This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
I seem to remember some discussion here about this. Depending on when you buy one you end up paying extra, or something along those lines. I've searched the forums but can't find a thread with this paticular subject. Can anyone help with this?
In reply to aln: afaik, it makes no difference, its a set price for a year, makes no diff when you buy it, as it will run out exactly 1 year after the date on which you buy it.
although this being ukc, someone will be along shortly, to call me a complete idiot, give you an answer totally apposite to mine then insist 3 pebble slab is an e1. (its not its vs+ hvs-)
although this being ukc, someone will be along shortly, to call me a complete idiot, give you an answer totally apposite to mine then insist 3 pebble slab is an e1. (its not its vs+ hvs-)
In reply to aln:
It makes no difference, but for the first 6 months you'll pay more
From the TV licence website:
You'll usually pay for your first licence within six months, in instalments of around £24 per month. (If we have to spread the cost into four or five monthly instalments, each payment may be slightly higher). From then on, you pay for your licences in 12 monthly instalments of just over £12 - six before your licence is due and six afte
It makes no difference, but for the first 6 months you'll pay more
From the TV licence website:
You'll usually pay for your first licence within six months, in instalments of around £24 per month. (If we have to spread the cost into four or five monthly instalments, each payment may be slightly higher). From then on, you pay for your licences in 12 monthly instalments of just over £12 - six before your licence is due and six afte
In reply to skarabrae:
5.37am on an odd day of the month when that month has a blue mean in it.
mildly more serious, the price increases are april (if its happening this year) so buying prior to that may be cheaper.
5.37am on an odd day of the month when that month has a blue mean in it.
mildly more serious, the price increases are april (if its happening this year) so buying prior to that may be cheaper.
In reply to aln:
If you buy it now it will run out on 1 Jan 2014 but if you wait until 1 Feb it will run out 1 Feb 2014. Don't buy your first licence at the end of the month.
(Based on my recollection only)
If you buy it now it will run out on 1 Jan 2014 but if you wait until 1 Feb it will run out 1 Feb 2014. Don't buy your first licence at the end of the month.
(Based on my recollection only)
In reply to dissonance:
It's not happening this year, or next. Licence fees are frozen until 2016.
>
> mildly more serious, the price increases are april (if its happening this year) so buying prior to that may be cheaper.
> mildly more serious, the price increases are april (if its happening this year) so buying prior to that may be cheaper.
It's not happening this year, or next. Licence fees are frozen until 2016.
In reply to elsewhere: That's what I was thinking about. Thanks
Sorry to hijack, but another related note i have been receiving letters about buying a TV licence every two weeks since i moved in. I have a television but it is not and has never been connected to the wall or digital signal. I don’t watch a lot of TV but what i do i watch through my Xbox online (Netflix, Sky etc).
The point is the letters arrive and have begun to highlight more and more that i should get a licence and the consequences of not doing. Up to and including a presumably pleasant gentleman coming to my house and searching for unlicensed television equipment.
Despite contacting them on numerous occasions and explaining the situation the letters arrive like clockwork. I’m beginning to think they don’t believe me. Anyone had this situation before that could offer advice?
The point is the letters arrive and have begun to highlight more and more that i should get a licence and the consequences of not doing. Up to and including a presumably pleasant gentleman coming to my house and searching for unlicensed television equipment.
Despite contacting them on numerous occasions and explaining the situation the letters arrive like clockwork. I’m beginning to think they don’t believe me. Anyone had this situation before that could offer advice?
In reply to Cappa:
Maybe they do believe you and think you need a licence. If you're watching Sky TV, you probably do need a licence.
>
> Despite contacting them on numerous occasions and explaining the situation the letters arrive like clockwork. I’m beginning to think they don’t believe me. Anyone had this situation before that could offer advice?
> Despite contacting them on numerous occasions and explaining the situation the letters arrive like clockwork. I’m beginning to think they don’t believe me. Anyone had this situation before that could offer advice?
Maybe they do believe you and think you need a licence. If you're watching Sky TV, you probably do need a licence.
In reply to Cappa:
A friend of mine was in a similar position, he was taken to court and their arguememnt was that he has the ability to watch tv even thou he may chose not to. lucky enough the judge was lenient and let him of just saying he needs to buy a licence within the next 5 days.
Ian
A friend of mine was in a similar position, he was taken to court and their arguememnt was that he has the ability to watch tv even thou he may chose not to. lucky enough the judge was lenient and let him of just saying he needs to buy a licence within the next 5 days.
Ian
In reply to Cappa:
There's a link (in the letters) to an online form that you can fill in stating that you don't need one. I resisted doing this for about 3 years partly because I objected to being asked to justify not needing a licence (surely that should be the presumption), and partly because I wanted to see how long it would take for them to actually do anything. The letters get increasingly threatening, but nobody bothered to come round in person, and even if they had, they have no authority to enter your house.
After I filled in the online form, I didn't hear anything for about 5 years, when they asked me to confirm that I no longer needed one.
Best thing is to fill in the form, and failing that just ignore them; no reason to find the letters threatening if you are doing nothing wrong.
> Despite contacting them on numerous occasions and explaining the situation the letters arrive like clockwork. I’m beginning to think they don’t believe me. Anyone had this situation before that could offer advice?
There's a link (in the letters) to an online form that you can fill in stating that you don't need one. I resisted doing this for about 3 years partly because I objected to being asked to justify not needing a licence (surely that should be the presumption), and partly because I wanted to see how long it would take for them to actually do anything. The letters get increasingly threatening, but nobody bothered to come round in person, and even if they had, they have no authority to enter your house.
After I filled in the online form, I didn't hear anything for about 5 years, when they asked me to confirm that I no longer needed one.
Best thing is to fill in the form, and failing that just ignore them; no reason to find the letters threatening if you are doing nothing wrong.
In reply to Cappa:
Do what I did and ignore them. You don't need to let them in unless accompanied by a cop.
> Despite contacting them on numerous occasions and explaining the situation the letters arrive like clockwork. I’m beginning to think they don’t believe me. Anyone had this situation before that could offer advice?
Do what I did and ignore them. You don't need to let them in unless accompanied by a cop.
In reply to aln: Licence*
In reply to Submit to Gravity:
That's quite funny because I used to be a bit of a pedant on here. I gave it up though, as I had better things to do.
> (In reply to aln) Licence*
That's quite funny because I used to be a bit of a pedant on here. I gave it up though, as I had better things to do.
In reply to aln:
found my tv worked just fine without one in my student days?
now i'm all grown up and responsible i found out that you can get out of this paying extra for 6 months bollo by paying quarterly.
think it cost an extra pound or two over a year but definitely not 6 months bloody payments!
found my tv worked just fine without one in my student days?
now i'm all grown up and responsible i found out that you can get out of this paying extra for 6 months bollo by paying quarterly.
think it cost an extra pound or two over a year but definitely not 6 months bloody payments!
In reply to Cappa:
I could be very wrong, but I understood that you need a licence if you have equipment capable of receiving a signal.
You have stated that you have such equipment, so ,if that is correct, then you should dispose of the TV to be legal.
(Waits to be corrected.......)
> Sorry to hijack, but another related note i have been receiving letters about buying a TV licence every two weeks since i moved in. I have a television but it is not and has never been connected to the wall ......
I could be very wrong, but I understood that you need a licence if you have equipment capable of receiving a signal.
You have stated that you have such equipment, so ,if that is correct, then you should dispose of the TV to be legal.
(Waits to be corrected.......)
In reply to Jim C:
Here's your correction from the tvlicence website
You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder.
Merely owning a Tv is not sufficient.
Here's your correction from the tvlicence website
You need to be covered by a valid TV Licence if you watch or record TV as it's being broadcast. This includes the use of devices such as a computer, laptop, mobile phone or DVD/video recorder.
Merely owning a Tv is not sufficient.
In reply to tony:
Is that because of the bad weather? It's not going to last that long is it, they said on the radio the weekend would be nice.
> (In reply to dissonance)
> [...]
>
> Licence fees are frozen until 2016.
> [...]
>
> Licence fees are frozen until 2016.
Is that because of the bad weather? It's not going to last that long is it, they said on the radio the weekend would be nice.
In reply to Jim C: ok I will correct myself.
Cut and pasted from the website of TV licence rules-
.
The law states that you need to be covered by a TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes, on any device, as they're being shown on TV. This includes TVs, computers, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorders.
You don't need a licence if you don't use any of these devices to watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV - for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs or play video games, or you only watch ‘catch up’ services like BBC iPlayer or 4oD.
Cut and pasted from the website of TV licence rules-
.
The law states that you need to be covered by a TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes, on any device, as they're being shown on TV. This includes TVs, computers, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorders.
You don't need a licence if you don't use any of these devices to watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV - for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs or play video games, or you only watch ‘catch up’ services like BBC iPlayer or 4oD.
In reply to aln:
Re: the constant stream of letters people without a license receive. As an ex-postie I know they get sent to all registered addresses on the royal mail database that doesn't have a license on the tv database. They rotate the letters to make them seem as " they are onto you" but I had them sent to a near derelict house on my round for several years despite it being empty.
I don't have a license because I don't watch live tv as it is broadcast, I did have a telly to watch DVDs on but it wasn't connected to an arial. They send me letters on a regular basis and for the first year or 2 collectors would knock on my door a couple of times a year then post a vaguely threatening card saying they had called. If they had ever called when i was in I would have shown them that my telly couldn't receive live programmes.
Most people without a license are trying to dodge paying so they treat everyone in the same way, try not to be offended and just ignore them.
Re: the constant stream of letters people without a license receive. As an ex-postie I know they get sent to all registered addresses on the royal mail database that doesn't have a license on the tv database. They rotate the letters to make them seem as " they are onto you" but I had them sent to a near derelict house on my round for several years despite it being empty.
I don't have a license because I don't watch live tv as it is broadcast, I did have a telly to watch DVDs on but it wasn't connected to an arial. They send me letters on a regular basis and for the first year or 2 collectors would knock on my door a couple of times a year then post a vaguely threatening card saying they had called. If they had ever called when i was in I would have shown them that my telly couldn't receive live programmes.
Most people without a license are trying to dodge paying so they treat everyone in the same way, try not to be offended and just ignore them.
>
> I could be very wrong, but I understood that you need a licence if you have equipment capable of receiving a signal.
>
> You have stated that you have such equipment, so ,if that is correct, then you should dispose of the TV to be legal.
>
> (Waits to be corrected.......)
No, it only counts if it receives a signal. If the fee collector called you could demonstrate that your telly doesn't get a signal then and they can't do anything. you need to detune the channels, merely not having it plugged in is probably harder to demonstrate that you can't get a live signal > I could be very wrong, but I understood that you need a licence if you have equipment capable of receiving a signal.
>
> You have stated that you have such equipment, so ,if that is correct, then you should dispose of the TV to be legal.
>
> (Waits to be corrected.......)
In reply to ayuplass:
See 18:32 above, I corrected myself.
See 18:32 above, I corrected myself.
In reply to Jim C:
Though isn't there a moral obligation to pay the licence if you use the iplayer (or any of the BBC's services, I suppose)?
> (In reply to Jim C) ok I will correct myself.
>
>
> Cut and pasted from the website of TV licence rules-
> .
> The law states that you need to be covered by a TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes, on any device, as they're being shown on TV. This includes TVs, computers, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorders.
>
> You don't need a licence if you don't use any of these devices to watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV - for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs or play video games, or you only watch ‘catch up’ services like BBC iPlayer or 4oD.
>
>
> Cut and pasted from the website of TV licence rules-
> .
> The law states that you need to be covered by a TV Licence if you watch or record television programmes, on any device, as they're being shown on TV. This includes TVs, computers, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorders.
>
> You don't need a licence if you don't use any of these devices to watch or record television programmes as they're being shown on TV - for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs or play video games, or you only watch ‘catch up’ services like BBC iPlayer or 4oD.
Though isn't there a moral obligation to pay the licence if you use the iplayer (or any of the BBC's services, I suppose)?
In reply to nufkin:
Does the BBC have a moral obligation to give licence fe payers a dividend from its commercial activities which include Dave, BBC world wide and the sale of programmes paid for by LF payers?
> (In reply to Jim C)
> [...]
>
> Though isn't there a moral obligation to pay the licence if you use the iplayer (or any of the BBC's services, I suppose)?
> [...]
>
> Though isn't there a moral obligation to pay the licence if you use the iplayer (or any of the BBC's services, I suppose)?
Does the BBC have a moral obligation to give licence fe payers a dividend from its commercial activities which include Dave, BBC world wide and the sale of programmes paid for by LF payers?
In reply to A Longleat Boulderer:
And they have a search warrant.
Even then it is not TV Licensing policy to force entry (imagine the scandal) so if you are in the East wing or whatever....
> (In reply to Cappa)
>
> [...]
>
> Do what I did and ignore them. You don't need to let them in unless accompanied by a cop.
>
> [...]
>
> Do what I did and ignore them. You don't need to let them in unless accompanied by a cop.
And they have a search warrant.
Even then it is not TV Licensing policy to force entry (imagine the scandal) so if you are in the East wing or whatever....
In reply to jenks580:
An odd story.
I attended a TV licence hearing last year for research purposes.
There were several cases where the defendant had, since the visit, bought a licence or started a payment plan. In these cases the (lay) prosecutor asked that the case be adjourned until the next scheduled hearing to check the defendant's good faith. There were also a number of cases where the case was withdrawn because the defendant had obviously kept up with their payments/not refunded the licence.
The Magistrates/district judge have no power to order anyone to purchase a licence (or else or otherwise) this is is evidenced by the typically twisted TVL line "you could face a fine of £1000 and you will still need to buy a TV licence".
Also the average fine issued on the day I attended was £65 +£35 (costs) + £15 (victim surcharge), make of that what you will.
An odd story.
I attended a TV licence hearing last year for research purposes.
There were several cases where the defendant had, since the visit, bought a licence or started a payment plan. In these cases the (lay) prosecutor asked that the case be adjourned until the next scheduled hearing to check the defendant's good faith. There were also a number of cases where the case was withdrawn because the defendant had obviously kept up with their payments/not refunded the licence.
The Magistrates/district judge have no power to order anyone to purchase a licence (or else or otherwise) this is is evidenced by the typically twisted TVL line "you could face a fine of £1000 and you will still need to buy a TV licence".
Also the average fine issued on the day I attended was £65 +£35 (costs) + £15 (victim surcharge), make of that what you will.
In reply to ayuplass: Just to clarify. I'm not trying to avoid paying a TV licence/license fee, nor do I think I'm intellectually superior if I don't have a TV. I haven't had a telly for two years, thinking about getting one, when I do I'll buy a licence. Just a cheapskate so I want to get my timing right.
In reply to andic: Interestingly, one of my work colleagues did not have a license and did not watch live TV nor have a TV in his flat. After lots of letters the License people turned up for a visit. He told them what would happen if he refused them entry, they license guy obviously couldn't come in without permission but said he would return with a warrant (or something). As my friend didn't have anything to hide he invited the guy in, at which point, Mr. TV man said that as he had been invited in there was obviously nothing to hide, so just left.
In reply to deanr: Either that or he was going to kill the licence* guy...
In reply to aln:
The answer for a 'cheapscate' as I posted before, If you only watch catch up TV you need not buy a licence. A little bit of oganisation and forward thinking problem solved.
Here again are the rules Cut and PASTED from the website of TV licence rules so there is no argument-
"The law states that you need to be covered by a TV Licence IF you watch or record television programmes, on any device, AS they're being shown on TV.
This includes TVs, computers, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorders.
(for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs or play video games, or you only watch ‘CATCH UP ’ services like BBC iPlayer or 4oD.)"
> (In reply to ayuplass) Just to clarify. ........ Just a cheapskate so I want to get my timing right.
The answer for a 'cheapscate' as I posted before, If you only watch catch up TV you need not buy a licence. A little bit of oganisation and forward thinking problem solved.
Here again are the rules Cut and PASTED from the website of TV licence rules so there is no argument-
"The law states that you need to be covered by a TV Licence IF you watch or record television programmes, on any device, AS they're being shown on TV.
This includes TVs, computers, mobile phones, games consoles, digital boxes and Blu-ray/DVD/VHS recorders.
>
You DON'T need a licence if you DON'T use any of these devices to watch or record television programmes AS they're being shown on TV (for example, if you use your TV only to watch DVDs or play video games, or you only watch ‘CATCH UP ’ services like BBC iPlayer or 4oD.)"
In reply to deanr:
Well, what would happen first is that the TV license guy would have to go to court and get a court order before he could get a warrant, and in order to get the court order he would need evidence to justify it, and as far as I'm aware 'he looks like a wrong'un' is not sufficient in court.
The only people who ever get a search by the TV license people are fools who DO watch TV and have it visible from a window or something.
Well, what would happen first is that the TV license guy would have to go to court and get a court order before he could get a warrant, and in order to get the court order he would need evidence to justify it, and as far as I'm aware 'he looks like a wrong'un' is not sufficient in court.
The only people who ever get a search by the TV license people are fools who DO watch TV and have it visible from a window or something.
In reply to nufkin:
This is a more interesting question. We don't have a TV license as we don't watch broadcast TV. I do make plenty of use of iplayer and various BBC services though, and there was a point where I was going to buy a TV license just to help support what is a world class media organisation.
Unfortunately then the TV license people started their harassment campaign, so now they can get stuffed. They really are one of the scummiest organisations you can have the misfortune to deal with. If you actually notify them that you don't need a TV license they'll send someone round just in case you are a massive liar, and then they'll wait about 6 months and start their letter campaign again anyway. Even during that period they send you helpful reminders just in case you've bought a TV and 'forgotten' to get a license.
Their letters are carefully constructed to be as intimidating and threatening as possible without actually overstating their powers or your obligations (both of which are not very extensive) in black and white. I wonder how many vulnerable or poorly informed people have been tricked or bullied in to paying for something they don't need over the years?
I'm amazed at the number of people who cheerfully let these weasels in. The police don't do casual searches of your house just in case you're a criminal, the fishing license guys don't drop by to check that your garage isn't full of fish and even your landlord needs a formal process to come and look at his own property, and yet this commercial organisation demands unannounced access to people's houses and most people let them have it!
> Though isn't there a moral obligation to pay the licence if you use the iplayer (or any of the BBC's services, I suppose)?
This is a more interesting question. We don't have a TV license as we don't watch broadcast TV. I do make plenty of use of iplayer and various BBC services though, and there was a point where I was going to buy a TV license just to help support what is a world class media organisation.
Unfortunately then the TV license people started their harassment campaign, so now they can get stuffed. They really are one of the scummiest organisations you can have the misfortune to deal with. If you actually notify them that you don't need a TV license they'll send someone round just in case you are a massive liar, and then they'll wait about 6 months and start their letter campaign again anyway. Even during that period they send you helpful reminders just in case you've bought a TV and 'forgotten' to get a license.
Their letters are carefully constructed to be as intimidating and threatening as possible without actually overstating their powers or your obligations (both of which are not very extensive) in black and white. I wonder how many vulnerable or poorly informed people have been tricked or bullied in to paying for something they don't need over the years?
I'm amazed at the number of people who cheerfully let these weasels in. The police don't do casual searches of your house just in case you're a criminal, the fishing license guys don't drop by to check that your garage isn't full of fish and even your landlord needs a formal process to come and look at his own property, and yet this commercial organisation demands unannounced access to people's houses and most people let them have it!
In reply to mullermn:
Could not agree more.
I would just point out that the number of SWs issued is minuscule a handful every year and reserved for special cases who have "annoyed" TV licensing in some way two I know of ar filming the inspector and putting the video on you tube and writing sarcy anonymous withdrawal of implied right of access letters
Could not agree more.
I would just point out that the number of SWs issued is minuscule a handful every year and reserved for special cases who have "annoyed" TV licensing in some way two I know of ar filming the inspector and putting the video on you tube and writing sarcy anonymous withdrawal of implied right of access letters
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...