It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

UK TV Licence law, facts without BS, remember deny ignorance?

page: 6
18
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   
TV license is a crock of #.

I barely watch BBC programs so I don't see why I should have to pay the license when all I watch is bloody sky.

I don't see why my money should go into paying for crap programs like eastenders and Johnathon ross stupid salary when I do not use such service.




posted on Feb, 13 2015 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: grainofsand

Snap. I had the same letter last year and opted to set up a direct debit after never paying for a TV licence. Maybe the decision would have been different if your points are accurate? Too late now lol.

In my opinion, it's worth the money just to keep the BBC going. Although many disagree, I see them as one of the last media outlets that aren't as compromised and degraded by commercial intrusions. They also set a high standard no other corporation, that I know of, can equal so consistently.

Infinite Monkey Cage (science)
Philosopher's Arms (philosophy)
History of the World in a 100 Objects (history)
Comedy podcasts/radio shows
Radio 4
5 Live
Radio 1
1Xtra
Match of the Day
David Attenborough
Melvin Bragg
etc...

One day the BBC will fall and commercials will be inflicted on us every 7-10 minutes. It'll be a sad day...




Fine if you use the BBC you should rightfully pay the fee.

I dont

So I dam well resent having to pay for YOUR programs when don't use the service.



posted on Feb, 13 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
So I dam well resent having to pay for YOUR programs when don't use the service.

That is essentially how I used to feel, because in reality it is a tax on all TV channels in the UK as broadcast live.
I stopped watching TV as broadcast so no longer required a licence. I then stopped really giving a toss about this tax/licence because it no longer applied to me.
I do feel sorry for more vulnerable folk who believe the lies of 'enforcement officers' and get intiminated into buying a licence, and as I said earlier in the thread I have got rid of them for a disabled neighbour before, and will again, every time.
I can't be arsed joining a campaign and petitioning Parliament though, the tax/licence doesn't affect me so I ignore it, and I could miss the amusement of their annual visits lol.



posted on Feb, 13 2015 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Have paid for the BBC for many a year and the typical sky movie package

I hardly ever watch the BBC but listen to radio 2 news while travelling too and from work

Sky is far more expensive and after while the so many channels you get is rather bland and the same movies are on nearly all the time with repeats on a lot

Some people watch BBC and don't pay,these people are thieves

But these people also download music for nothing and watch films for free:-/ so I expect nothing better

Saw a mate the other day and he raved on about Slash's latest album with myles Kennedy on vocals saying "ahh mate I'll burn you a copy "

I said thanks but I will buy from iTunes as I like to put some money in the collective pocket of the band as they deserve payment

People don't think it's theft if they don't have a hard physical copy of it,and that's wrong it's still theft no more different than going into a music shop and just picking up a cd and walking out or marching straight into the cinema without paying after barging past the people who are in line waiting to purchase tickets

I do think it's wrong that if you do buy a new tv or even video recorder in the past they ask very firmly for your street address :-/

Went with a mate years ago to a retail shop and he was trying to buy a video recorder and the shop assistant at the till kept pushing him for his address or he could not buy it

"Fking stick that VCR up your rse I will go elsewhere" was my mates reply

BBC isn't too bad even if I don't watch it,still pay as from time to time I might actualy do so-



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:14 AM
link   
What a lot of people don't realise, is that a small percentage of the licence fee is used to maintain the transmission infrastructure (broadcast masts, satellite uplinks, cabling, relay stations, which ALL channels use, including ITV, C4, Sky, Virgin.

It could be argued that the non-BBC channels should pay into a pot towards the maintenance of the transmission infrastructure, and they may well do, but currently the licence must be paid even if you only watch ITV, because they still use the transmission infrastructure.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: BMorris

Only needs to be paid if you watch or record live TV.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 07:27 AM
link   
The BBC is a nest of padophile protectors. Refuse to fund them. You are not required to tell the inspectors anything, they are not law officers. Anything means your name, whether you reside at the address, if you own a TV,or watch said TV. All they have to act on are your admissions, tell them nothing,they know nothing.
Don't finance paedophile gangs,don't fund media bias and don't be foolish enough to allow their goons access to your property. Ignore all letters, you don't even have to answer the door, these types exist on threats and menaces,deny them.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Dabrazzo

Correct, I never said otherwise. I was simply pointing out why it still has to be paid only if you watch ITV etc.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Whereismypassword

To be quite fair on that store assistant, they were only doing what was legally required at the time. It used to be the case that they could not sell you a tv, video, etc unless you gave them your name and address for reporting purposes. I do not know if that is still the case. I suspect it might be.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 09:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
After reading some of the completely inaccurate posts on ATS making wild claims about the UK television laws I felt the need to present the reality of the situation here in this topic.
In all the time I've lurked and been a member, this tired old subject keeps coming up and the ignorance is unbelievable, so here is a rational critique:

Here is a photo of a demand letter I got a couple of weeks ago...

...you will note my highlighted section where 'TV Licencing' are describing the law exactly as it is.


The law.
It is a criminal offence to watch or record programmes as they're being shown on TV unless you have a licence. It doesn't matter what equipment you use: colour or black and white television; computer, mobile phone, games console; digital box; or DVD/VHS recorder.
If you watch TV, on these devices or anything else, you need a licence


IT IS NOT A CRIME TO OWN ANY DEVICE CAPABLE OF RECEIVING TV WITHOUT A LICENCE.
IT IS A CRIME TO USE ANY DEVICE TO RECEIVE BROADCAST TV WITHOUT A LICENCE.

I haven't had a TV licence for over a decade. I get letters 20 or 30 times a year, and a knock on the door every year or so.
I ignore the letters, and when the door knocks I tell the 'enforcement officers' they have zero authority over me, they are not welcome on my property, and if they do not leave immediately I will use reasonable force to eject them as they know I legally can.
One time as they left my property I was told they needed my name 'to update our records' to which I replied I couldn't give a toss what you need, until or unless you guys ever have any authority over me I'm telling you nothing.

A threat of returning with a warrant and police was laughed out of my yard as I reminded them that in order to obtain a warrant they must supply a Magistrate with 'reasonable suspicion' and it has already been established that not having a licence in itself does NOT meet the standard of reasonable suspicion that I am USING any device to watch TV as it is broadcast.
One of the guys mentioned detector vans and I laughed again reminding him that there has never been a conviction in the UK based on detector van evidence so piss off, they did.

Now the whole debate of is a licence fee fair is another matter all together, and to be honest I don't really care because all my media comes from the internet, and not 'live as broadcast'.

You can make the case that poor people can't afford the £2.80 per week licence but if they can't, they still do not need a licence if they do not USE a device to watch live broadcast TV. Even if someone has been silly enough to incriminate themselves by admitting they use a device to watch TV, all this talk of draconian fines making children starve or whatever is just sensationalist drama.

In the UK a fine for anything is not a hard punishment. Even if the amount is huge, courts will work out a repayment plan based on income after approved outgoings for housing/food/clothing/child expenses/etc, so if you are not stupid you can end up paying £5 a week or less interest free.
I've paid a few fines over the years and done exactly that with creative accounting. The fine was no punishment then, just the price of a couple of pints each week.

So folks, please get it straight, people are not prosecuted for 'not having a licence' they are prosecuted for 'using a device to receive broadcast TV without a licence. If they are prosecuted and refuse to arrange a payment plan/refuse to pay, then that is a seperate offence - Non payment of criminal fines.
Many years ago I failed to display an 'L plate' (learner) on the front of my motorbike before I passed my test and got a £25 fine. I didn't pay it, moved to another part of the UK, and unknown to myself, an arrest warrant had been issued for my non-payment of a fine. When I next had contact with the cops some years later I was arrested for the warrant and ended up 28 days in prison for non payment of a fine.
I was not sent to prison for failing to display a learner plate, I was sent to prison because with contempt I #ed the courts off and ignored their fine - That is the difference.

In closing, I look at 'TV Licensing' as a private commercial enterprise similar to say Microsoft employees turning up at your door demanding to check your operating system for authenticity. Neither have any authority over you in any way so both can be ignored and forcibly removed from your property, and both need reasonable suspicion that you are breaking the law before any magistrate will even think about issuing any warrant.
It is why I haven't had a licence since around 1999.

Deny ignorance folks. The few UK nationals who go to prison are mostly campaigning protesters refusing to pay the court after conviction as a matter of principle. With the generous UK fine payment plans they are 'won't' pay, not 'can't' pay.

Just remember, you do NOT need a licence to OWN a device capable of receiving TV, but if you USE a device to watch live broadcast TV then you do need a licence.

...oh and as an aside, all TV device vendors are required to get the customer to complete a form detailing the owner so it can be sent to TV licencing. The law does not require the vendor to verify that the information provided by the customer is correct.
Last flat screen I bought with cash and wrote Mickey Mouse of no fixed abode on the form. The saleperson hesitated then chuckled and sold me the screen.


Your as bad as people who drive without car insurance us HONEST people PAY MORE because of twat's like you!!!



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008
So in your eyes it's ok to be forced to pay for something you do not want.. OH OK !!

PMSL



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 09:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raffles
a reply to: wmd_2008
So in your eyes it's ok to be forced to pay for something you do not want.. OH OK !!

PMSL


Do you have one ?



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Nope, i have sky i don't use the bbc service at all.
So i won't be forced into paying for something i do not want.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raffles
Nope, i have sky i don't use the bbc service at all.
So i won't be forced into paying for something i do not want.


Even with sky you still the ability to watch BBC programs or listen to BBC radio stations, I do think they should make the BBC advertise and raise it's funds that way but until then a55holes should pay up like the rest of us, if you and the OP are not happy with the laws of the country why don't you go forth and multiply to a country you are happy to follow the laws of!



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008

Well if a55holes are happy to pay for something they do not want the so be it. pmsl

Me and the OP are not stupid, and we don't let stupid laws dictate what we can do.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: BMorris
a reply to: Dabrazzo

Correct, I never said otherwise. I was simply pointing out why it still has to be paid only if you watch ITV etc.





but currently the licence must be paid even if you only watch ITV, because they still use the transmission infrastructure.


This is not true.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008

originally posted by: Raffles
Nope, i have sky i don't use the bbc service at all.
So i won't be forced into paying for something i do not want.


Even with sky you still the ability to watch BBC programs or listen to BBC radio stations, I do think they should make the BBC advertise and raise it's funds that way but until then a55holes should pay up like the rest of us, if you and the OP are not happy with the laws of the country why don't you go forth and multiply to a country you are happy to follow the laws of!
Just cause you have should not mean you should be forced to pay for it.

I have access to a local lambo car dealership.
Doesn't mean I should be forced to pay for one.

End of the day if you use it you should pay for it. For those that don't pee off and leave us and our money alone



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raffles
a reply to: wmd_2008
So in your eyes it's ok to be forced to pay for something you do not want.. OH OK !!

PMSL


Well, no-one has to watch live TV.

So no-one is forced to pay anything. But if you want a service, and are told beforehand what that service will cost, you either pay for it, do without ..... or as some seem to advocate, steal it. Which is a crime and one, in this case, for which there is no possible excuse for committing.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: AndyMayhew

Well if its a crime to be forced to pay for something i do not want, i'm more than happy to commit it.



posted on Feb, 14 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   
The most comparable thing in the US I can think of - in my limited capacity - are radios. I can turn one on and get a load of stations from everywhere. Don't pay a dime for it, except for the radio.

I can listen to Dave Ramsey and get (relatively) sound financial advice. I can listen to a professional ball game. All sorts.

They obviously have to pay for the radio station. And the people manning them are getting paid somehow. I don't know the details.

I know people can put up a TV antenna and get public stations, but there're only a couple around here. If you have a satellite dish you can also pick up some foreign stations - only have to pay for the satellite dish. I'm not talking about the dishes people get by getting accounts with DirectTV or Dish Network. I mean buying a dish and pick up stations on your own. That may not be possible today, but it was 15+ years ago.

Example is TBN used to use satellites to allow anybody with a dish to pick it up, even if they live in the poorest countries.
edit on 14-2-2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join