QuoteWe haven't had a licence for 23 years now...

Do you not get hounded by the licensing people, who can't quite get it into their heads that not everyone has or watches the telly?

Quote from: Raider4 on 25 July 2022, 06:39:50 PMDo you not get hounded by the licensing people, who can't quite get it into their heads that not everyone has or watches the telly?

Not after the first one or two years, get a letter every two years or so stating they assume I still don't need a licence.

Quote from: Gwydion on 25 July 2022, 03:28:48 PMVery happy to pay the licence and fund the only broadcast news service not in hoc to a media oligarch, and the producer of excellent drama and documentaries.

Don't watch or buy any MSM as well

Just checked the BBC1 schedule for today. Program of painting portraits that I would possibly watch, so 30 minutes of possible out of 18 hours. Rest is antiques, bargains, pets, East-flipping-Enders and lcd quiz shows. Not seeing a lot of high quality programming.

Wednesday - same but with some ladies kicky-ball thrown in.

Friday, Saturday. BBC1 given up almost entirely to the Commonwealth Games. 

I gave up the TV licence because the BBC was a 99.7% Victoria Coren free zone. I also don't watch sports. Put the BBC on a subscription service and I'll happily pay for things that are watchable (e.g. Victoria Coren.)
 

Quote from: fsn on 25 July 2022, 09:17:03 PMI'll happily pay for things that are watchable (e.g. Victoria Coren.)
 

Would a more accurate and  correct version of the above comment be " I'll happily pay for things that I can lust over!"
 

Quote from: Raider4 on 25 July 2022, 06:39:50 PMDo you not get hounded by the licensing people, who can't quite get it into their heads that not everyone has or watches the telly?

Just get a threatening letter every two years checking I don't need a licence. I just confirm online, but it is really ridiculous. I don't have a gun or dangerous animals or a car, but I don't get a nastily worded letter every two years from the police, DEFRA or DVLA checking up if I don't have any of them. The arrogance of the BBC, and their misogynistic* privatised investigator Capita is unbelievable, I despise them and the BBC for it. One of the benefits of the upcoming collapse of global industrial civilisation will be the disappearance of the BBC, Capita and their ilk and TV in general.

*https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/why-are-women-being-disproportionately-penalised-tv-license-non-payment/
https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/resources/tv-licence-prosecutions-discriminate-against-women

Quote from: Ben Waterhouse on 25 July 2022, 01:49:08 PMWe haven't had a licence for 23 years now...

Good luck Ben but unless the device/s you use are physically incapable of receiving live TV you could be treading on very thin ice.  You'd need to show that any TV receiver you used was incapable of receiving live TV.

The authority for licences is the Communications Act 2003 which says at Part Four that (1).  A television receiver must not be installed or used unless the installation and use of the receiver is authorised by a licence under this Part.

TV Licensing.co.uk expands on this by a more recent explanation to cover common devices other than conventional TVs. "A TV Licence is a legal permission to install or use television receiving equipment to watch or record television programmes as they are being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, and to download or watch BBC programmes on demand, including catch up TV, on BBC iPlayer. This could be on any device, including TVs, desktop computers, laptops, mobile phones, tablets, games consoles, digital boxes, DVD, Blu-ray and VHS recorders. This applies regardless of which television channels a person receives or how those channels are received."
 
I am typing this on my PC, which is capable of receiving live TV, and even if it were the only receiver I owned, if push came to shove I'd need to show that I never used it to "watch or record television programmes as they are being shown".  The onus would be on me to prove this and the assumption in cases that are brought to court seems to be that if somebody operates a device that is capable of receiving live TV, they must be using it.  The fine is up to £1000 plus costs. 

Quote from: howayman on 25 July 2022, 03:43:00 PMQuite happy to pay tv licence .

I tend to agree with you and Gwydion.  I also pay it because I have numerous devices, including this PC, which are capable of receiving live TV via the internet, whether I like it or not, and I don't fancy being fined £1000 plus costs for operating one.  The concept that it only applies to TVs is a bit dated these days. 

BBC TV programmes are on my menu, as is BBC radio, so I shouldn't really complain but the fact that a licence is mandatory doesn't sit well with me and I would prefer for the BBC to be funded by a subscription service like any other, not least because the 'tax' raised by the licence is pillaged by governments for other purposes.

QuoteWould a more accurate and  correct version of the above comment be " I'll happily pay for things that I can lust over!"
 

Fie! I admire Ms Coren for her acerbic wit and keen intelligence.


Of course she has other attributes which are to be admired.

QuoteThe onus would be on me to prove this and the assumption in cases that are brought to court seems to be that if somebody operates a device that is capable of receiving live TV, they must be using it. 

As a young man with no TV (and a tad before cellphones let alone smartphones!) I was routinely harrassed by nasty letters from the licence people who seemed incapable of understanding how anyone could survive without a TV.  Anyway, I have long since been a regular payer but am I the only one who thinks that the evolution to the position above where we would have to prove our innocence is utterly obnoxious?

QuoteOne of the benefits of the upcoming collapse of global industrial civilisation

Oooh err.  Lets hope Leon can turn the workshop into a bunker and continue to turn out figures.

Quote. . . but am I the only one who thinks that the evolution to the position above where we would have to prove our innocence is utterly obnoxious?

No, you are not.

No, you're not.
My uncle in the 1970s abandoned his television - he was a jazz musician as well as holding down a day job and just didn't have time (or the inclination) to watch tv.
He got the usual letters which he ignored as he had already told them he didn't have one. They turned up and asked to check! He told them to go and get a warrant. Never heard another word until he died about fifteen years ago.

(on the other hand a lot of people who do watch live programming don't have a licence and the BBC need the cash. Its almost as if someone devised a system to alienate people from the BBC. I'm sure that can't be true.)

Quote from: Raider4 on 26 July 2022, 08:57:20 AMNo, you are not.

It is what it is.  At least a TV Licensing inspector has no right of entry, without a warrant, and magistrates rarely issue such warrants to TVL these days.

QuoteGood luck Ben but unless the device/s you use are physically incapable of receiving live TV you could be treading on very thin ice.  You'd need to show that any TV receiver you used was incapable of receiving live TV.

The authority for licences is the Communications Act 2003 which says at Part Four that (1).  A television receiver must not be installed or used unless the installation and use of the receiver is authorised by a licence under this Part.

TV Licensing.co.uk expands on this by a more recent explanation to cover common devices other than conventional TVs. "A TV Licence is a legal permission to install or use television receiving equipment to watch or record television programmes as they are being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, and to download or watch BBC programmes on demand, including catch up TV, on BBC iPlayer. This could be on any device, including TVs, desktop computers, laptops, mobile phones, tablets, games consoles, digital boxes, DVD, Blu-ray and VHS recorders. This applies regardless of which television channels a person receives or how those channels are received."
 
I am typing this on my PC, which is capable of receiving live TV, and even if it were the only receiver I owned, if push came to shove I'd need to show that I never used it to "watch or record television programmes as they are being shown".  The onus would be on me to prove this and the assumption in cases that are brought to court seems to be that if somebody operates a device that is capable of receiving live TV, they must be using it.  The fine is up to £1000 plus costs. 

John. The law is "watching" live TV not having the equipment that can watch it. Capita needs to prove in a court of law that I have watched live TV not me proving I don't; it's basic English law - innocence until proven guilty. The vast majority of people convicted have either admitted they watch live TV or have been observed by a licensing enforcer doing so.

I don't have a TV, I do have a PC, smart phone and iPad.

As the great Alan Price (yes, that one) said to me, "Why pay a poll tax for having a sewer in the middle of your front room?"