TV License Loophole?

[Brumerican]

Fwiw. £3 a week is very reasonable . It's. the fact that you Have no choice in the matter that irks.

[Davkaus]

Fwiw. £3 a week is very reasonable . It's. the fact that you Have no choice in the matter that irks.

 

 

I guess the argument is that there's all sorts of stuff that public funds go to that individuals don't use that we all still have to pay for. I have no kids, but I get no tax reduction for schools. I've not been to hospital ever, but I still contribute towards it...The Beeb is less vital than those, but it's just a question of where the line is drawn.

 

For what it's worth, I think almost all of the output is garbage, I have no TV, so consequently don't pay it, and also never use their website or the radio, because I think it's a bit shit. I won't be happy about it, but I think it's inevitable I'll be forced to pay at some point.

 

What I expect them to do, in addition to the TV checks, is just add a compulsary addition to broadband bills, to households that don't already have a TV license.

[Brumerican]

Schools and hospitals are much needed public services . The BBC is not.

I would happily pay for stuff that benefits society regardless of whether it benefitted myself but I just don't see how the BBC provides a service to society. There are free media outlets that are better than the BBC at what they do so if anything they are providing a burden . Why should the public be forced to pay for something that they can get elsewhere for free that is just as good if not better.

Besides natural history what does it truly excell at ? The news is just as manipulative as any other outlet , there is hardly any top class sport on there. Their entertainment output is shameful and it pisses money up the wall at every turn .

[Avfc96]

It should be a pay per view service.

[blandy]

Schools and hospitals are much needed public services . The BBC is not.

I would happily pay for stuff that benefits society regardless of whether it benefitted myself but I just don't see how the BBC provides a service to society. There are free media outlets that are better than the BBC at what they do so if anything they are providing a burden . Why should the public be forced to pay for something that they can get elsewhere for free that is just as good if not better.

Besides natural history what does it truly excell at ? The news is just as manipulative as any other outlet , there is hardly any top class sport on there. Their entertainment output is shameful and it pisses money up the wall at every turn .

Obviously people have different and equally valid views, but personally, Brum, the BBC provides a great service to me - Apart from the Natural History stuff, there's stuff like MoTD, which is free to air football highlights, there's the radio, there's BBC4 and radio stations like 6Music, there's the interwebs that they make, there's the little app thingies for my phone, then there's the news and news analysis, there's TV series, there's Test Match Special..loads of stuff I really enjoy, learn from and just would desperately miss. There's the red button music and sport. For the money it costs me - less than the price of a newspaper each day, it's a ruddy bargain and a marvel.

Yes it's full of London-centric chatterers and whatever, and the management of it is a bloated shambles, but despite that, it's still the most valuable (to me) media service.

I'd pay the 12 quid a month for the radio alone, let alone the TV or internet.

[Brumerican]

Thats fine. But why force people to pay for it who are not fussed about using it ? Either go pay per view or use adverts. It works fine for all the others . I love Attenbrough and Brian Cox but I would still love them if there were a few adverts thrown in.

[limpid]

Licence, not license.

 

The licence fee also part funds all the -four channels, ch4, e4, more4, etc.

[Brumerican]

Licence, not license.

 

The licence fee also part funds all the -four channels, ch4, e4, more4, etc.

Source ?

I know they apllied for a bailout that would have been provided via licence fee money but the idea was scrapped . I can't find anything that says the licence fee pays for anything other than the BBC.

I am happy to be proven wrong mind you.

[Delphouneso]

I'm pretty certain if they do turn up on your doorstep you have the right to refuse them entry for 24 hours, which is more than enough time to hide your TV aerial. I'm not a big watcher of television anyway but back when I was in uni I just rang them up and told them I had a TV but the only thing it was used for was a games console and they never bothered us again. I'm living in France now so it's not something I have to worry about, but with websites like FilmOn.com I can watch all the terrestrial British television I like for free - although I mostly use it to watch re-runs of Premier League and FA Cup games on the FilmOn Football channel.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Delphouneso

[Dr_Pangloss]

Licence, not license.

 

The licence fee also part funds all the -four channels, ch4, e4, more4, etc.

Source ?

I know they apllied for a bailout that would have been provided via licence fee money but the idea was scrapped . I can't find anything that says the licence fee pays for anything other than the BBC.

I am happy to be proven wrong mind you.

According to the CH4 website:

 

'Unlike the BBC, Channel 4 receives no public funding. It is funded entirely by its own commercial activities.

Most of our income comes from advertising revenue.'

 

http://www.channel4.com/info/corporate/legal/frequently-asked-questions-4

 

Odd because I always thought it was partially public funded.

[Davkaus]

I'm pretty certain if they do turn up on your doorstep you have the right to refuse them entry for 24 hours, which is more than enough time to hide your TV aerial. I'm not a big watcher of television anyway but back when I was in uni I just rang them up and told them I had a TV but the only thing it was used for was a games console and they never bothered us again. I'm living in France now so it's not something I have to worry about, but with websites like FilmOn.com I can watch all the terrestrial British television I like for free - although I mostly use it to watch re-runs of Premier League and FA Cup games on the FilmOn Football channel.

 

 

You have the right to refuse them entry until they obtain a search order/warrant through a court and attend your property with the police. If this happens, they must give 7 days' notice to allow you to prepare for a search. Anyone who allows some random minimum wage **** from TVL, who have a habit of lying in their reports, to search their property alone is a fool.

 

Note that TVL have a standing policy to not force entry if they are ever issued a search warrant. If access is refused, there's nothing their "officers" can do, though you risk being held in contempt of court if you tell them this. If you simply don't answer the door though, it seems that they're powerless.

Edited April 6, 2013 by Davkaus

[limpid]

Licence, not license.

 

The licence fee also part funds all the -four channels, ch4, e4, more4, etc.

Source ?

I know they apllied for a bailout that would have been provided via licence fee money but the idea was scrapped . I can't find anything that says the licence fee pays for anything other than the BBC.

I am happy to be proven wrong mind you.

 

Hmmm. I though I knew this but I can't find any references other than the Ch4 / BBC Wordwide partnership. I withdraw this comment (but not the first one)

[saturdaygig]

A compliment from a foreigner if you will. The British give themselves and some of their institutions a hard time. Perhaps it's a national trait, I dunno. You have a wonderful thing in the BBC and also the NHS fwiw. Yet you give out constantly about them. Be careful what you wish for. You should be extremely proud of both.

Saying everything is crap seems to be a national sport, egged on by the media who dissagree with every single thing that anyone ever says, even when its the opposite of what the dissagreed with last week.

[RunRickyRun]

I could get away without paying it but don't. The fee is worth it for BBC4 alone.

[Jimzk5]

Ppv would suit the bbc I think, just dont see how they can implement it, the beeb do some brilliant things, the natural history and nature shows are superb, africa especially, comedy is very hit and miss unless its by ricky gervais they struggle with comedy- Miranda being an obvious example, its absolute shite yet gets series after series but they cancel shooting stars and total wipeout? Really?

Edited April 6, 2013 by Jimzk5