[Closed] BBC Licence fee

yea, they are really quite offensive aren't they 😐

double post

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/cs/no-licence-needed/about.app
Tried the web page?

at we are to be prosecuted. For not having something we don't need. I've been waiting to see this escalate but unfortunately Mrs BigJohn chickened out and emailed to say the property is unoccupied. No doubt we're in for another type of threat now.

In the letters you ignored, there was clear instructions of what to do if you don't need a TVLicense.

Why didn't you do what was needed and avoid the further letters?

The way you use the phrase "chickened out" does suggest that you were enjoying your "stick it to the man" rebellious moment, and actually quite liked getting the letters and ignoring them.

When I didn't need one, I went online and told them, and that was it. Sorted.

In the letters you ignored, there was clear instructions of what to do if you don't need a TVLicense.

I didn't reply because a) they are groundless threats, and I have always been taught not to react to bullies and b) If I did respond they would just start making different groundless threats and c) they would have an name to print on their mock notice of summons.

No there wasn't. In fact I have NO obligation to do anything. They just lie and make you feel that you do.

You don't have an obligation but to simultaneously complain about the letters and not take some simple steps to stop them seems a bit petulant.

The Ministry of Propaganda ..

Two different issues. TV license, and enforcement.

You don't have an obligation but to simultaneously complain about the letters and not take some simple steps to stop them seems a bit petulant.

I'm not complaining, I just think they're ****s. And nothing stops the letters.

I'd say the majority of houses without a licence are owned by parasites who are willing to take as much as they can from society without contributing.

Surely we should be pursuing these people?

I'd say the majority of houses with a licence are owned by spineless wimps who are willing to bend over and take as much as they can from the man without question.

Surely we should be pitying these people?

So, in which other areas in your life do you choose to steal from your
fellow citizens?

Little a bit of mild tax evasion?
Benefit fraud?
Shoplifting?
Not paying your debts?

Stick it to da man!

Rusty Spanner - Member

I'd say the majority of houses without a licence are owned by parasites who are willing to take as much as they can from society without contributing.
Surely we should be pursuing these people?
.
.
sir, you have just made yourself More offensive than the tv licence letters 😕
are you a conservative politician???

I'm not complaining

Same experience here. Furnished, unoccupied house. Informed the licence people of this fact and have received threatening letter addressed to "the legal occupier" ever since. How they are going to get the legal occupier of an unoccupied house into court beats me!

Lawmanmx - Member
sir, you have just made yourself More offensive than the tv licence letters

Why?

They're will be a quite a few people like yourself who legally don't require a licence but can't be arsed to let the authorities know.
There will be people who genuinely don't watch TV.

But I think the majority of homes without a licence will be owned by people who use the service but refuse to contribute - parasites.

I find those who happily admit to fraudulently obtaining services which they have no intention of paying for offensive.
Just as I find tax evaders, beneft fraudsters and shoplifters offensive.

You don't have an obligation but to simultaneously complain about the letters and not take some simple steps to stop them seems a bit petulant

It's clear he enjoys being "rebellious", and moaning about things.

So not filling in the simple online form, and stopping the letters ticks both boxes.

Personally, I just filled in the form, and the letters stopped.

didn't reply because a) they are groundless threats, and I have always been taught not to react to bullies and b) If I did respond they would just start making different groundless threats and c) they would have an name to print on their mock notice of summons.

Of course, another course of action I didn't consider, was to make up what I thought "might" happen, if I filled in the form, make up some stuff that they "might" do, and then moan about a fictional scenario that I'd made up.

Why?

They're will be a quite a few people like yourself who legally don't require a licence but can't be arsed to let the authorities know.
There will be people who genuinely don't watch TV.

But I think the majority of homes without a licence will be owned by people who use the service but refuse to contribute - parasites.

I find those who happily admit to fraudulently obtaining services which they have no intention of paying for offensive.
Just as I find tax evaders, beneft fraudsters and shoplifters offensive.
.
.
have you even read what I wrote earlier??? Even when you do let them know They start their Offensive and Threatening letters again a few months later.
and your 'Generalisation' of the people of the country was still offensive.

have you even read what I wrote earlier??? Even when you do let them know They start their Offensive and Threatening letters again a few months later.

They didn't for me. Maybe you just don't trust you.

They didn't for me. Maybe you just don't trust you.
.
.
yea! because like You, they ACTUALLY know me don't they?

I continue to get letters informing me i don't have a tv licence despite telling them years ago that i didn't own a tv (means of receiving broadcast transmissions for the pedants), nor did i have any desire to own a tv, however if i did have a change of heart at some point in the future then i would be purchasing a tv licence and until that situation arose would they please remove my address from their mailing list.

I get a letter on average every couple of months addressed to the "legal occupier" threatening legal action (in big red letters) and stating that i should have all the facts before i have to attend court (or some such bollocks) - needless to say i don't bother opening them nor do i have a desire to enter into any correspondance with the TV licence company. I have never had a visit from the "licence police" 🙄 but i'd like to see them try and gain access to my house.

Here's the issue that ****s me right off……

Why am i automatically listed as residing in an address that does not own a TV licence?, surely i should not be automatically deemed to be watching live television as it is broadcast, i.e. we believe you are lying? - as long as they carry on with this charade then i will continue to disregard all correspondence received and dance naked upon it's burning embers.

I do not have to opt out of needing an HGV licence, a wild/dangerous animal licence, a motorbike licence, a licence to practice law (may be handy though), a licence to practice medicine etc…etc…

They can **** right off….

The reason is the number of homes without a tv is much smaller than the number of homes without a licence. Therefore a large % of those who say they have no tv are liars. We all know this even the BBC

Unfortunately this means they sometimes write to those who dont actually have a tv

then they should get their funding by Subscription as to NEVER have that problem again 🙄

I get a letter on average every couple of months addressed to the "legal occupier" threatening legal action

Have you filled out the online form ?

I filled out the form and didn't hear another peep from them for the rest of the time I didn't want/need a license.

I have one now, because I need one, but filling out the online form worked and they stopped sending letters.

Yes they should change their model of funding because some people are liars and break the law 😕

I think you need to think of the bigger picture here tbh. Basically you get some letters that you ignore.Personally I dont think that is enough to justify a change in the law and the entire BBC funding model

Junkyard - Personally I cannot see why Rusty thinks non payers are selfish.

Non-payers who still use the service?
You don't think they're selfish?

Tell you what, next time we go to the pub, you buy all the drinks and I'll drink half of them.
I'm paying nowt 'cos I reckon I'll get away with it.

Ok with you?

Personally I cant see why Rusty cannot detect sarcasm

I am not sure I would word it how you have but yes the majority of those a large number of those who claim they have no need for a licence will be lying and they are free loading

FWIW i think that about non P members on here

Why I oughtta............... 😀

Sorry Junky - I've 'swapped out' my sarcasm detector for a bullshit detector for this thread.
I can't think over the noise.

FWIW i think that about non P members on here

What does the P stand for?

Prick?

[img] [/img]

Premier but you just wanted to call the people who pay for this place pricks and , given we paid to let you do it, you might have a point

....the people who pay for this place.....

Interesting point, but I reckon advertising is a bigger revenue than membership (could be wrong?)

And as the "P" members are paying to avoid the adverts (in a lot of cases) then who is actually "paying for this place" in a more significant way ?

(I have no idea what the actual answer is by the way 🙂 )

If there was no mag there would be no STW site [ though I am sure they try their best to make money/not lose from it]. I dont think they do this website for the love of a bunch of argumentative freeloading tossers or they would stop publishing a mag and live on the royalties from the adverts.

I suspect they are also fortunate enough to love what they do [ beyond refereeing this place]

I could be wrong also ....... shall we see if we can merge our views seamlessly 😛

I am a triple freeloading tosser then. Non premier, yet still no online adverts and I just read the magazine in the supermarket without buying it. 😉

If there was no [s]mag [/s] such thing as click through advertising, there would be no STW site

There are many many free to use websites that don't have a magazine, but there aren't many that don't have advertising.

I don't see why anyone should have to pay a licence for the BBC. They did not create the airwaves.

It should be possible to watch the other free to air programmes without paying for a state propaganda service that you don't want to watch.

If you want to watch the BBC, by all means pay for it, but stop being a parasite and expecting other folk to subsidise your programmes.

So you don't watch the BBC then epi?

Some people are pretty simple here aren't they - yes, rusty sheriff's badge, I'm looking at you.

whether epicycle consumes BBC content is immaterial as long as he doesn't do it via a live feed.

The license for watching live feed moving images of any kind within the UK belongs to the BBC (why?) and so they can charge EVERYBODY for this who does so. The funds raised are then partly used for the unbiased BBC programming content so beloved of rusty knob and others.

On point two, filling in the forms or online web forms sometimes pauses the rude and insinuating letters for a few months.

I will do this ONCE. I will then do it again when my circumstances change. This has led to them threatening to take me to court.

The system is bollocks and should be changed.

winston - Member
Some people are pretty simple here aren't they - yes, rusty sheriff's badge, I'm looking at you.

whether epicycle consumes BBC content is immaterial as long as he doesn't do it via a live feed.

Legally, of course.

Morally?
Slagging off the BBC and it's method of funding, then using a loophole to watch the shows that others have paid for?
That would be hypocritical, as well as parasitic.

watch the shows that others have paid for?

Watching shows that others have paid for - is that not ITV too?

Change it to 'BBC shows' if it makes you feel happier.
The principle remains.

I don't see why anyone should have to pay a licence for the BBC.

(this may have already been posted more than once)

If the site owners allow folk to use the forum and other sections without coughing up for a sub then that's their choice, Junkyard. The fact that you feel you have more right to use the forum because you pay is, quite honestly, pretty ugly; it really does show you up for the self-important little **** you are.

epicyclo - Member

I don't see why anyone should have to pay a licence for the BBC. They did not create the airwaves.

It should be possible to watch the other free to air programmes without paying for a state propaganda service that you don't want to watch.

If you want to watch the BBC, by all means pay for it, but stop being a parasite and expecting other folk to subsidise your programmes.
.
.
.
There ya go!!! that man said it waaaaay Better than I ever could
can we lock the thread now please 😆

The only reason I asked if epi watched the BBC is that he contributed to the Death In Paradise thread.

Maybe someone else told him about it?
😀

And although I can believe that there may be people who only watch BBC via the iPlayer, I doubt very many exist in real life.
If you're the kind of person happy to take for free what other's pay for, I doubt you're really arsed about the smallprint.

Are you suggesting he should have to pay the licence fee and then NOT watch BBC? 😉

😀

Well, this is fun.

I just hope this Youth Hostel that ton has booked for next month doesn't have a telly. Can you imagine the problems?

So long as it's got WiFi for watching Top Gear on iplayer

Isn't it?
Always a highlight of the season for me.

The parasites seem to get more upset and angry every year though.
Guilty conscience?
🙂

[quote=piemonster ]So long as it's got WiFi for watching Top Gear on iplayer

And we haven't yet got to the questions of how many cooker rings we'll need for all these stove-top coffee pots, whether meat is allowed in the kitchen area or what constitutes "banter".

I don't even have a beard

Hammond has had me in stitches a couple of times tonight.

And although I can believe that there may be people who only watch BBC via the iPlayer, I doubt very many exist in real life.
If you're the kind of person happy to take for free what other's pay for, I doubt you're really arsed about the smallprint.

Hello *waves*

I did exactly that for ages.

No TV signal, no sky dish. I only had an Internet connection.

And as the Licensing people were good enought to tell me (I didn't previously know) I didn't need a license.

So I didn't buy one, as I didn't need to.

Just like I don't choose to pay "extra" VAT. Just the amount thats required.

They picked the rules, and I stopped paying because they told me I didn't need to.

There's always one.
🙂

Rusty Spanner - Member
So you don't watch the BBC then epi?

Haven't watched it since the Referendum coverage.

Wife watches some programmes on iPlayer or whatever service offers other programmes. Sometimes I'm in the room.

And I'd have to be blind not to notice Sara Martins. 🙂