The TV licence

Forums Forums TV Newsroom The TV licence

This topic contains 62 replies, has 9 voices, and was last updated by  NaRvIcK DeViL 12 years, 5 months ago.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 63 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #25375 Reply

    Will Riker
    Participant
    #25376 Reply

    Will Riker
    Participant

    The TV licence is just criminal. I am paying for sometihng I do not use and thats just wrong.
    I only wactch SKY.
    So is it right to have to pay the criminal BBC and I can not see why it can not be a subscription like SKY is then you only have BBC if you wanted it and that is fair.

    #25377 Reply

    HBox
    Participant

    Greetings Star Trek fan. No it is not fair with the current TV licence setup. It needs to be reviewed.

    #25378 Reply

    dirkyt
    Participant

    I always access BBC1,2 ITV1, CH4 and CH5 through my SKY Box.

    This is mainly because my aerial is dying.

    I do not agree with the TV Licence, as the Beeb doesn’t produce decent programmes anymore (Fame Academy, Strictly Dance Fever etc). I would grudge paying it even more if I was still in Bonnie Scotland, as Reporting Scotland is crap. However, this is not the arena for BBC discussions.

    Even with an array of new channels dear old auntie is nowhere near SKY.

    #25379 Reply

    Forum Member
    Participant

    You are not alone.

    Join the TVL Resistance and discuss at: http://www.tvlicensing.biz/phpbb2/index.ph…b26e88c258c4148

    Cheers

    Mickey

    #25380 Reply

    Will Riker
    Participant

    did that last week

    #25381 Reply

    Forum Member
    Participant

    I have to say I couldn’t disagree more.

    In my opinion the BBC provides the best broadcasting service I’ve seen. It’s programmes are often informative, educational and entertaining. The BBC’s use of Interactive services is far superior (in my opinion) and the integration of websites with their programmes superb (e.g. Digital Picture of Britian).

    I pay 100+ UKP for the BBC each year and 492UKP to Sky. Do I get 4 times better quality, service? In my opinion, I do not. Again, in my opinion, the BBC offers exceptional value for money.

    The media used (Satellite, Terrestial, Terestial Digital) is immaterial. The license fee funds the BBC. In the past few months I have made a conscious choice to monitor the channels I do watch. I invariably find that it is the BBC channels I’m usually drawn to. This is leading me to seriously consider my future membership and subscription to Sky, as I will be changing address soon.

    Having access to a freeview box has seriously questioned whether I will continue with satellite (or at least subscription satellite) in the future.

    I do appreciate that people should have a choice and with the license fee, they do not. I would still the license fee by choice. The BBC is, in my opinion, worth every single penny.

    #25382 Reply

    Forum Member
    Participant

    I would like to state that the TVL Resistance movement is not trying to completely dismantle the BBC – this is not the objective. The main thrust of the TV Resistance campaign is to stop funding the BBC via the compulsory TV licence. If the Government wishes to introduce a voluntary subscription service, more commercialism or provide general taxation monies, so that the BBC can continue, then it would be supported.

    To summarise – my own, and the TV Resistance Group?s aim, is to challenge the anachronistic TV licence fee through legal and political action.

    Non-possession of a TV Licence makes it a criminal offence to watch not just the BBC but any TV programme from any off-air source. But beware this might soon included Internet WWW derived streaming media. N.B. a compulsory PC download Licence to fund the BBC. Fanciful? But it?s being talked about. Particularly as more and more TV programmes are “live” streamed. Not to mention G3 mobiles etc.

    It is believed that the requirement of a TV Licence or possible PC Licence is an infringement of our freedom to receive and impart information and hold opinions and ideas without interference by public authorities – as defined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Further, it is believed, that the UK Government?s continuing action of prosecuting UK citizens under the Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1948 is illegal.?

    Just my thoughts – what about a Poll on Sky News?

    #25383 Reply

    Will Riker
    Participant

    mickey+Jun 24 2005, 03:09 PM–>(mickey @ Jun 24 2005, 03:09 PM)
    I would like to state that the TVL Resistance movement is not trying to completely dismantle the BBC – this is not the objective. The main thrust of the TV Resistance campaign is to stop funding the BBC via the compulsory TV licence. If the Government wishes to introduce a voluntary subscription service, more commercialism or provide general taxation monies, so that the BBC can continue, then it would be supported.

    To summarise – my own, and the TV Resistance Group?s aim, is to challenge the anachronistic TV licence fee through legal and political action.

    Non-possession of a TV Licence makes it a criminal offence to watch not just the BBC but any TV programme from any off-air source. But beware this might soon included Internet WWW derived streaming media. N.B. a compulsory PC download Licence to fund the BBC. Fanciful? But it?s being talked about. Particularly as more and more TV programmes are “live” streamed. Not to mention G3 mobiles etc.

    It is believed that the requirement of a TV Licence or possible PC Licence is an infringement of our freedom to receive and impart information and hold opinions and ideas without interference by public authorities – as defined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Further, it is believed, that the UK Government?s continuing action of prosecuting UK citizens under the Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1948 is illegal.?

    Just my thoughts – what about a Poll on Sky News?

    Lets email sky news

    Keep the tvl
    stop the tvl

    poll

    #25384 Reply

    Forum Member
    Participant

    I’ve tried asking Sky for a TVL poll but with NIL response. When you think about it SKY, ITV, Ch4 etc all have a vested interest in keeping the TVL going. Why? Because a commercial BBC would suck in more of the depleting TV advertising revenue.

    The model I’d like to see is the way the BBC World Service is run. Contrarily to popular belief it’s not financed from the TVL pot. But by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office budget. It shows commercial adverts and has programme sponsorship.

    People talk about Government interference but the Gov already contributes some ?450M directly to the BBC National service for free over 75 licences.

    There is a real alternative to the compulsory TVL that can still provide a first class quality Public TV Service. QED

    Mickey

    #25385 Reply

    DDP
    Participant

    You don’t need a licence to own a pet, or have kids. Living, breathing things that can either bring joy to your family with companionship or cause abject misery to a community.

    Yet I need a licence to use a television, regardless of if I actually use it for the purposes of watching a TV show. It is wrong for someone to be charged over a hundred quid when all they may well do is play video games or watch DVDs. :angry:

    #25386 Reply

    Forum Member
    Participant

    Actually it?s a bit of a misnomer ? a TVL is only required to view off-air/cable TV programmes. A TVL is not required to own a TV set to watch pre-recorded tapes or DVD?s , play games etc. But to be careful the TV and/or Video/DVD should have it?s aerial disconnected and ideally be rendered incapable of receiving broadcasted TV signals.

    The wider question of TV live programmes being watch on the WWW has yet to be tested in the courts no one to date has been prosecuted for this. TVL authorities say you do need a licence but his is all-open to argument as the law is not specific. However the Gov in it?s Green paper on the future of the TVL mentions: that if viewing via the web becomes more popular than the conventional TV set then use of PC to receive streaming media may become licenceable.

    #25387 Reply

    tim1
    Participant

    So, the licence fee should be scrapped and the BBC broken up because everyone now apparently watches Sky.

    Interestingly more people watch the BBC’s 10 O’Clock news every evening than watch Sky News in an average month.

    Speaking of which, Sky News were doing a story about a ‘laugh formula’ which explains what makes things funny. Their package had clips from some of the funniest TV moments of all time.

    Like clips of ‘The Office’, ‘Little Britain’, ‘Fawlty Towers’, ‘Monty Python’ etc.

    You’re right – the BBC is not a patch on Sky. Well, at least it says so in The Sun.

    #25388 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    Abolish the TV Licence ! – sign the petition…

    http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bbcresi…ignatories.html

    http://www.tvlicensing.biz/phpbb2/

    =============================================
    How to mess up the TV licensing

    Have you had enough of ?. ?

    ? having to pay for the BBC, whether you watch it or not ?

    ? subsidising the BBC?s expansion in digital channels, which you never watch ?

    ? being forced to pay for the politically biased BBC ?

    ? the TV Licence going up faster than your Council Tax ?

    ? being forced to fund an overmanned & inefficient organisation that does not live in the real commercial world ?

    ? receiving threatening & intimidating letters from TV Licensing ?

    If you just grumble about it, then nothing will happen.

    There are powerful vested interests supporting the continuation of the TV Licence Fee (the ?TV Tax or Entertainment Tax?).

    Write to you MP ? Write to the Minister of Media & Culture ? Don?t waste your time !

    Only mass civil disobedience is going to get rid of the TV Licence.

    So, you are going to have to do something !

    In an ideal world, everyone would refuse to pay their TV Licence, and become a TV License martyr.

    If you want to do this, then please carry on and do it !

    If you are careful, you will probably get away with it. (See Part Two below). And the fine is only ?150, even if you get caught, which you probably won?t.

    However, for many reasons, all quite understandable, most people are not ready to go ?all the way?.

    Don?t go away though, because there is lots that you can do.

    Please help to disrupt the TV Licensing system as much as possible. Please consider doing some, or all, of the things that I suggest below.

    Just doing one of these things will help.

    So, here are my suggestions from personal experience of trying to mess up TV Licensing.

    Remember. One flea biting an elephant will not be noticed by the elephant.

    However, hundreds of thousands of fleas nibbling away will bring the elephant down. So get nibbling now !

    Do not respond to any letters or phone calls from TV Licensing. If anyone phones, asking for ?Mr / Mrs Yourself?, then always ask, ?Who?s calling ??, before confirming your identity. If the reply is ?TV Licensing? or similar, put the phone down immediately ? do not say anything at all.

    TV Licensing are known to send letters by recorded delivery, requiring a signature. Always ask to see where a recorded delivery has come from, before signing.

    Cancel your direct debit. You do this by contacting your bank, not TV Licensing. Having a direct debit to pay your TV Licence makes life easy for them ? and we don?t want to do that, do we ?

    If you do pay for a TV Licence, do not pay by cheque or credit card. Do not pay through the TVL website.

    Dealing with TV Licensing

    When the initial demand for payment comes, ignore it. Ignore the next threats / reminders for as long as you can. I know you can hold out for at least 2 months. Hold out for as long as you possibly can. You can do it. Remember that the letters from TVL are computer generated. They are intended to make you afraid.
    Don?t forget – Fear is all in the mind – Do not be afraid. Repeat after me ? ?I am not afraid?. ? I am not afraid ?.

    Do not attempt to engage in debate with TV Licensing ? eg ?I pay for Sky? ; ?I only watch DVDs?. Firstly, this does not work, and secondly, you may incriminate yourself.

    Get your TV ?free? for a few months

    If / when you do pay, only pay in cash at the Post Office, at the end of a calendar month. Use only the blank forms supplied at the Post Office, not one with your name & address already printed on it. On the form, put in the date that it actually is, not when your last Licence ran out. Put in your real address, but a different name. Each year, change your name on the form. Use your imagination ? Silly name (P. Occupier, R. Sole) ; BBC character (D Trotter, B Brush) ; TV Licensing employee (V Smith) ; serial killer (H Shipman, T Bundy).

    Make sure that you get the Licence stamped, and keep the till receipt for the cash payment as proof.

    I have found that doing all this means you get a couple of ?free? months every year. I?ve done it for 3 years now.

    Get a black and white TV Licence

    This only costs ?42.

    If the TV Licensing man calls ?..

    If someone from TV Licensing calls at your house ?

    – If you know it is them, do not answer the door.

    – If you do answer the door, and then find out who they are, close the door immediately.

    – Neither confirm your name, nor say who lives at the house.

    – Do not say anything. No banter / abuse / debate, no matter how tempting this may be. You have no legal obligation to say anything.

    – Do not let them in.

    – Do not sign anything.

    – Obvious, but make sure they can?t see your TV through the window, or hear it through the letterbox !

    Do not forget that the TV Licence Officers are employees of a company called Capita. Commonly known as ?Crapita?.

    They are not Police Officers. Do not be afraid of them.

    TV Licence Officers know if you haven?t got TV Licence, since ?The System? has told them. On its own, this is not illegal ! They are looking for evidence that you have a TV. They need this evidence. Don?t make life easy for them – don?t give the evidence to them !

    Prosecutions depend on people owning up ! Don?t do it !

    Beware – reported TV Licensing ?dirty tricks? include ?

    – Pretending to be ?doing a survey?. Start off, ?Have you got a washing machine ??, etc. Then, ?Have you got a TV ??.

    – Asking the neighbours ? ?Who lives next door ??.

    If you move house, do not tell TV Licensing ? leave them to find you.

    If you buy a TV or DVD player, or similar, the shop may ask for your name & address. This is to be sent to TV Licensing, so that they can check that you have a TV Licence. Always give a false name & address. Try not to use your loyalty / reward card, since this gives your name & address automatically.
    Apparently, TV Licensing are also trying to get names & addresses of people buying mobile phones which are able to receive TV.

    This may also apply to MPEG4 players, or computers capable of receiving TV (see below).

    Senior citizens?..

    If you are over 75, you get a free TV Licence. However, my understanding is that TVL does not prosecute non-payers aged over 65. If you are over 65 (I?m not there yet), then please try this out and see what happens.

    The dreaded TV Detector Van is a myth created to make people think that they will be ?caught?. They are really empty vans with ?TV Detector Van? written on the side. If you see one, stop them, and ask to see inside !

    No-one has ever been prosecuted on the basis of ?TV Detector Van? evidence anyway. Prosecutions depend mainly on people owning up or as I put it the gullible punter.

    Haven?t got a TV ? You will know that TV Licensing will still bombard you with threats, even if you really haven?t got a TV. You are under no legal obligation to sign their ?declaration? that you haven?t got a TV. You can just ignore them, as above.
    See also Haven?t got a TV ?

    The more people we can get to do some or all of this, the better.

    Happy Viewing !

    PART TWO

    AVOIDING THE TV LICENCE

    Lots of people (reportedly about 5% of the population) have a TV, but avoid paying the TV Licence altogether.

    You can join them.

    In order to prosecute you, TV Licensing need evidence that you have a TV, but no Licence.

    The evidence is always one of two things ?

    Your admission that you have a TV.

    A TV Licensing Officer seeing your TV.

    Getting a search warrant is expensive and lots of hassle, and they need some initial evidence to get one of these anyway.

    TV Detector Vans are a myth. No-one has ever been prosecuted on the basis of ?Detector Van? evidence.

    So, if you do the following, you will probably be OK ?

    Do not respond to any letters from TV Licensing.
    Do not respond to any phone calls from TV Licensing.
    If someone from TV Licensing calls, do not say anything.
    Do not let anyone from TV Licensing into your house.
    Do not communicate with TV Licensing in any way.
    Make sure that no-one can see / hear your TV from the doors / windows.
    If you buy a new TV / DVD player / etc, always give a false name & address if asked.
    So – No Evidence ? No Prosecution ! Happy viewing !

    PART THREE

    TECHNOLOGY AND THE FUTURE OF THE TV LICENCE

    One of the great causes of cultural change is new technology. An attractive new technology can change rapidly the way in which people behave.

    Got a mobile phone ? When was the last time you used a public call box ?

    Several new technologies are affecting the way in which people watch TV.

    In the relatively recent past, things like ?phones, TVs, video recorders, computers, cameras, personal music systems, etc, were separate pieces of kit.

    Now, things are usually merged together, with several functions on the same piece of kit.

    These changes are happening very rapidly ? will the BBC notice before it is too late ?

    What will happen to peoples? acceptance of the TV Licence, as a result of all these changes ?

    Digital TV

    Digital TV channels have proliferated, in particular specialist channels. The TV audience has become much more fragmented, and people watch ?their? TV channel ? music, sport, movies, whatever. Fewer people watch the mainstream BBC channels, which try to please everyone.

    Hopefully, people are thinking, ?Why should I pay for the BBC when I pay for, and watch, Sky Movies, or Sky Sport, or music channels ??

    Digital TV recorders

    VHS cassette -type video recorders are disappearing from the shops. New recorders are really computers. They can record much bigger chunks of programs. You can program many future recordings, rather than having to do it one program at a time.

    Effectively, people can now have ?their? TV channel, made up of programmes chosen by them, not chosen by a broadcaster.

    Hopefully, people are thinking, ?Why should I pay for the BBC when I never watch any of their programmes ??.

    TV and films over the internet

    Broadband internet connections and more powerful computers mean that large amounts of data can be downloaded quickly.

    You can watch live TV over the internet, and download films.

    TV Licensing are trying to get companies with broadband internet connections, but no TV, to get a TV Licence. Not having a TV Licence under these circumstances has not yet been tested in court.

    Hopefully, people are thinking, ?Why should I pay for the BBC when I watch non-BBC things on my computer, that I pay for each time ??.

    Portable DVD players
    You can buy portable kit that will play DVDs. Also, MPEG-4 players allow you to download films via the internet, and then watch them.

    Hopefully, people are thinking, ?Why should I pay for the BBC, when I watch films, which I have paid for, on my portable player ??

    TV on your mobile phone

    You can subscribe to TV channels, and watch them on your mobile phone. Normal TVs are essentially fixed in the house where they are used. Now, you can watch TV on the move.

    Hopefully, people are thinking, ?Why should I pay for the BBC when I pay for my mobile phone TV subscription ??

    The past

    Families sit together watching ?family? programs on their single TV set, which can receive only 4 channels.

    Big broadcasters decide what the family shall watch.

    The family don?t mind paying for their TV Licence.

    The future ?

    People watch most of their TV alone, often away from home, often when travelling, on their ?mobile phone TV? or wireless laptop.

    They pay a subscription to get only the channels & programmes they want to watch.

    People decide what they want to watch themselves.

    People cannot understand why they are told to pay for a TV Licence

    #25389 Reply

    Lone
    Participant

    Orange_Crush wrote:I have to say I couldn’t disagree more.

    In my opinion the BBC provides the best broadcasting service I’ve seen. It’s programmes are often informative, educational and entertaining. The BBC’s use of Interactive services is far superior (in my opinion) and the integration of websites with their programmes superb (e.g. Digital Picture of Britian).

    I pay 100+ UKP for the BBC each year and 492UKP to Sky. Do I get 4 times better quality, service? In my opinion, I do not. Again, in my opinion, the BBC offers exceptional value for money.

    The media used (Satellite, Terrestial, Terestial Digital) is immaterial. The license fee funds the BBC. In the past few months I have made a conscious choice to monitor the channels I do watch. I invariably find that it is the BBC channels I’m usually drawn to. This is leading me to seriously consider my future membership and subscription to Sky, as I will be changing address soon.

    Having access to a freeview box has seriously questioned whether I will continue with satellite (or at least subscription satellite) in the future.

    I do appreciate that people should have a choice and with the license fee, they do not. I would still the license fee by choice. The BBC is, in my opinion, worth every single penny.

    Couldn’t agree with you more, well said. :rolleyes:

    With ITV Digital long dead, and NTL and the rest unable to put up any sort of a fight against BSkyB, BBC is the only thing stopping Murdoch from dominating British TV. If the license fee is the last barrier which prevents a Murdoch monopoly, I am happy to continue paying it.

    #25390 Reply

    vicky23
    Participant

    The TV Licence is a pile of crap. I hate the BBC and only watch Sky. When I was at university I stayed in an old stately home type building. There were about 200 bedrooms and each one had to have its oWn tv licence. The porter used to warn us when the Tv licence men were coming round to check and everyone used to hide their TVs. A small victory over the BBC

    #25391 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    No contact

    Simply ignore TVL/BBC. Their letters are computer-generated and sent out by the hundred-thousand. The purpose of these “official warnings” and threats of “imminent legal action” is psychologial rather than actual. Once this is realised, the letters cease to have any effect or credibility.
    The same applies to street visits. If someone called at your door and asked to see whether you had a washing-machine or a food-mixer, would you let them in? Of course not, so why permit TVL/BBC to look for a TV, video or DVD player? People who work for TVL/BBC have no more right to enter private residences than people selling dusters.
    Without entry, TVL/BBC have no sure means of knowing whether a house has equipment set up to receive broadcasts. That is why they rely on mass mailshots, declaring messages such as, “This is your final warning”. They rely on householders’ own reaction to these letters, and on self-incrimination during street visits. Without YOUR co-operation, TVL/BBC is impotent.
    What about search warrants? Before a search warrant can be issued, TVL/BBC must satisfy the court that they have “reasonable grounds” for believing that broadcasts are being received at the unlicenced address. The simple absence of a licence does not constitute this, nor does the householder’s refusal to communicate with TVL/BBC. To obtain a search warrant, TVL/BBC must offer the court positive evidence, such as seeing or hearing a television, or the householder’s own admission. Without such evidence, TVL/BBC cannot apply for a search warrant, and without a search warrant, they cannot enter. So, they are back to square one.
    The “no contact” method is therefore to ignore the letters and to keep the door shut to TVL/BBC visitors. A drawback of this approach is that TVL/BBC will keep coming, but the benefit is that it wastes their time and money: every ?100 spent chasing “no contact” households is ?100 less spent on the BBC itself. And that can only be a good thing.

    Implied right of access

    For some households, letters and visits are not an option. Fortunately, there is a way to stop TVL/BBC approaches. Although houses and flats are private property, there exists an “implied right of access” to enable postal deliveries, newspaper rounds, etc. This means that the pathway, doorbell and letter box may be used by visitors without the express permission of the owner. Invitiation to use them is implied. As a result of this, TVL/BBC can come up your path and ring your door bell.
    To prevent TVL/BBC approaching your property, write to them, stating that you have withdrawn their implied right of access. There is no need to indicate whether you have a television, and you do not need to give your name.
    That will (should) keep their employees away, but it will not stop the delivery of TVL/BBC letters, since it is the postman who uses your letter box. So, inform TVL/BBC that you consider their written contact as harassment. This combined approach – withdrawing the right of implied access and informing them that their actions are harassment – should prevent further contact. At least for a while.
    Remember, whether you choose the No Contact route, or withdraw the implied right of access, always remember the following if a TVL/BBC employee calls: If you know it is them, do not answer the door. If you do answer the door, and then find out who they are, close the door (do not engage in conversation). If they have already been let in, instruct them to leave; they are obliged to do so, as indicated in TVL/BBC’s booklet “About TV Licensing”:

    “If one of our Visiting Officers calls at your home they will … stop the enquiry if asked to leave … [they will] only enter a property when given permission” (page 4, About TV Licensing, December 2004).

    Finally, under no circumstances, do you admit or sign anything. TVL/BBC employees are not the police; they are a private company, and have no special legal powers. They rely on you providing information, which they will seek to use against you.
    Other information

    The less TVL/BBC know about you the better, so here are some more ideas to keep them off your back:

    i) Be mindful of what information you give retailers. Retailers are required to pass names and addresses to TVL/BBC of all customers who buy a television, DVD or video player. TVL/BBC then use this information to update their mailing database.

    ii) If you move house, do not inform TVL/BBC. There is no legal obligation to do so.

    iii) Important: make sure your TV is not visible through the window, or audible from the letterbox. While there is nothing unlawful about having a television without a licence, TVL/BBC will automatically assume that it is receiving broadcasts.

    iv) TVL/BBC sometimes send letters by recorded delivery, requiring your signature. This enables them to confirm your identity and update their database. They also hope that signing for an “official warning” will give you a fright. So, ask to see where a recorded delivery has come from before signing. If it is from Bristol BS98 1TL, refuse it (keep a note of TVL’s address by your front door for easy reference).

    v) TVL/BBC sometimes phone people up. If a caller asks for you by name, ask who is phoning before confirming your identity. If the reply is “TV Licensing” or similar, replace the handset. Do not engage in conversation. If you give your identity, it enables TVL/BBC to update their database.

    vi) Beware dirty tricks. For instance, a caller pretending to do a survey; “Have you got a music centre?”, followed by, “Have you got a TV?”, or “What’s your favourite TV programme?” Always confirm the identity of the caller.
    The following are good practice, regardless of your TV licensing requirements:

    vii) Have your details removed from the publicly available version of the electoral roll. You can do this by ticking the relevant box on your voter registration form. See further details from the Electoral Commission.

    viii) Have your telephone number removed from the directory; details to be found in the phone book.

    ix) Join the Mailing Preference Service, the Telephone Preference Service and the Fax Preference Service. http://www.fpsonline.org.uk

    x) Do not give your name on your answer machine’s recorded message.

    xi) Do not give consent for your details to be given to third parties; for instance, when completing coupons for special offers, magazine and catalogue tear-off slips and promotional questionnaires and flyers. Always tick the non-disclosure box.
    Complaints against TVL/BBC, and how to make them

    If you wish to contact them for purposes of a complaint, below is where to write. This is a three-stage process; start with the first address, and move to the second and third if the responses are not satisfactory. Do not start with the second or third addresses. According to its 2005 annual report, TVL/BBC received 18,000 written complaints, and 5,000 by telephone, so you will be in good company.
    1) Head of Customer Relations
    Customer Relations Department
    TV Licensing
    Bristol BS98 1TL

    2) Customer Services Director
    TV Licensing
    Bristol BS98 1TL

    3) Customer Relations Manager
    BBC TV Licensing Management Team
    PO Box 48309
    London W12 6YA

    #25392 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    BBC.com to be funded by advertising?

    Auntie standing on her own two feet?

    The BBC has admitted it is to look at funding it?s websites with online advertising.
    A spokesman for the corporation stated that media reports claiming the BBC is considering the use of advertising to fund bbc.com, pencilled in for a spring 2007 launch, are “broadly accurate”.

    The reports appeared first in The Guardian which carried an interview with David Moody, director of strategy at the BBC.
    Moody said the corporation must consider the validity of making money from BBC.com

    Moody told The Guardian: “What we are investigating is: should the BBC make money from people visiting and using our website?? Currently the bbc.co.uk website attracts around one billion page impressions every month, the BBC says.

    It is thought the new designed website will not carry some of the web’s more unwelcome ad formats such as pop-ups or rich media overlays – the animated ads which crawl across pages, often obscuring content.

    However, it is unlikely this announcement will pass without the usual fierce opposition from websites operating wholly in the commercial space.

    #25393 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    Ministers agree TV licence deal :huh:

    The culture secretary and chancellor have agreed a below-inflation rise for the TV licence fee, the BBC has learnt.
    The agreement reached by Tessa Jowell and Gordon Brown has not yet been approved by Tony Blair.

    Under the plan, the fee would rise by 3% next year and the year after, and 2% for the following three years. The Retail Price Index is currently 3.9%.

    The decision would mean the licence fee rising to ?135.45 next year from its current level of ?131.50.
    By 2012, the cost of a TV licence is set to be between ?148.05 and ?151.

    The level of increase is unclear for year six, because of the uncertainty over the financial cost of the changeover from analogue to digital TV.

    That is well below the amount that the BBC had demanded viewers pay – which included inflation-busting increases taking the figure to as much as ?180 over seven years.

    The BBC said discussions continued and it awaited an announcement in the New Year.
    New stance

    The agreement would mean the BBC had failed to convince ministers of its case for an above-inflation increase, which it has often enjoyed in the past.

    The settlement would also bring the BBC more closely into line with other public sector bodies, as the licence fee will not be linked to inflation at all in future.

    BBC media correspondent Torin Douglas said it asked for the above-inflation rise to help pay for better programmes and the switch to digital television.

    He added that the increase was also intended to pay for the move of many staff and programmes to Salford in Greater Manchester.

    Sources at the Department of Culture, Media and Sport said that the Treasury had originally hoped to secure a settlement of 1.5% below inflation.

    They added that as a result of their negotiations, they had secured about ?1bn in additional funds over the next six years for the broadcaster.

    However, the new fee agreement is expected to lead to the BBC cutting back on many of its plans, though it is not clear which ones.

    Ms Jowell told Parliament this week that ?600m to help elderly people switch to digital television would be ring-fenced and that the BBC’s Manchester move should be able to go ahead under the settlement.

    Conservative shadow culture spokesman Hugo Swire added that the deal was a “huge defeat” for Ms Jowell, adding she had led the BBC to believe it would get a generous settlement.

    He added: “The big questions now are what comes off the menu agreed between the government and BBC during the charter renewal process, if the BBC can deliver on all they have been told to by the government, and was the original figure submitted by the BBC grossly inflated?”

    But BBC business editor Robert Peston said the deal meant the licence fee would rise broadly in line with the headline rate of inflation – the Consumer Price Index, which excludes mortgage payments.
    “In theory this is less than inflation, in the sense that Retail Price Index is 3.9% at the moment. And I am sure the Treasury will claim this as a tough settlement,” he said.
    “But on a running CPI basis, I think it can be seen as broadly in line with inflation – the Bank of England’s CPI target rate is 2%.”
    News of the deal comes just weeks after Michael Grade quit as BBC chairman during key talks over the licence fee.

    http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bbcresi…ignatories.html

    http://www.tvlicensing.biz/

    #25394 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    ‘PC tax’ could replace BBC licence fee :wacko:

    The TV licence fee could eventually be axed and replaced by a tax on all personal computers, according to a new report from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

    In announcing the findings of the Whitehall’s review of the BBC’s Charter, Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell told ministers that the government was content with the traditional licence – but only in the short term.

    “Although not perfect, we believe it remains the fairest way to fund the BBC so it will continue throughout the next Charter. In the coming months, we will have to decide on the right level for the fee after 2007 – but beyond that, we have to take account of the rapid advance in technology and media consumption,” she said.

    “Over the next charter period we expect the BBC to play a substantial part in developing a digital Britain,” the Culture Secretary told the Commons.
    If alternative funding models get the go ahead, one idea being mooted by the government is a fee payable for each PC purchased.
    The green paper on the Charter review, published yesterday, suggests that TV piracy may force the BBC into changing how the licence fee is collected.
    “In future, if a large number of people are downloading audio-visual content from the internet, and watching it on their computers or mobile phones, rather than using traditional TV and radio services, it may be difficult to collect and enforce a licence fee based on television ownership.”
    The green paper continues: “In that world, different funding models may have to be considered. If the licence fee was to be retained, the means of collecting it might have to be changed – so that it because, for example, either a compulsory levy on all households or even on ownership of PCs as well as TVs.”
    Much of what the government is predicting, however, is already a reality. The UK now accounts for one-fifth of global piracy of television, a recent report found, while O2 is trialling video-over-mobile and several operators are already investing in HSDPA technology, which will facilitate TV-style broadcasts to mobiles.
    The BBC, which has recently been forced to prune its web presence, declined to comment on the possibility, saying the issue of funding is solely down to the government.
    Nevertheless, the change could prove a lucrative one for the BBC. Currently, there are 24.5 million TV licences in force, according to the TV licensing authority. However, almost nine million PCs were sold in the course of 2004 in the UK, according to analyst house Gartner, and growth rates are rising fast, with a year-on-year increase of nearly 15 per cent.

    :blink: sign the petition these people have no idea how unpopular their imposed tax is ….. http://www.tvlicensing.biz

    #25395 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    Why do we currently pay 36 pence a day, ?2.53 per week, ?131.50 a year for a tax to have the right be entertained in our homes?

    In 1993 Mr Greg Dyke who was then to become chairman of the BBC told the media society that it was imperative that the BBC should be financed through voluntary subscription since the current licence system was becoming absurd to enforce due to the changing viewing habits of the British public and the emergence of new technologies.

    In 2000 the government agreed to increase the TV licence fee each year 2.5% above the rate of inflation to fund the BBC?s extra digital channels even though to receive a large part of the BBC package UKTV Gold , UKTV People etc.. You will still have to pay extra if you wish to receive these channels and don?t forget the BBC has been given the go ahead to introduce advertising on its website BBC.com.

    This year 2006 a review took place of the T.V Licence and its Royal Charter. I had my suspicions that it wouldn?t be a fair, open and a unbiased debate as there are too many BBC cronies within the government.
    I was right all objections by the British Public were suppressed and the BBC had its charter renewed and to think the then culture secretary, Ms Tessa Jowell said ?The prospect of the UK having the BBC being funded by the Licence fee is anywhere between improbable to impossible to sustain?.

    The BBC can now be confident that they will be able to extort money from us well into the next decade despite the ever increasing numbers of people shown in polls who are opposed to the licence fee. Politicians will now not even have to consider the alternatives which are more viable such as voluntary subscription which doesn?t infringe on European law.

    TV Licence under Threat

    The European Commission has updated it’s TV without frontiers directive to take into account of new developments such as video-on-demand, broadcasting via broadband, podcasting etc.
    Currently The Uk as been exempt from a large part of the old directive to protect our TV licence system and our stringent censorship laws, so far several lobby groups who represent the media/communication cartel in the Uk The Broadband Lobby Group, Trade body Intellect & The BBC have branded the changes as unworkable.

    I?m not anti-BBC but I am opposed to a draconian system that is supported by a so called democratic government which allows an unelected and unaccountable organisation to enforce its own policies as law and therefore allows them to unjustly persecute and intimidate the British people.
    130,000 people a year are prosecuted for failure to pay the TV licence fee. The BBC recently told T.V.L.A to actively target the armed forces by demanding that every single soldier, though they may only be mere centimetres away from each other buy their own TV licence.
    They are also determined to squeeze as much money out of us before we turn 75, when we get our free licences, by harassing us with threatening letters until we crack and just pay the full fee.
    There are far too many injustices to mention i.e. you aren?t legally entitled to a refund and you have to buy a full colour T.V Licence if you use a colour VCR with a black and white T.V.
    The BBC says they provide value for money. I believe the public should be allowed to decide if this is the case or not.

    Is it any wonder then that with such unjust legislation to back them up that TVLA can be as rude and arrogant to us as they please, at the end of the day we still have to pay whether we like it or not, that is why there is a great familiarity between the licence fee and a tax or as I like to call it a entertainment tax.
    So why have I taken up the baton? Well I know I?ve taken my time getting there but I wish to voice my objections, along with other like-minded people, for the need in present day Britain to counter this compulsory entertainment tax.

    One of the steps I?m taking is giving my support and help trying to build up a petition which is to be presented to the government and I hope you will sign. This is not just merely a poll gauging public opinion but a petition voicing a genuine objection to the current and ongoing expansion of licence fee legislation.

    I know there are more important issues within the UK but ask yourself this, how long are you going to let yourself be sub servant to a system that contradicts freedom of choice and that allows the BBC to hold a monopoly in a ever increasing commercial market of CHOICE.

    A colour licence currently costs ?131.50 with a rise each year 2.5% above the rate of inflation how long before you can not afford it, that is if you already can?t?

    PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION DON?T JUST SIT BACK AND ALLOW YOURSELF TO GET SCREWED HARDER EACH YEAR <_ <

    http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bbcresi…ignatories.html

    Or visit the website for more information……..

    http://www.tvlicensing.biz

    #25396 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    It’s the BBC against the world (wide web)

    Family Christmases are often marred by an unpopular Auntie – but is the same thing happening to the internet…

    The BBC has never been universally popular – and it’s not just the tunnel-vision approach to programming which angers licence-fee payers (‘what do you mean you want to watch something which doesn’t involve reality TV, DIY or the emergency services?’).
    One of the more galling things for many online businesses is the self-congratulatory tone the BBC has every time its online services scoop another gong.
    Each time it happens millions of website users are informed as to just how good the service is. And while there’s nothing wrong with blowing your own trumpet, each time the announcements will be met with a uniform response from rivals:

    “Yes, but give us that much money the BBC gets and see how many awards we win.”

    You have to admit they’ve got a point. Of course all these competing businesses would like the same level of funding – that goes without saying – but it is also about wanting a level playing field.

    Now, the BBC is up before another judging panel – but it’s not a nice mantelpiece-friendly trinket which is up for grabs.
    In a nutshell: the Beeb is being asked to ‘justify itself’.

    In more detail: a review ordered by Tessa Jowell, the Secretary of State for Culture, will examine how well the Beeb’s online arm has lived up to its remit, if it provides value for money and what commercial impact the organisation has had on the market.
    It’s that latter point which will strike a chord with competing organisations who have had to scrap for ad-based funding. Obvious comparisons would be with an organisation such as ITV. The commercial channel would no doubt argue that the BBC has an unfair advantage and that the market is skewed as a result.

    In defence of the organisation Ashley Highfield, director of BBC New Media and Technology,said: “Two million people came onto the net as a result of the BBC. In terms of e-commerce, 65 per cent of traffic from our sites goes onto other sites, so we’re actually driving ecommerce.”

    It’s a good point and shows a level of benevolence which may previously have been overlooked. It seems likely that thousands of BBC site visitors may have read reports about the new Harry Potter book for example and then headed to Amazon to buy the book – which is good news for Amazon, but it’s not necessarily good news for the rival sites selling banner ads to Amazon.
    This isn’t a question of quality. The BBC site to some is outstanding – but it again raises questions about funding and competition issues which will dog Auntie ad nauseum.

    What do you think? Should Auntie be forced to stand on her own two feet and support itself? Is the idea of a state-sponsored broadcaster outdated in the internet age? Should the BBC’s new media properties be spun off? Let us know your thoughts .

    #25397 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    BBC should ‘stop its imperial march’, says ex-boss

    Former BBC chief Sir Michael Checkland has blasted the corporation for breaking the terms of its charter by making a push into the commercial arena.

    Sir Michael told the Commons select committee on culture, media and sport that he had tried to put a halt to the BBC’s commercial march when he was director general from 1987 to 1992. He is reported to have said: “I said when I was director general that the BBC should stop its imperial march. It is now on a much bigger march.”

    His criticisms came after Culture Secretary Chris Smith ordered three inquiries into the BBC after criticism that it was misusing licence fee money and competing unfairly with commercial companies.
    Smith ordered inquiries into BBC Online, the internet channel and into News 24, the corporation’s rolling news channel.
    Sir Michael said that by encroaching on the territories of its commercial rivals, the BBC was “destroying the consensus that has been very important to public service broadcasting”. He warned that the core services could be put at risk by diverting cash to other services. :unsure:

    #25398 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    BBC defends ?20m online bill

    BBC chairman, Sir Christopher Bland addressed the House of Commons Culture Committee to explain that the ?20m of license-payers money used to set up BBC Online is money well spent.

    Sir Bland told the committee that the BBC has to keep up with online exploitation.
    Sir John Birt, the BBC’s director general, described the site “as the best in the world,” adding that there is no better way in finding out what is happening in the world.

    A spokesman for the BBC commented that the select committee “encouraged us to get online,” adding, “using 1 per cent of the budget is a small amount for a start up”.
    He explained that the site is getting 31 million page impressions a month and has doubled its user base in the past six months. He added that it allows users to interact with the BBC in ways they have never done before. “We are fulfilling the expectations of license-payers,” he said.
    Robin Duke-Woolley, principle analyst at Schema, said: “The BBC should be strongly defended.” He explained that the Web extends internationally and will help with overseas marketing.
    He said: “If they didn’t have a Web site they would be seen as being behind the times. Although a smaller amount of the population have Web access, a high percentage that do are youngsters so this helps out with the education needs of kids in the UK.”

    #25399 Reply

    NaRvIcK DeViL
    Participant

    Two-thirds want TV on demand

    Sixty-three per cent of us want to watch what we want when we want to, rather than when schedulers dictate.

    According to a survey commissioned by ISP Tiscali, nearly two-thirds of us would prefer to watch TV-on-demand through our TV sets via our broadband connection even though most of us don’t know what the term IPTV (internet protocol television) means.

    Tiscali surveyed 1,465 adults in the UK and found that 42 per cent of them believed that the television schedules that are used today will be a thing of the past in ten years time.

    Twenty-five per cent of respondents think that larger commercial broadcasters such as ITV will struggle to survive in future, when smaller, targeted broadcasters who cater better to individual needs will flood the market.

    It seems that ITV at least partially shares this view and is attempting to adapt to the changing market. Earlier this week, ITV announced that it would be launching a broadband TV portal in April of this year.

    “There is obviously a big demand already among British consumers for the freedom and choice IPTV will give them, even if they don’t know the jargon yet. Conventional broadcasters should heed the warning and will need to adapt significantly in the coming years to retain their market share,” said Neal McCleave, managing director of media services at Tiscali.

    However, despite our appetite for TV-on-demand, the results of the survey suggest that we’ll spend less time in front of the box rather than more. Forty-two per cent of respondents who viewed on demand content said they watched less TV, with a further 41 per cent saying that they watched the same amount.

    ?The good news for consumers is that with all the extra choice and freedom, we’re not all going to become couch potatoes. While the growing adoption of IPTV may mean we watch less TV overall, the time we spend in front of the box will be of a higher quality,? said McCleave.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 63 total)
Reply To: The TV licence
Your information: