lol tvlicensing

So its not causing you enough harassment to do anything about it, so there you go.



I didn't say I was taking anyone to court for harassment;

I responded to "If you don't respond to their questions, they'll continue to do so"

With:

"if they do it becomes harassment. lol!"

Which is correct as far as I can see?
 
Given that you have failed to reply or get in touch with them, obviously they now think that you are not replying as you don't have a licence, and therefore have a right to take you to court to understand the situation. If the court finds that you ought to have done something to remedy the situation (ie getting back in touch) they will probably order you to pay costs.
even the criminal prosecution service won't try to take you to court if they don't think there is enough evidence even if you have been arrested for a crime....

BBC evidence is what?
Does not own tv license...

how is that even comparable?

you know what if i go to court. I am claiming compensation for stress and anxiety issues for the last 6 months.
I will play on my autism like hell and my GP already has me on record as having anxiety problems.

treat them like they treat me.
 
Last edited:
It means they don't watch live TV. They download everything they watch :D

This, I live in a household that has Sky TV (look at my age :p), however I do not turn on a TV and watch live TV unless I'm incredibly bored and even then I pay half attention to it.

When I move out, my personal views would be not to pay TV as there are only one or two series' I actually would like to watch and these are only ever on every now and then and most of the time they're canceled.

I don't agree with the way TV Licencing get licence invoice payments, they rely on threatening and harrasing people, if they come to your door, they'll claim that you're breaking the law (plenty of videos on youtube displaying this) and will threaten you with whatever they can. The BBC are corrupt and rely on threatening people in order to get their wages.
 
It means they don't watch live TV. They download everything they watch :D

nothing wrong with that even channel 5 has on demand which comes in handy for watching person of interest :) or did when they had the episodes up still.

the bbc missed a beat they should have teamed up with all the UK channels and had one big on demand service that requires a different possibly cheaper license that only covers on demand.
the profit from this new license could have been distrusted to the other people in the partnership based on view count for their channels content
 
Last edited:
So some of you in here are saying that even if you have a TV and the ability to watch live feeds, because you claim not to, you should never have to pay a TV licence? So say I have a Sky subscription and a TV or three, because I state I never watch it, I don't have to pay a licence? That does not make sense to me as it would always be a case of your word against theirs, Surely if you own a TV and the equipment, you pay the licence?
 
To be fair, they don't really require much information about you at all when you declare that you don't need one on their website. Only takes 2 minutes. The declaration is more for the poperty than the person(s) living within it.

My partner watched Live TV so we've had one for a years and in 4 years I never once watched a program or recorded one as it was being shown live. All she ever watched was 10-15 minutes of daybreak in the morning while getting ready.

So i convinced her to have a trial period of not watching it. (she insisted she'd miss it). 6 months in and she hasn't mentioned once that she wishes we could watch Live TV again.

I bought the 1-10 boxset for Smallville and it's the only thing I've watched since. 3 Months later and I'm only at the end of Season 8. lol. And that's just 1 series...there are dozens I want to watch. Watching these on Live Tv would suck...1 Ep per week?? I'd go mad. I'm a binger.lol
 
So some of you in here are saying that even if you have a TV and the ability to watch live feeds, because you claim not to, you should never have to pay a TV licence? So say I have a Sky subscription and a TV or three, because I state I never watch it, I don't have to pay a licence? That does not make sense to me as it would always be a case of your word against theirs, Surely if you own a TV and the equipment, you pay the licence?

Well if you have a Sky subscription I don't know of any other real use for it so yes. But having PC, TV, Games Console etc etc it isn't the case. All these things have looooooads of other uses other than watching Live TV.

In fact my TV is used for about everything BUT Live TV.
Gaming, Streaming, Catch Up, HDMI to PC, Music etc. Just not Live TV.

What they really should have set up is a way so that you CANT use the service without paying. Like everything else in the world. It needs updating!!
 
So some of you in here are saying that even if you have a TV and the ability to watch live feeds, because you claim not to, you should never have to pay a TV licence? So say I have a Sky subscription and a TV or three, because I state I never watch it, I don't have to pay a licence? That does not make sense to me as it would always be a case of your word against theirs, Surely if you own a TV and the equipment, you pay the licence?

How does simply owning a TV/digital receiver = watching live TV? It's a matter of whether you use it or not to watch/record live TV. As for Sky etc. sub, you wouldn't be getting a TV service from one of those companies if you weren't using it unless you're happy to throw money away.
 
So some of you in here are saying that even if you have a TV and the ability to watch live feeds, because you claim not to, you should never have to pay a TV licence? So say I have a Sky subscription and a TV or three, because I state I never watch it, I don't have to pay a licence? That does not make sense to me as it would always be a case of your word against theirs, Surely if you own a TV and the equipment, you pay the licence?

Yes, in theory you could pay for Sky, never watch it (or record with it), and you would not need a licence.

Owning a TV and associated equipment does not mean you need a licence.
 
So some of you in here are saying that even if you have a TV and the ability to watch live feeds, because you claim not to, you should never have to pay a TV licence? So say I have a Sky subscription and a TV or three, because I state I never watch it, I don't have to pay a licence? That does not make sense to me as it would always be a case of your word against theirs, Surely if you own a TV and the equipment, you pay the licence?

I think if you had a contract for a live service such as sky, that would be proof enough, or put it this way, I wouldn't want to try and argue that as its a bit of an absurd argument, no reasonable person would pay for a service they don't use.

Even though technically, one could subscribe and never watch it, if they were a bit loopy.

Owning a TV on the other hand is very different, its the most appropriate thing to buy if you want a large-ish screen for watching your DVDs/downloads and playing games on etc.
I dread to think how much a 50 inch PC monitor would cost, if they made them...
 
Last edited:
You could get a Sky TV Package just to get access to Sky's On Demand Service which would not need a TV Licence as long as you did not use it to watch any 'Live' broadcasts.
 
Seems appropriate

LOL IM WAISTING THEIR TIME

Or you could just politely write to them explaining you don't own a tv and it's not all that exciting, would be more responsible and adult.
 
You could get a Sky TV Package just to get access to Sky's On Demand Service which would not need a TV Licence as long as you did not use it to watch any 'Live' broadcasts.

Actually, is there any reason Sky couldn't just prevent you access to their live TV if you only wanted an on demand package?
 
Seems appropriate

LOL IM WAISTING THEIR TIME

Or you could just politely write to them explaining you don't own a tv and it's not all that exciting, would be more responsible and adult.

And waste you own time instead? I don't see the logic in that.

I stand nothing to gain, why would I do something for no reason?

Ok I might have to put the odd letter in the bin, but its not much effort as I have to put other junk mail in the bin also.
 
To be fair, they don't really require much information about you at all when you declare that you don't need one on their website. Only takes 2 minutes. The declaration is more for the poperty than the person(s) living within it.

My partner watched Live TV so we've had one for a years and in 4 years I never once watched a program or recorded one as it was being shown live. All she ever watched was 10-15 minutes of daybreak in the morning while getting ready.

So i convinced her to have a trial period of not watching it. (she insisted she'd miss it). 6 months in and she hasn't mentioned once that she wishes we could watch Live TV again.

I bought the 1-10 boxset for Smallville and it's the only thing I've watched since. 3 Months later and I'm only at the end of Season 8. lol. And that's just 1 series...there are dozens I want to watch. Watching these on Live Tv would suck...1 Ep per week?? I'd go mad. I'm a binger.lol

Hey mate, I'm going to setup a form, could you please just fill it in for me? All I need is your names and your addresses and perhaps your card details for future reference, perhaps your National Insurance number?

Giving out your information is stupid, it doesn't matter how long it takes. Giving out information when it's not needed or the person asking has no legal authority is wrong. If a police officer walked up to you, walking down the street, asked your name and address what would you say?


I'm the same, I watched Spooks Series 1-10 in a month.
 
Back
Top Bottom