

They're showing the program 1 hour later than it's broadcast!! There's most of the ITV, CH4 and CH5 channels, and I even think there's some (if not all) of the BBC channels on +1 now!! ;)
Click to expand...

The +1 channels are still broadcast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom