AIBU TV Licence

[LouBlue1507]

I don't have a TV licence and don't intend to pay for one.

I don't have access to live TV and only watch Netflix, Itv player, 4od and channel 5. Not BBC iplayer.

I have declared this to the TV licence people and now property is under investigation.

AIBU to refuse them entry if they turn up? I've read horror stories of them being bullies, intimidating and even lying!

Here are a few things I have never watched and have no interest in -

Bake off, Strictly, X Factor, The Voice, Sherlock, Dr Who, Sport, Attenborough, Game Of Thrones, Property and DIY shows.

I haven't watched TV in years, it's so 1990's

Mollie, you don't need superfast broadband to access Netflix. It is not available here, but we use Netflix etc. And there are a small number of places that don't get fast enough broadband to get Netflix etc near me, but it is the minority. I am probably further from civilisation than you, to be honest.

But that doesn't change the fact that the people that choose to not access BBC or live TV are doing nothing wrong - and most people would also have that choice.

Our broadband is about 13 mps or whatever it is and we use Netflix, so not super fast.

The scandalously bad infruastructure in many areas of the country is a completely different issue to how the bloody BBC is funded or how tv licensing enforcement works.

If it's about equality of access, then there is a case for paying for the BBC out of general taxation (the BBC is subject to regular political interference over the license fee anyway). But there's an even better case for just improving the broadband infrastructure so that people can do things like run online businesses from the countryside and subscribe to Netflix if they want.

It's not reasonable to tell people who will never use the BBC that they must cough up for a TV license so people in rural areas don't have to pay too much for their license. That's like insisting that anyone who gets the bus (but doesn't own a car) must pay vehicle tax to keep the cost of that down for people who drive because the bus service in their area is shit.

you all do realise (those of you who ever contemplate life outside your comfortable bubble) that there are areas of the country (I live in one) where the internet is so b*y slow that netflix and all the rest are not possible

I'm glad someone has said this. We can get Netflix sometimes but on the whole we don't have enough broadband speed. (I don't pay for netflix, I use my DDs to watch the odd programme). I am actually close to civilisation and have now become a warrior (haranguing BT and the goverment) trying to get even half decent speed enough to watch catch up which is impossible without it stopping every 10 seconds. So for some of us there is no choice and I suspect the number of people in the same boat as me is pretty big.

Light our speed is 1.17MBps. Yes really. Last time BT tested it, it was too slow to register on their official broadband speed checker.

Yes. Lots of people cannot access streaming services because the government have (for years and years) been utterly lax about it. It is a disgrace.

But, as I said, it's still ridiculous to expect people who don't use the BBC to subsidise access to strictly come dancing because the government won't ensure everyone can access basic utilities.

Oh Roussette that is very very slow, I bet your phone signal is bad too, I know when we have been on holiday sometimes there as been very slow connections and no fibre, it is something which many take for granted nowadays, having a reasonable broadband service

DH and I watch no live TV at all. In fact we don't watch catch up nor do we subscribe to Netflix or any thing similar.

The only reason for my TV licence is for the odd weekend when my parents visit. They are lost without TV.

I'd love the BBC to switch to subscription or PPV. It would save me £145 pa

Thanks Light, yes it is pathetic. My DCs (now young adults) were home over Christmas and it just about ground to a halt with us all on phones, tablets etc. Mobile signal bad too yes! What is galling is, we live 20-30 minutes from three major towns so there is no excuse so I shall keep fighting the battle!

So for us... TV licence is a no choice option!

Can I point out it's unlikely the elderly/blind/those in care are making up the non-licence holder numbers given tv licenses are free for over 75s, half price for those registered blind, and less then a tenner for those in a residential home. Those people probably have their free/discounted licence.

As for me. I love tv. Except when I don't have access to it I barely notice. Spent a few years in the military - never went near the tv room, didn't bother with a tv for my room, watched the occasional DVD film or tv series. Probably added up to less then 20 hours of screen time a year. Now I live abroad. I'd like to see Sherlock and doctor who, will probably buy the series at some point. I was invited to bake off and strictly parties from people who've registered a second tv licence at a family home back in the U.K. so they can legally watch iplayer here but wasn't interested enough to go. I don't have live tv access at all here. I use Netflix and prime and download bits I can't get on those two subscriptions or do without. Frankly I still watch too much tv. I won't bother with a license (or live tv) when we go back to the uk unless DH insists.

I haven't had a tv license for years as I only use Netflix, catch-up and DVDs, no BBC or live tv at all, had many letters from tv licensing and one man chap on the door in that time, but I didn't let him in.

I don't have superfast broadband, it's supposed to be 2mgs but I'm lucky if I get that. Netflix and Prime work fine, but you can adjust the streaming quality to compensate for bad connections.

To those who say you watch BBC ad free for £145 a year. That's astonishing bad value. Have you looked at netflix and amazon prime's prices? Netflix even offer you a monthly subscription! I think amazon too if you don't use the prime delivery? I'm not sure because I have the all song and dance package which also includes delivery and amazon music (for the sonos) for the sum of £79 a year. Both services are ad free.

If BBC offers a monthly subscription model for the price of £7 or under a month, I'll consider it for the month that sherlock is on. That will be £7 a year, not £145.

And why shoudln't I enjoy netflix because I can get up to 78Mb broadband? (Just checked BT says my line is 59Mb-78Mb with a guaranteed minimum of 54Mb). Yes I streamed everything, both TV and radio. I don't own a DAB or FM radio either. I listened to things on Spotify, Amazon Prime music and TuneIn Radio (that's the sonos radio). I pay for my broadband. I think it's massively better value for money than BBC.

We don't have a license either. Cancelled it about 6 months ago when we realised that yes, we would put BBC on but only on autopilot. We never actively wanted to watch it.

We have Netflix and that's about it...We do have Amazon prime but haven't linked it up yet. We did watch the odd thing on iPlayer until the rules changed, but we haven't since as there hasn't been anything on that we have wanted to watch enough to faff around with the laptop.

Dh and I watch the odd old film, Louis theroux, etc. The kids watch mike the knight and my little pony, and we all watch the odd documentary series that's on there.

We don't miss it, but aren't really a massive TV watching family anyway. We haven't had any letters from them yet, if we did I certainly won't feel compelled to let them in.

I pay for the tv licence to watch the apprentice... that's an awful lot of money for a 12 part box set!
I don't watch anything else on BBC, 99% of what I watch is on Netflix but I occasionally buy a tv series on amazon if I really want to see it.
I would love for the BBC to go onto a monthly subscription I would save a fortune!

You don't have to let them in without a warrant. If they turn up and want to come in, slam the door in their face.

The offence is watching live television or iPlayer programmes without a licence. Owning the equipment capable of watching them is not an offence.

To prove you guilty, they would need one of the following to happen:
a) You to admit it.
b) Them to catch you in the act.
c) Evidence from your internet and/or TV service provider.

In all cases, if you are not watching these services, they cannot find the evidence. They use threatening letters and try to intimidate people into admitting that they are doing something wrong, or to try to barge their way into your home.

People usually get caught because they have their TV by the window or they don't know that they don't have to let the inspector into their home. I've not heard of anyone being convicted because of evidence from their TV or internet provider, but I suppose it could happen. I imagine they'd need a warrant though, which would cost them time and money.

Also in my experience, the BBC isn't advert free. They've just substituted loads of adverts for the bloody BBC in place of (a greater variety of) paid for advertising. It always drives me mad when we're at the PILs and MIL puts on the BBC.

I won my case against the tv licencing authority last year , however they have now closed the loop hole and if you view the TV players , use now TV or any other type device you will STILL need a licence to view these.Even on a tablet! So I would go buy one sorry !!!

So many posters convinced that they 'know' the TV licensing rules and so are uniquely positioned to advise everyone else of the minutiae of them - it's not as if these rules are easily and clearly available on the TV license own website which will show said posters that they are COMPLETELY WRONG.

As for the moral superiority bleaters - please tell me what commercial services you happily pay for even though neither you (nor anybody in your household) uses them. Why should OP pay for a service she doesn't use? How is not doing so in the slightest bit immoral, or 'leeching?'

RitchyBestingFace - surely the fact that OP watches and pays for other TV services supports, not invalidates her? She only has a set amount of time to watch TV - if she is watching multiple other providers/channels she will have less time to watch BBC, and therefore be less likely to watch it, not more likely!

Same with your point about affordability - if OP only has a set budget to spend on tv - it makes complete sense that she would spent £6 p/m on netflix which has a wide variety of shows she would like to watch, rather than double the amount to watch BBC which has far fewer shows, let alone paying for three times the amount she actually needs to spend to have access to both, but still only watch the original service she could have accessed for the original £6.

With regard to your 'decades of audience data,' - yes, almost all of these decades would have been when there was no other option than watching terrestrial TV. It is literally only in the last few years that things like PS have had functionality to stream TV, chromecasts, smart TVs etc have been available. All these earlier datasets are of no relevance to the current position. Also of no relevance are your repeated references to 'all BBC products.' It's not a website license, or a radio license, it's a TELEVISION license, so all that matters is if OP watches BBC television. If the BBC wanted to put a firewall on their website or online radio so only people who had paid for a licence could access it, they could do so - they have chosen not to.

I also love the playground mindset of the 'No offence but I don't believe you,' poster. You can't play the 'but Miss I SAID no offence!' card in adult life. Putting no offense in front of an insult does not negate the rudeness. You called someone a liar. That's offensive.

We don't have a tv and we don't have iplayer downloaded and no other access to programmes such as Netflix. We simply don't watch BBC, ever. There was nothing on that interested us when we did have a licence, so we just didn't bother renewing when we moved house. We don't have an arial either.

I do see tv programmes at work because I work nightshift in a care home, but it just looks like a load of rubbish to me (gogglebox and celebrity juice).

I'll just stick to watching TED talks, documentaries and kittens on YouTube thanks

OopsDearyMe

No, they haven't, and no, you don't: www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ8.

It doesn't matter if it's on a tablet or an actual TV via Chromecast, Firestick, etc (i.e. anything that connects to media via internet rather than aerial). As long as it's catch up services and not live you can watch any channel that's not BBC without a license.

It even specifically refers to Now TV as being ok
www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ104

You only need a license if you watch live tv or iplayer.

You do not need to have a tv license to watch catch up and on demand programming through the now tv app (having bought a pass). I'd imagine most of the people doing that also ignore the bit about 'live movies'. (Why would you choose to open up the app to watch a live broadcast of a film that's available on demand whenever you like on the same app anyway?).

I actually can't imagine wanting to watch live tv anymore. I don't even like catch up tv (so I don't watch it). I don't want to watch an hour then have to wait a week until the next instalment.