[Closed] BBC Licence fee

online as they are pulling it [ both good shows IMHO]

I would quite happily pay the whole fee for R4 alone. If I had to listen to a station with adverts my bike wouldn't get any work done on it.

£12 a month to be able to switch the radio on any time and listen to advert free music, a steady stream of worth watching programmes, access to iplayer and so on.

That'll do me.

i think the BBC is mostly great.

i'm in Germany. radio is generally proper shite here. there is some decent tv broadcasting, but by and large it is mostly regurgitated/rehashed versions of British shows. here we have "deutschland sucht das supertalent" (BGT), "Hölle der Löwen" (Dragons Den), "wohnzimmer helden" (Gogglebox), "Firmen Retter" (like Polizzi/Fixer).

they show quite a few of BBC wildlife stuff here. i'll watch it thinking "i've seen this before" and then as the credits roll see that it was a BBC production, just very heavily edited. i remember there being a big hoo-har about a wildlife programme. maybe it was Africa, but was a whole series condensed into a 2 hour programme.

(strangely, i recently saw a poster for a 2 hour show, along with live orchestra, for the Life Stories series..... Life Stories... a 6 or 7 part series condensed into 2 hours with a live orchestra.... odd, IMO)

even the GF chooses to watch UK output over German stuff.

if i could, i would happily pay to watch the BBC here in Germany. as it is i watch it online via some trickery.

i think that the majority of what the BBC puts on TV is crap. cheap tv filler.

i remember reading something saying that TV should be for the betterment, benefit and education of the masses.

lose BBC3. it's crap. show Family Guy on one of the other channels if you must. no one needs Snog, Marry, Avoid or any of the other crap on there. cannot remmeber tha last time i watched something on BBC3.
stop sending camera crews to auctions, be that house auctions or who-the-****-is-going-to-buy-that-shite auctions.
get rid of any presenters that use yoot speak - this goes for radio, too, so that is most of the R1 presenters out of a job.
ban the BBC from doing any kind of cheap "reality" tv. this includes Fannying About on Ice, Strictly Can't Dance, Noise (think it's the Voice i'm thinking of... and on that note, don't give Will I Am (what a chunt... his name is William - you clever funny funk. ****) any more air time). why compete on that level? leave that sort of LCD* programming to ITV/C4.

more documentaries, even if it is stuff like that (incredibly tedious) Tying a Fly prog that was on BBC4 recently. i don't mind fly-on-the-wall type stuff, just prefer it if the BBC left the point-and-larf stuff to C4 (someone picked up on that earlier).

more original comedy (Detectorists, Office etc). please note that dressing a guy up as a woman, ala Mrs Brown's Boys, does not make something funny.

no day-time soaps. Doctors or WPC 56, for example. never watched it, never will.

kill Eastenders. it offers nothing other than LCD, dregs viewing.

*LCD... lowest common denominator

So once again, get rid of everything you don't watch (but millions do)?

I have no interest in BBC West Midlands - the BBC could save money by getting rid of it.

get rid of any presenters that use yoot speak - this goes for radio, too, so that is most of the R1 presenters out of a job.

new figures from TV Licensing reveal today that over 28,000 homes across the UK are still enjoying their programmes in black and white.

A colour TV Licence currently costs £145.50. A black and white TV Licence currently costs £49.00.

just throwing that in there

to be honest anyone moving on from Shakespeare or Chaucer is speaking yoof english...

Verily. you say it wearies you, It wearies me

u no wot i mene, blud. get me?

and yeah, get rid of regional stuff. don't know what it costs to run BBC Midlands, BBC East etc, but i always used to turn off or switch over when the regional news came on.

ban the BBC from doing any kind of cheap "reality" tv. this includes Fannying About on Ice, Strictly Can't Dance, Noise (think it's the Voice i'm thinking of... and on that note, don't give Will I Am (what a chunt... his name is William - you clever funny funk. ****) any more air time). why compete on that level? leave that sort of LCD* programming to ITV/C4.

That's probably the only thing in your list I agree with. This category is already well covered on other channels.

The BBC do a lot of rubbish day time tv, yes it's mostly crap, but I bet it's pretty cheap to make and gives retired folk and other stay at home types something to watch. I wouldn't be too fussed if they didn't broadcast after 9am and before 5pm, but I bet there's an audience that would be upset.

Bring back the test card. Hours of cheap tv
[img] [/img]

rene59 - Member
The BBC should move towards the Netflix/Amazon type of subscription service.

get rid of the TV licence! it should be funded by subscription by the people who WANT the bbc, just like those who want sky or virgin, its simple basic commerce.
if you don't want it then don't buy it.

Scrap it, either let them advertise or make it a subscription service.

I am more than happy to pay the licence fee for the quality of programming the BBC produces & the lack of adverts.

I watch the BBC daily, listen to BBC radio daily, all other TV channels are inferior.

the You should pay for it by Subscription! I on the other hand really don't like their threatening letters of £1000 fines (unlawful) or jail.
buy it if you want it and don't if you don't! there should be NO force or threats.

[quote=Lawmanmx ]get rid of the TV licence! it should be funded by subscription by the people who WANT the bbc, just like those who want sky or virgin, its simple basic commerce.

Yay for commerce - we should do everything that way. TV, trains, water, post, doctors...

[quote=Lawmanmx ]I on the other hand really don't like their threatening letters of £1000 fines (unlawful) or jail.

So do you watch live TV or not? If you do then you should be paying, which stops the letters, if you don't then tell them which also stops the letters.

and report them as its unlawful

You cannot have subscription radio services you can have the BBC or commercial services.
you wont like this either

The BBC World Service is the world's largest international broadcaster,[1][2] broadcasting news, speech and discussions in 28 languages[3] to many parts of the world on analogue and digital shortwave platforms, internet streaming, podcasting, satellite, FM and MW relays. The World Service was reported to have reached 188 million people a week on average in June 2009.[4] It does not carry advertising, and the English language service broadcasts 24 hours a day.

Impartial news to the world..its comendable

I don't have a TV and ive tried all that telling them crap, but the letters start again soon after, so I say Again, buy it if you want it!
don't make Everyone else pay for what You want tho, Fair I think.

issuance of fine Without due process IS unlawful.

then the fine will be unenforceable as its unlawful

don't make Everyone else pay for what You want tho, Fair I think.

Aye but those who don't pay have to put up with adverts. It's not like we take money off everyone that's ever viewed a website on the off-chance they might look at this one.

I don't have a TV and ive tried all that telling them crap

yea, I do, then the letters start all over again 🙄

We bought an old terraced house in town recently and we're gutting it and doing it up. We have a licence for the house we live in but we keep getting really nasty threatening letters at the doer-upper from the licensing people. I've been ignoring them. The last one was particularly nasty. It starts by saying "You have not responded to our previous letters. We want to ensure you have the information you need before a hearing is set at your local court".

In other words they are trying to imply that 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.

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?