It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: grainofsand
Snap. I had the same letter last year and opted to set up a direct debit after never paying for a TV licence. Maybe the decision would have been different if your points are accurate? Too late now lol.
In my opinion, it's worth the money just to keep the BBC going. Although many disagree, I see them as one of the last media outlets that aren't as compromised and degraded by commercial intrusions. They also set a high standard no other corporation, that I know of, can equal so consistently.
Infinite Monkey Cage (science)
Philosopher's Arms (philosophy)
History of the World in a 100 Objects (history)
Comedy podcasts/radio shows
Radio 4
5 Live
Radio 1
1Xtra
Match of the Day
David Attenborough
Melvin Bragg
etc...
One day the BBC will fall and commercials will be inflicted on us every 7-10 minutes. It'll be a sad day...
originally posted by: crazyewok
So I dam well resent having to pay for YOUR programs when don't use the service.
originally posted by: grainofsand
After reading some of the completely inaccurate posts on ATS making wild claims about the UK television laws I felt the need to present the reality of the situation here in this topic.
In all the time I've lurked and been a member, this tired old subject keeps coming up and the ignorance is unbelievable, so here is a rational critique:
Here is a photo of a demand letter I got a couple of weeks ago...
...you will note my highlighted section where 'TV Licencing' are describing the law exactly as it is.
The law.
It is a criminal offence to watch or record programmes as they're being shown on TV unless you have a licence. It doesn't matter what equipment you use: colour or black and white television; computer, mobile phone, games console; digital box; or DVD/VHS recorder.
If you watch TV, on these devices or anything else, you need a licence
IT IS NOT A CRIME TO OWN ANY DEVICE CAPABLE OF RECEIVING TV WITHOUT A LICENCE.
IT IS A CRIME TO USE ANY DEVICE TO RECEIVE BROADCAST TV WITHOUT A LICENCE.
I haven't had a TV licence for over a decade. I get letters 20 or 30 times a year, and a knock on the door every year or so.
I ignore the letters, and when the door knocks I tell the 'enforcement officers' they have zero authority over me, they are not welcome on my property, and if they do not leave immediately I will use reasonable force to eject them as they know I legally can.
One time as they left my property I was told they needed my name 'to update our records' to which I replied I couldn't give a toss what you need, until or unless you guys ever have any authority over me I'm telling you nothing.
A threat of returning with a warrant and police was laughed out of my yard as I reminded them that in order to obtain a warrant they must supply a Magistrate with 'reasonable suspicion' and it has already been established that not having a licence in itself does NOT meet the standard of reasonable suspicion that I am USING any device to watch TV as it is broadcast.
One of the guys mentioned detector vans and I laughed again reminding him that there has never been a conviction in the UK based on detector van evidence so piss off, they did.
Now the whole debate of is a licence fee fair is another matter all together, and to be honest I don't really care because all my media comes from the internet, and not 'live as broadcast'.
You can make the case that poor people can't afford the £2.80 per week licence but if they can't, they still do not need a licence if they do not USE a device to watch live broadcast TV. Even if someone has been silly enough to incriminate themselves by admitting they use a device to watch TV, all this talk of draconian fines making children starve or whatever is just sensationalist drama.
In the UK a fine for anything is not a hard punishment. Even if the amount is huge, courts will work out a repayment plan based on income after approved outgoings for housing/food/clothing/child expenses/etc, so if you are not stupid you can end up paying £5 a week or less interest free.
I've paid a few fines over the years and done exactly that with creative accounting. The fine was no punishment then, just the price of a couple of pints each week.
So folks, please get it straight, people are not prosecuted for 'not having a licence' they are prosecuted for 'using a device to receive broadcast TV without a licence. If they are prosecuted and refuse to arrange a payment plan/refuse to pay, then that is a seperate offence - Non payment of criminal fines.
Many years ago I failed to display an 'L plate' (learner) on the front of my motorbike before I passed my test and got a £25 fine. I didn't pay it, moved to another part of the UK, and unknown to myself, an arrest warrant had been issued for my non-payment of a fine. When I next had contact with the cops some years later I was arrested for the warrant and ended up 28 days in prison for non payment of a fine.
I was not sent to prison for failing to display a learner plate, I was sent to prison because with contempt I #ed the courts off and ignored their fine - That is the difference.
In closing, I look at 'TV Licensing' as a private commercial enterprise similar to say Microsoft employees turning up at your door demanding to check your operating system for authenticity. Neither have any authority over you in any way so both can be ignored and forcibly removed from your property, and both need reasonable suspicion that you are breaking the law before any magistrate will even think about issuing any warrant.
It is why I haven't had a licence since around 1999.
Deny ignorance folks. The few UK nationals who go to prison are mostly campaigning protesters refusing to pay the court after conviction as a matter of principle. With the generous UK fine payment plans they are 'won't' pay, not 'can't' pay.
Just remember, you do NOT need a licence to OWN a device capable of receiving TV, but if you USE a device to watch live broadcast TV then you do need a licence.
...oh and as an aside, all TV device vendors are required to get the customer to complete a form detailing the owner so it can be sent to TV licencing. The law does not require the vendor to verify that the information provided by the customer is correct.
Last flat screen I bought with cash and wrote Mickey Mouse of no fixed abode on the form. The saleperson hesitated then chuckled and sold me the screen.
originally posted by: Raffles
Nope, i have sky i don't use the bbc service at all.
So i won't be forced into paying for something i do not want.
originally posted by: BMorris
a reply to: Dabrazzo
Correct, I never said otherwise. I was simply pointing out why it still has to be paid only if you watch ITV etc.
but currently the licence must be paid even if you only watch ITV, because they still use the transmission infrastructure.
Just cause you have should not mean you should be forced to pay for it.
originally posted by: wmd_2008
originally posted by: Raffles
Nope, i have sky i don't use the bbc service at all.
So i won't be forced into paying for something i do not want.
Even with sky you still the ability to watch BBC programs or listen to BBC radio stations, I do think they should make the BBC advertise and raise it's funds that way but until then a55holes should pay up like the rest of us, if you and the OP are not happy with the laws of the country why don't you go forth and multiply to a country you are happy to follow the laws of!
originally posted by: Raffles
a reply to: wmd_2008
So in your eyes it's ok to be forced to pay for something you do not want.. OH OK !!
PMSL