TV Licence “Unenforceable”?

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by nomadking

So are they simply going away if a man answers? Yes or No?
How are they being "targeted"? If there is also a man there, then aren't they jointly liable, just as in a shared property with a joint tenancy. Or is it in that situation they pay and avoid proceedings.
Are women-only households more likely not to pay? If so, then it can be no surprise if more women than men are pursued.

Again I ask you about your naivety?

Anyway I will take the anecdotal evidence from people like Black Belt Barrister and ChilliJonCarne on youtube rather than discuss this matter with you any further. My view will not change and neither will yours so what is the point?

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

Again I ask you about your naivety?

Anyway I will take the anecdotal evidence from people like Black Belt Barrister and ChilliJonCarne on youtube rather than discuss this matter with you any further. My view will not change and neither will yours so what is the point?

What about the little things called FACTS.

Still zero evidence of "targeting".
If a disproportionate number of women-only households, don't pay, get caught, and continue not to pay, then it is common sense that more women than men will be prosecuted. It's 74%/26% split, so not overwhelmingly disproportionate.
How would a household tax system change anything? Perhaps the German system of being per household regardless of owning equipment or viewing might be simpler. The issue of non-payment would still be there, so doesn't solve anything.


Link

There is no evidence that TV Licensing deliberately discriminates against any group, and gender is not a factor in the way TV Licensing collects and enforces the licence fee.

[Mr K]

Maybe a tax on Sky/VM/Netflix etc. True it might come back to the customer, but those with the ability to pay for these extras. A basic tv service guarantee for all.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Maybe a tax on Sky/VM/Netflix etc. True it might come back to the customer, but those with the ability to pay for these extras. A basic tv service guarantee for all.

No, that’s simply mad. Voluntary subscriptions will ensure that only those who want to watch or listen to the BBC have to pay.

Why should people who don’t watch the BBC have to pay?

As the commercial channels receive most of their funding from advertisements and subscriptions, it is unfair to expect the viewers that tune into those channels to pay for a TV licence.

[Sirius]

The TV tax is antiquated and should have gone the way of the Dodo years ago. It's simple to make any service subscription. So just make the BBC subscription and then those that use their service pay for the service.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

No, that’s simply mad. Voluntary subscriptions will ensure that only those who want to watch or listen to the BBC have to pay.

Why should people who don’t watch the BBC have to pay?

As the commercial channels receive most of their funding from advertisements and subscriptions, it is unfair to expect the viewers that tune into those channels to pay for a TV licence.

People want the BBC, but don't want to pay. They want new programming, they want radio, tv and website etc, without ads. What's your solution?

---------- Post added at 20:08 ---------- Previous post was at 20:06 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

The TV tax is antiquated and should have gone the way of the Dodo years ago. It's simple to make any service subscription. So just make the BBC subscription and then those that use their service pay for the service.

Its a public service broadcaster. It not just tv, its radio , website etc. People may say they don't use it, but they do. It's an essential public service, not pay tv.

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by nomadking

What about the little things called FACTS.

Still zero evidence of "targeting".
If a disproportionate number of women-only households, don't pay, get caught, and continue not to pay, then it is common sense that more women than men will be prosecuted. It's 74%/26% split, so not overwhelmingly disproportionate.
How would a household tax system change anything? Perhaps the German system of being per household regardless of owning equipment or viewing might be simpler. The issue of non-payment would still be there, so doesn't solve anything.


Link

Linking me or quoting the BBC is not gonna wash. It is not like they lie. Plus Capita are also untrustworthy. BBC and fact I am actually laughing at you and you have now answered my naivety question . Will be no more replies :-)

---------- Post added at 20:14 ---------- Previous post was at 20:13 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

People want the BBC, but don't want to pay. They want new programming, they want radio, tv and website etc, without ads. What's your solution?

---------- Post added at 20:08 ---------- Previous post was at 20:06 ----------



Its a public service broadcaster. It not just tv, its radio , website etc. People may say they don't use it, but they do. It's an essential public service, not pay tv.

Advertise job done

Not gonna be forced to pay for the BBC after all their hiding of Peodos and the like over the years . The institution needs to go

Essential?? no it is not

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Mr K

People want the BBC, but don't want to pay. They want new programming, they want radio, tv and website etc, without ads. What's your solution?

---------- Post added at 20:08 ---------- Previous post was at 20:06 ----------



Its a public service broadcaster. It not just tv, its radio , website etc. People may say they don't use it, but they do. It's an essential public service, not pay tv.

Grief counselling

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Mr K

People want the BBC, but don't want to pay. They want new programming, they want radio, tv and website etc, without ads. What's your solution?

---------- Post added at 20:08 ---------- Previous post was at 20:06 ----------



Its a public service broadcaster. It not just tv, its radio , website etc. People may say they don't use it, but they do. It's an essential public service, not pay tv.

I can honestly say I have NOT used any BBC TV radio or etc forr many years. I have no need for it. I've even had a vist from a TVL enforce, gladly allowed him in for him to admit I didn't need to pay.

It should be dispensed with and made a subscription servie.

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

Again I ask you about your naivety?

Given your next sentence, you should probably worry more about your naivety.

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

Anyway I will take the anecdotal evidence ...

---------- Post added at 22:51 ---------- Previous post was at 22:49 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

People want the BBC

I think you mean "some people want the BBC".
I really dont care that much, I rarely watch it - in 2025 the only thing I have watched on it is Football.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Maybe a tax on Sky/VM/Netflix etc. True it might come back to the customer, but those with the ability to pay for these extras. A basic tv service guarantee for all.

How about a tax on anything from a supermarket that isn’t the bargain own brand? If you want Heinz, Kellogg’s, McCain etc,(you get the point)……… tax them more.

True it might come back to the customer, but if they have the ability to pay for these better brands. A basic food quality for all.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Mr K

People want the BBC, but don't want to pay. They want new programming, they want radio, tv and website etc, without ads. What's your solution?

---------- Post added at 20:08 ---------- Previous post was at 20:06 ----------



Its a public service broadcaster. It not just tv, its radio , website etc. People may say they don't use it, but they do. It's an essential public service, not pay tv.

I dont use it, why should i have to pay for it.

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by Paul

Given your next sentence, you should probably worry more about your naivety.


---------- Post added at 22:51 ---------- Previous post was at 22:49 ----------


I think you mean "some people want the BBC".
I really dont care that much, I rarely watch it - in 2025 the only thing I have watched on it is Football.

Yes but they back it up with evidence from real cases. Have a look. Would much rather take anecdotal evidence than anything the BBC says. Black Belt Barrister is a proper Barrister so knows the law .

There are hordes and hordes of accounts that back up the anecdotal evidence and on the other side the BBC and Capita. The naivety stems from him quoting the BBC

[Sephiroth]

Here’s the problem (apart from the BBC being a woke, lefty bastion - but that lot have infiltrated everything):

An entirely commercial BBC would potentially be at the editorial mercy of its owner. That said, ITV seems to be doing OK in respect of editorial independence.

A subscription model would only work if the competitive price the BBC would have to charge (e.g. £11/month) was matched by cost cutting.

My conclusion, therefore, is that the BBC has had its day and should be wound up.

The BBC isn't going to go subscription, and I don't think it will have adverts. It's too important a national institution for it to go away and leave us only with American venture capitalists controlling our news, radio and being responsible for discovering and promoting British artists.

We might have to look at a tax on the streamers. The BBC has helped them when it comes to production in this country. One of the reasons so much stuff is filmed in Britain, along with tax breaks, is that generations of on-screen and off-screen talent have been brought up via the BBC and Channel 4. Black Mirror is a big hit for Netflix but it was C4 who took the risk on it and the BBC that gave Charlie Brooker his break into television. Lots of British writers, directors and performers in Hollywood were helped to get where they are via theatre and our television, which we've helped pay for.

We need to protect our national interest here. We cannot keep giving it up so American Silicon Valley investors can make more and more money from us only to avoid paying us any taxes anyway. The BBC has to remain British, publically owned and do it's job promoting British arts.