TV Licence Super Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ken
  • Start date Start date
muon said:
They don't want a pay as you use model. If that happened, their income would decrease significantly unless they increase the licence price. But then they would start having to compete with commercial media organisations.

They just want as many households to pay as they can. The best way to do that is just give everyone access and the realisation that most people won't be able to help themselves.

It is why unsolicited goods rules exist, but this happens to be an exception.
Click to expand...

Requiring a logon doesn't require a pay as you use model. They could use exactly the same model, but just require verification of a TV licence as was suggested.
 
So after a year and a bit I finally received one of their letters. Apparently one of their "enforcement team officers (lol)" has been authorised to visit.

I'll get the kettle ready :D
 
ov_sjo said:
I suspect the reality will be the courts will side with the BBC as they typically do if cases end up at court, even if the evidence is flakey.
Click to expand...


They lie in Court to gain Warrants of Access, they lie all the time saying they have 'Evidence' that they need to gain a Warrant when they don't, there are hundreds of videos of them in action on YouTube and the Police generally aid and assist them which they are not supposed to do at all, the Police are only there to prevent a Breach of the Peace which the BBCLicensing/Capita thugs are creating by just being there.

Even when they gain access unlawfully they then use every trick they can to push for an Obstruction, they will use this in Court to 'justify' their 'Case' against you. Even with a 'Warrant' they can only enter if you let them in, they cannot use force to gain entry like break-down a door or use a locksmith, all they do is intimidate and trick you into incriminating yourself. Never speak to them, don't even open the door to them, they have no authority whatsoever, they are just door-to-door salesmen on commission.
 
TV licence - Do I need it?

I saw the thread about cancelling and it got me wondering, I don't have any TV subscriptions like Netflix, Amazon Prime, Sky, Virgin etc...

I do have a TV hooked to my PC for playing games and watching Blu Rays on. But that's it...

I've been paying for months with the above situation. Do I need to?
 
Kelt said:
Are you going to let them in then?
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't he/she?

I've had one visit in the last few years, they were polite and professional, just asked me to switch on the TV and demonstrate there was no live signal.

I truly can't understand anyone refusing entry unless they have something to hide.
 
Last edited:
agnes said:
I saw the thread about cancelling and it got me wondering, I don't have any TV subscriptions like Netflix, Amazon Prime, Sky, Virgin etc...

I do have a TV hooked to my PC for playing games and watching Blu Rays on. But that's it...

I've been paying for months with the above situation. Do I need to?
Click to expand...

Its simple. Don't watch live TV then you don't need a licence. From Sep Iplayer on demand needs a licence but not Amazon, Netflix or the other on demand.
 
I don't believe Netflix or Amazon carry any live broadcast material so don't require a TV license, not sure how that works under the changes to "catch up" legality where they have BBC shows, etc. but as you pay for those via those services I suspect they are licensed differently to the same thing on iPlayer, etc. though that point seems very vague - one of my relatives is having a melt down at the moment as they don't own a TV or watch any live TV but do sometimes buy BBC shows via Amazon, etc. and just had the leaflet through about catch up changes which isn't clear on that point, but a bit threatening in tone, and no one at the BBC has given them a straight answer when they called them.
 
Diddums said:
Oh boy, here we go.



Edit: no. No you don't. That won't stop the usual from high-horsing the hell out of this thread though.
Click to expand...

Nice to see you jumping in with a "writing fallacy" straight away - predicting what will happen after making your first post in an attempt to be proven correct early on, as the name suggests, they should be avoided.

The "high-horsing" you mention is really just mis-information from people who don't know the answer. Don't think many people say you definitely need one when you don't and then tell you they are on the moral high-ground for doing so.
 
Thread merge. This has been answered a few times, but at least you can continue to talk about it in here :)
 
SixTwoSix said:
Why wouldn't he/she?

I've had two visits in the last few years, they were polite and professional both times, just asked me to switch on the TV and demonstrate there was no live signal.

I truly can't understand anyone refusing entry unless they have something to hide.
Click to expand...
Its simple letting them in for me led to nothing but harassment. So I don't let them in any more. Why would you let sales people into your house which is all they are?

Would you let someone in from Microsoft or Apple to make sure you are licenced? I don't let them in any more as I have proven to them I don't have a TV and they still send threating letters and try constant "inspections" despite them knowing I don't even own a TV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom