TV License

[lost eden]

As most of you should know (as the majority of us are Brits), if you tune television broadcasts in the UK you must pay £135+ every year to the BBC (British Broadcastng Corporation), even if you don't tune BBC signals. Yes that's right, if I don't even own an aerial, just a satellite dish pointing towards Astra, a service that broadcasts absolutely no BBC transmissions whatsoever, I still have to pay. If I'm blind I still have to pay (though not as much).

Now as it is, I'm at university & can't afford a license, & to tell the truth I'm not that bothered about TV, so I didn't bring one with me. This however is a paradox to the BBC - absolutely all UK residents have to own a TV & watch our programmes, surely? So they stoop to the level of blanketly assuming that everybody in the UK is tuning television, & therefore if they don't have a license they must be breaking the law. They send out droves of letters headed by large red text claiming, in as many words, WARNING YOU ARE BREAKING THE LAW, WE'RE SENDING THE HEAVIES TO GET YOU. The solution? "Call this number now to buy a TV license." F**k off I don't have a bloody TV!

Anyway, this is going somewhere. If you don't cough up the cash for a TV License, they will eventually send around their 'inspectors' to check your home for any unlicensed equipment in use. My question is this: in accordance with UK law, do the 'inspectors' actually have any right whatsoever to enter my home, because I'd love to 'politely' tell them to get off my property?

[Zak33]

dunno...BUT I'd say that the TV license, even going up in price as it is, is bloody superb value for money

Sky? Hardly. NTL? Hardly.

Digital TV. Fantastic

[IBM]

I'm pretty certain that they'd have to have a warrant to enter your property....don't hold me to it, but it makes sense that they can't just turn up and demand entry.

If they do turn up, don't say anything, just walk back into the house, leaving the door open, and then when they come in, beat the crap out of them and tell the police you were defending yourself against trespassers...

[G4Z]

Short answer, no they cannot enter without permission.

Back in my skint days I two encounters with them, both times I simply told them no they couldnt come in. The second guy was really arsey, started shouting at the top of his voice that "You're not above the law you know!!!" so the whole street could hear and wedged his foot into the door. I was very tempted at that point to simply flatten him, instead I gave him a good shove out of the door and closed it. Bought a license after that as I did have a TV at that point, however when they assumed that I owed them £112 for the whole year (this was in November, so they would want another £112 in April) I decided to cancel the DD as i was moving house anyway.

I know its breaking the law and all of that, however I simply do not agree with the license, when we go to digital and switch of analogue I do not see how they can continue the license, there is no reason not to encrypt BBC and pay for it as part of your package.

[lost eden]

dunno...BUT I'd say that the TV license, even going up in price as it is, is bloody superb value for money

So say I want to fix a satellite dish to the wall out there, & point it at one of the few remaining analogue satellite transmitters, which physically do not transmit ANY BBC material you say I should still pay £135 to the BBC, from whom I am getting nothing?

This submission to a Charter Review get's part of my frustration perfectly;

"The corollary of having a licence fee is that one needs to pay for an authority to police it. Anyone who doesn't have a licence either because they don't want to watch UK broadcast TV or because they can't receive it for geographical reasons, is harassed on at least a monthly and sometimes on a daily basis. In doing so the TVLA spend a vast amount of money infringing people's human rights. Britain might not be a police state, but it most certainly is a TVLA state. Unlike the TVLA, the police don't contact innocent people on a regular and frequent basis suggesting they are breaking the law. The police do not routinely threaten to investigate large numbers of innocent people, sending out letters promising huge fines and imprisonment. The police do not send round officers to search homes for illegal activity without any complaint being made. The TVLA do that monthly to all us "weirdos" who don't have a TV. The aggressive, objectionable behaviour of the TVLA has been reported on at least two occasions by the BBC's own "You and Yours" programme on Radio 4."

If they do turn up, don't say anything, just walk back into the house, leaving the door open, and then when they come in, beat the crap out of them and tell the police you were defending yourself against trespassers...

Although I'm not exactly a large fellow, I've always wondered how much damage I could do when given the perfect legal oppurtunity to do so...

[kasavien]

If you can honestly say that you would never watch a BBC channel, watch a program produced by the BBC, listen to BBC radio, visit the BBC website, then fair enough you shouldn't have to pay the fee. Personally i agree with zak, they provide an excellent service and very good value for money, personally i have no problem paying for it.

[lost eden]

The TV License should apply only to the BBC's television broadcasts - there was a radio license which was abolished after television became more popular. If they want to charge for the usage of their website, then they would have to alter the wording of the license agreement. Though it's already a shady area with them trying to apply the license to streaming media over the 'net.

[midzt]

They sent everyone in ur halls that letter early last term, even tho most people didn't actually have a TV. Haven't heard from them since, I think it was just a scare tactic to make as many people pay it as they can.

[lost eden]

Well with us they've kept sending them, fornightly at least.

[autopilot]

dunno...BUT I'd say that the TV license, even going up in price as it is, is bloody superb value for money

Sky? Hardly. NTL? Hardly.

Digital TV. Fantastic

Yep, it's a bargain when you compare it to other things. Some people pay 2-3 times more just on their phone.

TV stations BBC 1, 2, 3, 4, News 24, CBBC and Cbeebies PLUS Radio 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, World service, plus how many local stations AND the world best internet news portal - all non comercial and ad-free (did i miss anything?)

And digital TV/Radio is great, even if they did make a mess of DAB and some TV stations are way over-compressed.

Yet some of the people who moan about the fee don't bat an eyelid at the thought of paying Sky for the privilege of watching endless intrusive adverts Sky should be free FFS.

It's a crazy old world and we are lucky to have the greatest TV network in the world.

That said, i do sympathise with the OP if he can not receive any BBC content what-so-ever.

[iamtheoneneo]

they have to have a license. and seriously what is the bbc doing with our money? topgear and neighbours are the only things i watch on bbc hardly worth the £100+, to be honest i download more tv then i watch properly

[Sinizter]

Even if I can receive any BBC transmissions, I dont watch it at all. I occasionally blunder into a Top Gear show but other than NOTHING AT ALL. The only channels I watch are Film 4, some E4 and ABC1.

Why should I be made to pay for it (even if you seem to think its great value) ?

I dont listen to the radio either. Even in a car I have never listened to the BBC channels (except when I have been in the car with some other driver who listens to it).

So why should I pay ?

Yes, if I watch BBC programming on a regular basis, then it could be good value. But I don't. And I damn well wont be letting any TV License Inspectors into my house without a full warrant.

If they wedge their foot in my door, I might be very tempted to accidentally drop something extremely heavy on their foot - ensuring that they then wont be getting that foot in any door for a good few months.

[this_is_gav]

they have to have a license. and seriously what is the bbc doing with our money? topgear and neighbours are the only things i watch on bbc hardly worth the £100+, to be honest i download more tv then i watch properly

I agree with this - Top Gear and football, Radio 5 Live and the bare basics of the website are pretty much all use from the BBC now, and when you look at it like that, it's not good value (despite how excellent each of those products are).

If you watch a lot of TV, then fair enough, it becomes much better value, even excellent value, but I don't see why if I chose only to watch ITV that I should have to pay for a license - or even fund the plethora of things like the BBC Asian Network that I'm never, ever going to use.

Electronic entertainment has moved on a long from the days of 4 channels and a couple of radio stations. It's screaming out for a subscription-based service in my opinion.

//edit: this could just be a copy/paste of the post above that was made while I was typing mine, dammit!

//edit2: oh yes, of course we're also funding the installation and maintenance of the transmission masts and the accompanying things, and of course we should pay for them (well, those using these methods should), but of course that's not where the large majority of the license fee goes to.

[Saracen]

.... My question is this: in accordance with UK law, do the 'inspectors' actually have any right whatsoever to enter my home, because I'd love to 'politely' tell them to get off my property?

As has been said, unless they have a warrant from a court, then they have no right on entry at all. Nor, for that matter, do police officers except in very specific situations.

You aren't obliged to even answer questions to licence inspectors, including "What's your name". You can just shut the door on them, and might be well-advised to do so, since answering questions simply adds to the information they have on you.

If they have a warrant, however, it's a different story. Then, they have the right to enter and search, but there are restrictions. It's a warrant granted for the purpose of looking for evidence about unlicensed TV use, so they can't rip up floorboards on inspect your underwear drawer.

So while you can refuse an inspector entry, it should be considered that it isn't necessarily smart to do so (assuming you're not breaking the law). Because if you refuse admittance, they might then go to a court, present whatever evidence they have that an unlicenced set is in use, and get a warrant.

And if they do, you'd be foolish to not comply with the warrant, because then, you're defying the court, not TV licencing. Good luck with that, if you try it.

[kasavien]

It's screaming out for a subscription-based service in my opinion.

A subscription based service would almost undoubtedly be more expensive.

[this_is_gav]

For those who watch a lot of TV, then yes, it would be (which is probably the way it should be). But us who just watch this or that, it should work out cheaper.

I'll put it another way. Hypothetically, why should I fund the shows that you watch?