The TV licence makes me rage.

[Cotty]

SpeedMattersNot said:

I get my annual letter asking me if my situations have changed and since they haven't, I sign into the website following the instructions and repeat the process.

So guilty until proven innocent.

[0000]

SpeedMattersNot said:

ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TICK THE BOX THAT SAYS YOU DON'T REQUIRE A TV LICENCE.

It's that simple.

No, it's not.

We've had the letters continuously even after letting them into the house to see we don't have an aerial connected. Moving to a new build seems to have worked though, probably the easiest way to get rid of them without funding their machine.

[Funk]

Moonhawk said:

Funk said:

It isn't a tax......

Snip



http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/...

Fair enough.

However part 23 of the report says:

said:

23. We are not convinced by this argument not least because it has been the case
that a licence has been required to view any television channel in the UK for
many decades. Nevertheless the decision means that from now on the licence
fee will be recognised as a form of hypothecated taxation.

Taxes aren't usually optional. Licences and such are, should you wish to have them. I've love to opt out of paying income tax, maybe we can get it reclassified as a 'service charge'?

[98elise]

hunton69 said:

98elise said:

Sky deliver a service people are happy to pay for, and nobody is forced to pay if they choose not to watch.

To watch sky, i must first pay for the BBC. Thats just fundamentally wrong. Its TV, not the NHS.

Sky just put up the subs by £4 a month to cover the extra there paying for football. I never watch football but have to have Sky 1 for the motorsport so I'm paying £50 a year more. It's the same principle

Sky have 2 forms of income adverts and subs therefor they will and can always outbid the BBC

Think about how much you spend on sky and do you get value for money.

It doesn't matter if it is value for money, the choice to pay for it is yours and mine. You can ditch sky and you will never have to pay them a penny more.

To me the BBC is no different to any other channel. Day time TV are full of cheaply made public based shows (auctions, consumer affairs, antiques etc, followed by game shows. Couple that with early evening soap opera's, and a panel based celeb show at the weekend, and its not really that much different from a commercial channel..

if the BBC is making such qood quality programming then it should be able to stand on its own two feet.

[Einion Yrth]

Funk said:

Taxes aren't usually optional. Licences and such are, should you wish to have them. I've love to opt out of paying income tax, maybe we can get it reclassified as a 'service charge'?

So, V.E.D. isn't optional? Fuel duty? Alcohol? Tobacco?

Ok.

[Moonhawk]

Funk said:

Taxes aren't usually optional. Licences and such are, should you wish to have them. I've love to opt out of paying income tax, maybe we can get it reclassified as a 'service charge'?

Some taxes are entirely optional based on your own personal choices:

Fuel duty and VED are optional - if you choose not to own a petrol/diesel powered vehicle.

Stamp duty is optional - if you choose to buy a house below the threshold or choose to rent.

VAT on food is optional - if you choose to eat only zero rated foods.

Alcohol and tobacco duty are optional - if you choose not to drink or smoke.

TV licence is optional - if you choose not to watch or record live TV.

[oddball1973]

Does waiting 8 weeks for a sofa to turn and the designated day (this morning) get the wrong fking colour delivered count in this thread. After being lied to ( we allegedly changed it - turns out the order was inputted wrong) I've now got to wait another 8 weeks. Majorly tempted to tell them to fk themselves, give me back my deposit and go to Ikea on saturday

[AlexRS2782]

oddball1973 said:

Does waiting 8 weeks for a sofa to turn and the designated day (this morning) get the wrong fking colour delivered count in this thread. After being lied to ( we allegedly changed it - turns out the order was inputted wrong) I've now got to wait another 8 weeks. Majorly tempted to tell them to fk themselves, give me back my deposit and go to Ikea on saturday

Interesting thread diversification away from the subject of a TV licence

[Wacky Racer]

0000 said:

Wacky Racer said:

Stop being so tight.

It's £3pw, the price of a pint of beer once a week.

Anyone who says there is NOTHING good on the BBC (inc radio) needs to give their head a wobble.

It's worth the money not to have programmes interrupted by adverts every fifteen minutes for a start.

Can you pay me £3 per week please?

Don't be tight now, you can pay a year in advance or set up a direct debit. I'll also need your address to hound you in case you stop paying.

So what service are you going to provide for me that I get enjoyment out of most days of the week for my £3?

Just stop and think this through for a minute...

If you watch ITV or Sky, who pays for the programmes, wages of actors, directors, cameramen etc?...Yes, the advertisers, Heinz, Tesco, Asda, Jaguar, Go Compare etc...........

You watch BBC, who pays for their programmes?...Oh wait, they don't interrupt their shows every fifteen minutes with somebody trying to sell you something, or even worse, on the radio every ten minutes with ppi fkwits.......

If people are generally happy to trade not having to pay for a licence, with accepting ads, that's fine, but until then........

[oddball1973]

Ipad time delay stuff - clicked on the wrong bloody thread.

i'll get me coat

[oddball1973]

Ipad time delay stuff - clicked on the wrong bloody thread.

i'll get me coat

[hunton69]

98elise said:

It doesn't matter if it is value for money, the choice to pay for it is yours and mine. You can ditch sky and you will never have to pay them a penny more.

To me the BBC is no different to any other channel. Day time TV are full of cheaply made public based shows (auctions, consumer affairs, antiques etc, followed by game shows. Couple that with early evening soap opera's, and a panel based celeb show at the weekend, and its not really that much different from a commercial channel..

if the BBC is making such qood quality programming then it should be able to stand on its own two feet.

But they have the monopoly on most sports that I want to watch (apart from football) and if I ditched it I wouldn't be able to see those sports. There is a large percentage of my money that goes on football.

[budfox]

hunton69 said:

98elise said:

It doesn't matter if it is value for money, the choice to pay for it is yours and mine. You can ditch sky and you will never have to pay them a penny more.

To me the BBC is no different to any other channel. Day time TV are full of cheaply made public based shows (auctions, consumer affairs, antiques etc, followed by game shows. Couple that with early evening soap opera's, and a panel based celeb show at the weekend, and its not really that much different from a commercial channel..

if the BBC is making such qood quality programming then it should be able to stand on its own two feet.

But they have the monopoly on most sports that I want to watch (apart from football) and if I ditched it I wouldn't be able to see those sports. There is a large percentage of my money that goes on football.

They wouldn't have a monopoly if people weren't prepared to pay so much. If everyone called and cancelled their Sky subs tomorrow, the stupid amounts of money in sport would drop and it could be affordable again.

[MissChief]

budfox said:

hunton69 said:

98elise said:

It doesn't matter if it is value for money, the choice to pay for it is yours and mine. You can ditch sky and you will never have to pay them a penny more.

To me the BBC is no different to any other channel. Day time TV are full of cheaply made public based shows (auctions, consumer affairs, antiques etc, followed by game shows. Couple that with early evening soap opera's, and a panel based celeb show at the weekend, and its not really that much different from a commercial channel..

if the BBC is making such qood quality programming then it should be able to stand on its own two feet.

But they have the monopoly on most sports that I want to watch (apart from football) and if I ditched it I wouldn't be able to see those sports. There is a large percentage of my money that goes on football.

They wouldn't have a monopoly if people weren't prepared to pay so much. If everyone called and cancelled their Sky subs tomorrow, the stupid amounts of money in sport would drop and it could be affordable again.

I doubt that because there would always be someone willing to pay for it, knowing that it brings in subscribers. If you want the money thrown at football to reduce then it's the EPL that need to stop their blind auction for the rights. Sky NEED the football, it's the one thing that underpins their whole Sports offering. That's why they bid such huge sums. They had no idea what BT were going to bid because the auction is blind so they had to bid high. In this case, very high in order to get the matches they wanted and needed. If each auction was open and they were able to bid on the back of what BT had bid then the price would be much lower. But, of course, the EPL and the clubs want as much as they can get.

[0000]

Wacky Racer said:

0000 said:

Can you pay me £3 per week please?

Don't be tight now, you can pay a year in advance or set up a direct debit. I'll also need your address to hound you in case you stop paying.

So what service are you going to provide for me that I get enjoyment out of most days of the week for my £3?

Absolutely nothing you're interested in, but I'll get enjoyment out of it most days of the week.

Stop being so tight and pay me £3.

[SpeedMattersNot]

Cotty said:

SpeedMattersNot said:

I get my annual letter asking me if my situations have changed and since they haven't, I sign into the website following the instructions and repeat the process.

So guilty until proven innocent.

No, it's actually quite a polite reminder to keep myself up to date.

0000 said:

SpeedMattersNot said:

ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TICK THE BOX THAT SAYS YOU DON'T REQUIRE A TV LICENCE.

It's that simple.

No, it's not.

We've had the letters continuously even after letting them into the house to see we don't have an aerial connected. Moving to a new build seems to have worked though, probably the easiest way to get rid of them without funding their machine.

Yes, it really is that simple.

You must have done something wrong at your first place of residence. To suggest moving house is the 'only way' to get rid of them, is ludicrous.

New levels of stupidity being reached on PistonHeads today.

Stupidity Matters.

[The Mad Monk]

hunton69 said:

But they have the monopoly on most sports that I want to watch (apart from football) and if I ditched it I wouldn't be able to see those sports. There is a large percentage of my money that goes on football.

You can control that situation.

If you, and others like you, stopped giving money to Sky they would have to stop giving so much money to footballers etc.

It is a voluntary act.

[Funk]

SpeedMattersNot said:

Cotty said:

SpeedMattersNot said:

I get my annual letter asking me if my situations have changed and since they haven't, I sign into the website following the instructions and repeat the process.

So guilty until proven innocent.

No, it's actually quite a polite reminder to keep myself up to date.

0000 said:

SpeedMattersNot said:

ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TICK THE BOX THAT SAYS YOU DON'T REQUIRE A TV LICENCE.

It's that simple.

No, it's not.

We've had the letters continuously even after letting them into the house to see we don't have an aerial connected. Moving to a new build seems to have worked though, probably the easiest way to get rid of them without funding their machine.

Yes, it really is that simple.

You must have done something wrong at your first place of residence. To suggest moving house is the 'only way' to get rid of them, is ludicrous.

New levels of stupidity being reached on PistonHeads today.

Stupidity Matters.

No, stupidity is being harassed with threatening letters by Capita on a monthly basis when you have no legal obligation to communicate with them whatsoever.

If ANY other private company were sending these letters there'd be outrage.

[0000]

SpeedMattersNot said:

es, it really is that simple.

You must have done something wrong at your first place of residence. To suggest moving house is the 'only way' to get rid of them, is ludicrous.

New levels of stupidity being reached on PistonHeads today.

Stupidity Matters.

It had a door and roof and no live broadcasts being received. Delight us with your intellect - what could have been wrong with it?

[stuart313]

Does this letter look like a polite reminer?



Notice the words "official notice" and "under investigation"

It also says "if you are continuing to watch without a licence..." So, they have accused you out right of already breaking the law, it doesn't say if you have started to etc it says continuing to do so. It then goes on about threats of court and large fines. Nice and polite don't you think.

Afew more letters on someones blog.

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/2013%20letters.htm


As for telling them you don't need a licence why would you, there are loads and loads of things I don't need to do daily but I don't ever have to tell anyone I don't want to. I get tonnes of spam emails that say tick this box if you want to unsubscribe from this news letter, I just delete them, far easier. If I tick the box it just confirms it a live email address and the same goes for TV licencing, it wont stop the barage of abuse it just gives them all the necessary details for ammunition to use against you at a later date. Make no mistake they really are a sinister outfit.