TV LICENCE why should people pay when paying for Sky?

[Total Chaos]

About 8% of the BBC's budget is spent on collecting and administering the Licence Fee. Capita are currently contracted to do most of this work, in the same way that SIS Live are contracted to provided outside broadcast facilities, and Red Bee are contracted to play out their programmes. Many people like to think the Capita link is part of a massive conspiracy and a way of avoiding the fee, but it's not, it's just the way that companies work.

 

And the rest goes here

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=sun%20investigation%20into%20bbc%20spending&source=web&cd=10&cad=rja&ved=0CGAQFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesun.co.uk%2Fsol%2Fhomepage%2Ffeatures%2F3470211%2FSun-investigation-reveals-waste-is-endemic-in-the-BBC.html&ei=kiF8UaumHIKt0QXv4IHwDQ&usg=AFQjCNFHuGFUOPUdP2CZwfkTlP5-xXwabQ

 

The video seems to be completely based on the usual FMoTL wibble about acts requiring consent, along with the normal add ons of 'only constables can read someone their rights', and the police/judges are breaking their oath if they get involved in civil cases. All of which is nonsense.

 

I did not say in civil cases, i meant in general,if a judge/magistrate issues a warrant, because i may or may not have a TV,sorry i may have been watching live broadcasts then he/she is breaking the law,if they issue a warrant under oath.

Sigh....More evidence,but dismissed because.....you know your wrong.The camera never lies.

 

My favourite parts are when the police officer asks if they've ever tested any of these ideas in court, and they answer "no, but they know of many successes", it's a shame they haven't posted links to verifiable sources of these successes... That and when they start telling the TVL guy about how he's partly responsible a paedophile ring because he works for the BBC and they protected Jimmy Savile, but then go on to tell him to look on David Icke about it, without noticing the irony that David Icke also used to be a BBC employee at the time of Savile's crimes and he did nothing to expose them. If you're going to accuse TVL people of harbouring paedo's, then Icke is just as guilty.

 

Again.....an attempt to ridicule others believes etc,but never producing any evidence of your own:roll: has David Icke been arrested for any involvment in the paedo ring?If not how was he supposed to know about any paedo ring?

 

 

A number of magistrates are complaining that licence fee evasion should be a civil matter, not criminal, because it takes up too much court time to process the numbers of evaders. They're not complaining about the fee's existence, they're complaining that too many people are trying to avoid paying it. Besides, if you're going to bring that element into your arguments, doesn't it kind of blast your "it's a civil matter" arguments away, because if it was, the magistrates wouldn't be complaining?

 

Thank you for clearing that up once and for all.It is not a criminal offence not to pay your TV license,thank you.

 

Unless you have any hard, legally proven, evidence that licence fee evasion is a recommended course of action for anyone, please stop posting your nonsense. Several people have ended up in court getting much bigger fines than normal, criminal records and even jail terms because they have followed similar advice from FMoTLers.[/QUOTE]

 

You just pointed out in,what im assuming is your professional/qualified opinion, that it is not criminal,but a civil matter,again thank you,case closed.

[dosxuk]

???

 

Are you reading what's written, or making your own meanings up based on looking at random words?

[Total Chaos]

About 8% of the BBC's budget is spent on collecting and administering the Licence Fee. Capita are currently contracted to do most of this work, in the same way that SIS Live are contracted to provided outside broadcast facilities, and Red Bee are contracted to play out their programmes. Many people like to think the Capita link is part of a massive conspiracy and a way of avoiding the fee, but it's not, it's just the way that companies work.

 

 

 

The video seems to be completely based on the usual FMoTL wibble about acts requiring consent, along with the normal add ons of 'only constables can read someone their rights', and the police/judges are breaking their oath if they get involved in civil cases. All of which is nonsense.

 

My favourite parts are when the police officer asks if they've ever tested any of these ideas in court, and they answer "no, but they know of many successes", it's a shame they haven't posted links to verifiable sources of these successes... That and when they start telling the TVL guy about how he's partly responsible a paedophile ring because he works for the BBC and they protected Jimmy Savile, but then go on to tell him to look on David Icke about it, without noticing the irony that David Icke also used to be a BBC employee at the time of Savile's crimes and he did nothing to expose them. If you're going to accuse TVL people of harbouring paedo's, then Icke is just as guilty.

 

 

 

A number of magistrates are complaining that licence fee evasion should be a civil matter, not criminal, because it takes up too much court time to process the numbers of evaders. They're not complaining about the fee's existence, they're complaining that too many people are trying to avoid paying it. Besides, if you're going to bring that element into your arguments, doesn't it kind of blast your "it's a civil matter" arguments away, because if it was, the magistrates wouldn't be complaining?

 

 

Unless you have any hard, legally proven, evidence that licence fee evasion is a recommended course of action for anyone, please stop posting your nonsense. Several people have ended up in court getting much bigger fines than normal, criminal records and even jail terms because they have followed similar advice from FMoTLers.

 

Im reading this because this is written,erm by you:roll:Booosh your blown out of the water old man.How do i make a really big,massive wave splash in words?come on fellow FOTL.

[dosxuk]

Im reading this because this is written:roll:

 

In which case how do you jump from

 

[some magistrates say] licence fee evasion should be a civil matter, not criminal

 

to

 

It is not a criminal offence not to pay your TV license

 

when I clearly state it's a criminal matter at present?

[Total Chaos]

About 8% of the BBC's budget is spent on collecting and administering the Licence Fee. Capita are currently contracted to do most of this work, in the same way that SIS Live are contracted to provided outside broadcast facilities, and Red Bee are contracted to play out their programmes. Many people like to think the Capita link is part of a massive conspiracy and a way of avoiding the fee, but it's not, it's just the way that companies work.

 

 

 

The video seems to be completely based on the usual FMoTL wibble about acts requiring consent, along with the normal add ons of 'only constables can read someone their rights', and the police/judges are breaking their oath if they get involved in civil cases. All of which is nonsense.

 

My favourite parts are when the police officer asks if they've ever tested any of these ideas in court, and they answer "no, but they know of many successes", it's a shame they haven't posted links to verifiable sources of these successes... That and when they start telling the TVL guy about how he's partly responsible a paedophile ring because he works for the BBC and they protected Jimmy Savile, but then go on to tell him to look on David Icke about it, without noticing the irony that David Icke also used to be a BBC employee at the time of Savile's crimes and he did nothing to expose them. If you're going to accuse TVL people of harbouring paedo's, then Icke is just as guilty.

 

 

 

A number of magistrates are complaining that licence fee evasion should be a civil matter, not criminal, because it takes up too much court time to process the numbers of evaders. They're not complaining about the fee's existence, they're complaining that too many people are trying to avoid paying it. Besides, if you're going to bring that element into your arguments, doesn't it kind of blast your "it's a civil matter" arguments away, because if it was, the magistrates wouldn't be complaining?

 

 

Unless you have any hard, legally proven, evidence that licence fee evasion is a recommended course of action for anyone, please stop posting your nonsense. Several people have ended up in court getting much bigger fines than normal, criminal records and even jail terms because they have followed similar advice from FMoTLers.

 

In which case how do you jump from

 

 

 

to

 

 

 

when I clearly state it's a criminal matter at present?

 

My apologies,i meant unlawful.

 

Going to watch Wednesday v Petersborough match now,free of charge,obviously.

[Sid Umpley]

 

 

 

My apologies,i meant unlawful.

 

Going to watch Wednesday v Petersborough match now,free of charge,obviously.

 

 

not free of charge

just without paying

 

thief!

[buck]

I suppose many of you, like me, have well over 200 channels to pick from, and like me, spend half your time trying to find one thats worth the effort. But it would appall me, and anyone of my fellow citizens, to have to pay a license fee for one channel, especially a government one. There would be a revolution.

[JFKvsNixon]

I suppose many of you, like me, have well over 200 channels to pick from, and like me, spend half your time trying to find one thats worth the effort. But it would appall me, and anyone of my fellow citizens, to have to pay a license fee for one channel, especially a government one. There would be a revolution.

 

The BBC isn't a government channel, it is run independent of them.

[dosxuk]

I suppose many of you, like me, have well over 200 channels to pick from, and like me, spend half your time trying to find one thats worth the effort. But it would appall me, and anyone of my fellow citizens, to have to pay a license fee for one channel, especially a government one. There would be a revolution.

 

In case it's not clear from all the waffle, there isn't a compulsory charge levied by the government to run the BBC. We have to pay a fee to operate television signal receivers, in common with many other things we get charged to use, like cars with their vehicle excise duty. Unlike the VED though, the television licence fee funds are ring fenced, primarily for the publicly owned BBC, and the BBC are also required to manage the collection of those fees. The funds from the VED on the other hand just go to central budgets for spending on anything.

 

I can accept that this is a very un-American concept, but there are numerous things we do over here which are similarly unappealing to many Americans, like having compulsory National Insurance and a free-to-the-user health service, something which only a tiny number of Brits have any issue with.

 

Many other countries have a licence fee equivalent, including many which also have adverts shown on channels which have government funding.

 

Oh, and just so you know, the BBC programmes you get to watch, they're bought at commercial rates from the BBC, and the proceeds of those sales go to supplement the licence fee. You don't get them for free at the cost of British fee payers.

 

There are many pro's and con's to the way the BBC is funded, and the alternatives, and a sensible discussion of those is probably more suited to a new thread which isn't filled with FMoTL nonsense from freeloaders like this one.

[Rupert_Baehr]

You have to pay because it is a TV tax.