Comments on: Why are iPlayer viewers exempt from the TV licence?

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:40:07 +0000

I have not had a TV for the last 8 years or so and I refuse to speak to the TV licensing people due to the threatening tone of their letters.
I do sometimes use the IPlayer to watch the occasional program, sometimes I even follow a series. If the IPlayer charged per program and the fee was reasonable then I would consider paying it but there is no way I would buy a TV license for 1 show every month or 2. I also do not see why my taxes should be increased to fund those who want to watch the BBC. I would be happier if they were sold off and only those who pay to receive the channels could do so. Then we would see who truly thought the BBC was the home of quality programs…

By: MarkyMark

MarkyMark — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 17:55:52 +0000

I think it’s stupid. I like the idea of the BBC (shame it’s gone downhill, especially after the death (murder) of Dr David Kelly) but think it’s such an inefficient way of collecting the money. The amount they spend on adverts, enforcers, letters and their offices could be done away with. It’s like the working tax credit thing- an expensive way to do something. I say we should just put the minumum wage up instead of having working tax credits and put a fraction of a penny on income tax to cover the TV costs. I don’t watch TV but watch iPlayer sometimes.

By: Pele Mannering

Pele Mannering — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 22:48:19 +0000

Is there no law of harrassment in the UK. If the licensing authority continually write threatening letters despite being told that no TV is being used then cannot a complaint be made to the local police? Perhaps demanding money with menaces is acceptable in the UK? And are the Licensing Authority really entitled to target groups such as small businesses and students? Seems a bit dubious, but Britain post Thatcher is a free and liberal society isn’t it?

By: RM Taylor

RM Taylor — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:41:47 +0000

Why do we have to pay this tax to receive broadcast television from any source? Other countries manage to do this without a mandatory tax… why?

By: David C MacKenzie

David C MacKenzie — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:13:55 +0000

There is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the TV License revenues are. They are funds collected entitling you to receive broadcast television from any source. The revenues are then put into a contingency fund which is then used to fund the BBC, to fund the Digital Changeover, and so on.

As for what TV licensing people can and cannot do, they have a database of all residences which claim to have a TV license. By law, they are duty bound to ensure compliance with TV licensing law, and so, they check this in a number of ways, including by reminder letters, visits and so on. If they have reason to suspect that you are not in compliance with the law, then they can apply to the courts for a warrant to enter your premises, with the evidence that leads them to suspect non compliance. This might include such things as evidence from any of the methods of detection which are available, and which have been used to successfully prosecute evaders. There are many rumours about detector vans, but there is much evidence showing that such data has been used in the courts.

Yes, it is a tax. That is it’s official status in law.

When you use Sky, you actually do not pay for any of the BBC channels, they are free. Even if you cancelled your Sky subscription, you would still be able to receive them; the BBC Channels are freely available on the platform supplied by Sky.

And, lastly, it is NOT the BBC, but the government that demand compliance; it was only in 1991, that duty for enforcement of compliance was taken away from the Post Office, and handed to the BBC

By: Fido

Fido — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:28:52 +0000

It is not a TV licence it is a TV tax. It exists because we are stupid enough to allow it.
The solution is simple. when the TV licence people come knocking, don’t let them in. It has worked for me for the last 20 years.

By: Shaun2k5

Shaun2k5 — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:47:20 +0000

I don’t watch BBC programming at all so I fail to understand why I should pay for content I never need.

Maybe if BBC wasn’t busy paying for Championship football/F1 to appease niche audiences they might not need such money?

By: stu

stu — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:20:54 +0000

I, like someone else mentioned, pay for Sky and for the TV licence. Why am i forced to pay twice when frankly I don’t watch anything on the BBC apart from one or two programs a year.

You should be able to pay for your chosen medium but then thats it, you pay once not multiple times….and as we will all be paying an internet tax soon how long before the BBC try to force through something on that too?

By: Brian Clark

Brian Clark — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 14:51:59 +0000

Move to Australia No TV Licence there

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:44:20 +0000

The Licence fee is a tax that creates a ring-fenced fund to run the BBC. It was created before the web was a twinkle in Tim Berners-Lee’s eye. It’s a mess that somoneone will fix, one day, and then we can all moan about what they come up with.

In reply to Roy (above) and the incredulous Americans – I’d rather pay for a licence that put up with the ridiculous amount of advertising they endure. Been there and been appalled.