TV Licence Super Thread

Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2006
Posts
5,750
Location
N Ireland
Could be I suppose. Goes to show market it right and ya might get away with it.

Designed for people who want to delay TV and not record it. Theres no way you can prove or ban that kind of device. What they would do is get the law changed to make delaying a stream to evade the fee an offence. But fee evasion is already an offence so it makes no sense.

Watch it if you want i say, Look to see who is at the door before you open and bin all letters. You send things freely over the air to someones house and demand they not look at it is irreponsible. Not that i do this the BBC content is so bad and so woke i would not even bother to watch it for free.
 
Permabanned
Joined
9 Aug 2008
Posts
35,707
Designed for people who want to delay TV and not record it. Theres no way you can prove or ban that kind of device. What they would do is get the law changed to make delaying a stream to evade the fee an offence. But fee evasion is already an offence so it makes no sense.

Watch it if you want i say, Look to see who is at the door before you open and bin all letters. You send things freely over the air to someones house and demand they not look at it is irreponsible. Not that i do this the BBC content is so bad and so woke i would not even bother to watch it for free.

Indeed that’s a spot on comment so I have nothing to add to that.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Feb 2010
Posts
13,249
Location
London
Designed for people who want to delay TV and not record it. Theres no way you can prove or ban that kind of device. What they would do is get the law changed to make delaying a stream to evade the fee an offence. But fee evasion is already an offence so it makes no sense.

Watch it if you want i say, Look to see who is at the door before you open and bin all letters. You send things freely over the air to someones house and demand they not look at it is irreponsible. Not that i do this the BBC content is so bad and so woke i would not even bother to watch it for free.
Pretty sure the wording is that you are receiving a broadcast not just watching it - hence why a TV licence is also required for recording on Sky Boxes and the like.
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Apr 2006
Posts
17,955
Location
London
Just got the "...we have no alternative but to procedure to the final stages of our investigation" red letter.

Time to worry?

**** no, but how did it get to that? Did you let them in to see your TV? I just filled in the form that i don't watch TV and when someone came and knocked on my door i just slammed it in his face
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Apr 2006
Posts
17,955
Location
London
I see the BBC are stepping up the educational content for kids during the lockdown. It's terrific to have a national broadcaster available that can make a decision like that without having to consider commercial interests.

Of course, they have to get the next generation of little tikes brainwashed to be Tories hating flag-waving EU loving wet liberal environmentalists as quickly as possible seeing state schools have been removed from the equation ;););):p
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
45,169
Just got the "...we have no alternative but to procedure to the final stages of our investigation" red letter.

Time to worry?
I've been getting them for 6-7 years.

I'm 100% convinced it's an automated system on a cycle that resets every so often with no human input unless you respond, then your probably tagged on a different list

  • friendly reminders
  • you naughty boy
  • window watchers in your area, expect a visit
  • no alternative but to proceed with our investigation because your a naughty boy who doesn't give us your details
  • court action imminent.

then back to
No tv license registered at this address.
the first time it happened I was like "holy poop, this is some really twisted sick mind games to terrify the elderly"

it's basically intimidation and extortion in my view.... the BBC are an awful nasty horrid company
 
Last edited:

Jez

Jez

Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
33,073
Its funny that new people always get scared in the same way by these. As said, these just cycle round and round, until they reset back to the start again, they are just spam designed to look like demands.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Dec 2017
Posts
8,386
Location
Beds
Is there any sign that the BBC are driving the process? Don't get me wrong I'm sure they keep cracking the "Get more fees whip" over Capita's head. It's just Capita are known for *****y practises like this across the board, for decades. Shady ********, they've done the same level of harassment for parking fines before.
 
Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2006
Posts
5,750
Location
N Ireland
Is there any sign that the BBC are driving the process? Don't get me wrong I'm sure they keep cracking the "Get more fees whip" over Capita's head. It's just Capita are known for *****y practises like this across the board, for decades. Shady ********, they've done the same level of harassment for parking fines before.

Yes the BBC pay thier wages and thus they are responsible for ALL of the actions of Capita etc. The BBC could stop this tommorrow but they refuse. So the BBC are an evil undemocratic entity. Someone prove me wrong?

As stated above these are sick mind games played out on the Elderly, The infirm, The Austistics etc. They also opposed a legally binding referendum so that also makes them undemocratic. If anyone thinks i am wrong i say prove me wrong then!
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
45,169
Is there any sign that the BBC are driving the process? Don't get me wrong I'm sure they keep cracking the "Get more fees whip" over Capita's head. It's just Capita are known for *****y practises like this across the board, for decades. Shady ********, they've done the same level of harassment for parking fines before.
your suggesting the BBC is innocent and unaware with how they are trying to intimidate and threaten people with court cases?

is this a business run in a unlit backstreet of china town or what
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
9,158
Is there any sign that the BBC are driving the process? Don't get me wrong I'm sure they keep cracking the "Get more fees whip" over Capita's head. It's just Capita are known for *****y practises like this across the board, for decades. Shady ********, they've done the same level of harassment for parking fines before.
The BBC know what Capita are like, just as well as you do ...
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Nov 2006
Posts
23,304
Capita are incompetent screw-ups, yes.

But the BBC hired them, sets the policies and produce the contract they work to. So the blame ultimately lies with them.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
9,158
Posted this quite a few pages ago so just thought I would post as a reminder.

If you have any questions or just want some advice about going "Licence Free", this is the place to go: https://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum/

If you look in the Letters section, you will see that all the "threat-o-grams" you are receiving are just automated and get sent out to everyone.

You mean they're not personally hand written to just the super naughty people? No way.
 
Capodecina
Soldato
Joined
30 Jul 2006
Posts
12,129
The licence fee “may be worth reassessing” as the BBC’s future funding is decided, the corporation’s incoming chair has said, describing the model as the “least worst” option but saying he has an open mind about its future.

Richard Sharp, who has been chosen by the government as its preferred candidate for the post, told the Commons’ digital, culture, media and sport select committee his current view was that the licence fee was “fit for purpose”.

But he said: “When we next get the chance to review … it may be worth reassessing. Like anybody I’d come to this with an open mind about what’s appropriate. [The model] is idiosyncratic.”

The remarks from Sharp – who will be deeply involved in discussions over the right model for the corporation’s financial future – came as part of a wide-ranging session that also covered impartiality, the BBC’s internal culture, and his own association with the Conservative party.

His comments may encourage critics of the corporation who view the licence fee model as anachronistic, ahead of the BBC’s charter renewal in December 2027. But Sharp also emphasised the licence fee model meant that “at 43p a day the BBC represents terrific value”.

“What surprised me on some of the statistics is that for what amounts to a regressive tax, the nation broadly supports the licence fee,” he said.

He said his own enthusiasm for the broadcaster’s output dated back to his enjoyment of Andy Pandy as a child, and said he had watched Fleabag with his 90-year-old mother.

But he suggested staff at the organisation had lost trust in leadership and trust in processes, and both needed to be rebuilt.

Referencing the 2012 Pollard inquiry into the Jimmy Savile affair and equal pay cases against the BBC more recently, he said: “Clearly some of the problems it’s had recently are really rather terrible and reflect a culture that needs to be rebuilt so that everybody … who works at the BBC feels proud and happy to work there.”

He said the equal pay issues had “created inevitably a sense of unfairness for people working within the BBC … and that’s not a good culture to have.”

On whether the BBC’s role could be replicated in the marketplace, he said: “I’m familiar with capitalism. I understand what drives Facebook, Google, Apple – I understand that capitalism has its strengths. It also has its fundamental weaknesses and in the area of media and truth and impartial information public service broadcasting has a very important role to play.”

Sharp, a former Goldman Sachs banker who has been an unpaid adviser to the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, on the economic response to coronavirus over the last year, told MPs he felt the BBC’s coverage of Brexit overall had been “incredibly balanced”.

“If you ask me if I think Question Time seemed to have more remainers than Brexiteers, the answer is yes,” he said. “But the breadth of the coverage I thought was incredibly balanced, in a highly toxic environment that was extremely polarised.

“There have been studies and there has been some acknowledgment that some aspects of the Brexit coverage, from time to time, was not balanced. But I think both sides have issues with how the BBC delivered its view.”

He said the BBC had sometimes been guilty of an ad hominem defence – “we are the BBC, therefore we are impartial”.

Sharp – who has been a major donor to the Conservative party in the past, giving more than £400,000 from 2001-10 and much smaller amounts since then – also faced scrutiny over whether he was too close to the government for a position tasked with ensuring impartiality.

He explained his role with Sunak by saying: “My involvement with the chancellor arose from the fact that he actually used to work for me [at Goldman Sachs], and when the pandemic arose he asked me to put aside all my other interests and come in and help.”

He said the process by which he had been appointed was “robust and fair”, and that strong political leanings in candidates for such posts were “not unusual and it’s more common than not. It’s because it attracts people who are committed to public life and want to make a difference.”

He claimed his position on the board of the Centre for Policy Studies, a rightwing thinktank, did not constitute recent political involvement. He gave up that position as a result of his new appointment.

Sharp’s selection as the government’s preferred candidate was announced last Wednesday. In his new post he will be charged with protecting the corporation’s independence and setting its overall strategic direction.

The culture secretary, Oliver Dowden, called him “exactly the chair the BBC needs right now”. The multimillionaire, whose wealth was once estimated by the Sunday Times rich list at about £150m, said he would donate his £160,000 salary to charity. (LINK)
I suspect that the upshot of this is that the multimillionaire ex-Goldman Sachs banker and Tory Party donor will ensure that the BBC will have to rely on advertising and give up any idea of being impartial :rolleyes:
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Oct 2010
Posts
5,231
the BBC will have to rely on advertising and give up any idea of being impartial :rolleyes:

tomcruise.jpg
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2005
Posts
12,444
In his new post he will be charged with protecting the corporation’s independence

Funny, I wouldn't have called a forced subscription with punishment of prison in order to get paid as being independent

Imagine if Netflix employed such tactics, subscribe to us or we'll send the mafia round to break your legs
 
Back
Top Bottom