'Austerity' at the BBC

[carlwaring]

Originally Posted by Sirius

It would not surprised if they paid anyway to get the idiots from TVL off there backs.

Then they're idiots. You can easily "get TVL off your back" by co-operating with them. Yes, whether you are required to do so by law or not

---------- Post added at 20:58 ---------- Previous post was at 20:55 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

There is some video on this forum...

That forum is the worst advert for "anti-TVL" supporters ever. It's a complete laughing stock which no-one in their right mind would take seriously.

Carl if i don't want to use it WHY am i in essence forced to pay for it via this tax ???

In the same way that, even if you don't use Libraries or Schools you are forced to pay for them via a tax. The difference being that if you don't want to watch any live TV? Don't pay the TVL. You can still use catch-up services.

But that's a whole other loop-hole that needs closing

Originally Posted by Sirius

There is some video on this forum showing the TVL idiots at work.

That vids been taken down mate,

Thinking about it don't think that general taxation should include the tv licence.General taxation should be reserved for essential services .Therefore subscription is the way forward i feel.We don't force people to pay road tax if they don't own or use a car so why the tv licence which does force people to pay it even if they don't watch BBC channels

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Sirius

There is some video on this forum showing the TVL idiots at work.

---------- Post added at 20:44 ---------- Previous post was at 20:41 ----------



Carl if i don't want to use it WHY am i in essence forced to pay for it via this tax ???

Because you DO want to watch it really don't you...

[dilli-theclaw]

Originally Posted by martyh

sorry mate but it does , Section 363 of the Communications Act 2003. is quite clear on that



http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/part/4

Interesting - TV licensing told me it doesn't.

And they seem to say so on their own site.

'TV Licensing will visit a sample of NLC addressesto confirmthat there is no
television in use at that address orthat television receiving equipment at the
address is not usedto receivetelevision programme services. A methodology
will be usedto determine which addresses will make upthe sample for visiting.
This methodology is outlined in Appendix II'

Still - I think £6.06 a moth is well worth it so it doesn't bother me that much

When I did spend two years without a license I didn't get any letters or hassle, but I'm sure a lot if people do.

Originally Posted by dilligaf1701

And they seem to say so on their own site.
.

Then they are wrong ,their site does hint at it with this line from your quote

or that television receiving equipment at the
address is not used to receive television programme services.

It is vague and perhaps deliberately so ,but the act of law itself is very clear

---------- Post added at 21:28 ---------- Previous post was at 21:12 ----------

Originally Posted by carlwaring

Then they're idiots. You can easily "get TVL off your back" by co-operating with them. Yes, whether you are required to do so by law or not

Not that easy, even the TVL site states that letters will not stop permanently and if they send letters then shortly after big ugly gorrilas with come peeping through your windows .

[Osem]

A quick search for TV licence harrassment on YouTube yielded some very interesting viewing.

The TV licencing guy @ 9m20s on this video confirms that there's no need to licence a TV which is used solely for viewing DVDs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfHRhXW1hno

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by martyh

That vids been taken down mate,

Thinking about it don't think that general taxation should include the tv licence.General taxation should be reserved for essential services .Therefore subscription is the way forward i feel.We don't force people to pay road tax if they don't own or use a car so why the tv licence which does force people to pay it even if they don't watch BBC channels

I know where there is another link to that video

---------- Post added at 21:35 ---------- Previous post was at 21:35 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

A quick search for TV licence harrassment on YouTube yielded some very interesting viewing.

Indeed there are lots of them



---------- Post added at 21:40 ---------- Previous post was at 21:35 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

A quick search for TV licence harrassment on YouTube yielded some very interesting viewing.

What i don't understand is why they have to visit, lets face it they say they can tell what channel you are watching via one of there detector van So if that's the case they do not need to visit and instead just park up out side and use the van.

BTW i know the vans are a figment of our imagination and in fact are just vans with detector van written on the side with nothing in them but we have to play the game for Carl.


This video is great and it gives me an idea what to do with all the spam mail i get from companies

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g_2iSA76pg

[carlwaring]

Originally Posted by martyh

Thinking about it don't think that general taxation should include the tv licence.General taxation should be reserved for essential services.

Again, some would say that a national broadcaster free from commercial pressure is essential.

Therefore subscription is the way forward i feel.

No. For all the reasons previously stated.

We don't force people to pay road tax if they don't own or use a car so why the tv licence which does force people to pay it even if they don't watch BBC channels

Because it's a TV LICENCE, not a BBC LICENCE.

---------- Post added at 21:59 ---------- Previous post was at 21:57 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

Not that easy, even the TVL site states that letters will not stop permanently and if they send letters then shortly after big ugly gorrilas with come peeping through your windows.

Only if you don't respond to the letters

---------- Post added at 21:59 ---------- Previous post was at 21:59 ----------

Originally Posted by Osem

The TV licencing guy @ 9m20s on this video confirms that there's no need to licence a TV which is used solely for viewing DVDs.

Which is confirmed on the TVL website.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by carlwaring

Because it's a TV LICENCE, not a BBC LICENCE.

.

Wrong, the only reason this tax is imposed is to fund the BBC, if the BBC closed tomorrow there would be no need for this tax. So its a BBC tax

[carlwaring]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Wrong

Actually, I'm not. I am, in fact, 100% correct.

Read your TV Licence It doesn't mention the BBC anywhere.

The rest of your statement is moot as it is completely un-provable.

Originally Posted by carlwaring

Actually, I'm not. I am, in fact, 100% correct.

Read your TV Licence It doesn't mention the BBC anywhere.

and nor does the communications act 2003 .The reason why it applies to all tv signal receivers is because it is hard to modify a tv to not receive BBC signals ,the license also covers radio and phones as well ,is it feasible to block just bbc frequencies

Put more simply if a device is capable of receiving 1 channel it will be capable of receiving all of them unless they are encrypted.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by carlwaring

Actually, I'm not. I am, in fact, 100% correct.

Read your TV Licence It doesn't mention the BBC anywhere.

The rest of your statement is moot as it is completely un-provable.

Here you go Carl

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-i...pay-for-top13/

All of this content – and the television channels, radio stations and online spaces where audiences can find it – is paid for by the licence fee, allowing BBC's UK services to remain free of advertisements and independent of shareholder and political interest.

---------- Post added at 22:26 ---------- Previous post was at 22:22 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

and nor does the communications act 2003 .The reason why it applies to all tv signal receivers is because it is hard to modify a tv to not receive BBC signals ,the license also covers radio and phones as well ,is it feasible to block just bbc frequencies

Put more simply if a device is capable of receiving 1 channel it will be capable of receiving all of them unless they are encrypted.

Which is what the BBC should be told to do, that way they will need to produce good television or close, at the moment they produce some good and lots of crap and then just hold the hat out and say "please sir give me some more"

[Osem]

Just to clarify:

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/

You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder.

Watching TV on the internet You need to be covered by a licence if you watch TV online at the same time as it's being broadcast on conventional TV in the UK or the Channel Islands. Video recorders and digital recorders like Sky+ You need a licence if you record TV as it's broadcast, whether that's on a conventional video recorder or digital box. Mobile phones A licence covers you to watch TV as it's broadcast on a mobile phone, whether you're at home or out and about.

Originally Posted by Sirius

Which is what the BBC should be told to do, that way they will need to produce good television or close, at the moment they produce some good and lots of crap and then just hold the hat out and say "please sir give me some more"

I agree.
Don't get me wrong i am a supporter of the principle behind the BBC but i do feel that because of the way it is funded it does just enough to get by .The licence may have been fine and a good way to fund the BBC up to recent times but is now way out of date .
I feel it is falling into the trap of cheap reality tv and endless repeats on the other bbc channels to justify their existence whilst maintaining a standard of living for it's execs that would put the most greedy politician to shame

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by martyh

I agree.
Don't get me wrong i am a supporter of the principle behind the BBC but i do feel that because of the way it is funded it does just enough to get by .The licence may have been fine and a good way to fund the BBC up to recent times but is now way out of date .
I feel it is falling into the trap of cheap reality tv and endless repeats on the other bbc channels to justify their existence whilst maintaining a standard of living for it's execs that would put the most greedy politician to shame

Its been like that for a while now.