The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Why do we have to pay for a TV licence?

Scroll to see replies

Top Gear... nuff said.
Original post by rachiriot
Question! I wanna take my TV to Uni, but I'll be using it for a computer screen and for my XBox, am I gunna get hassle over it?


I had my tv at uni for watching DVDs and never had any problems. At the end of the day if you haven't got an aerial connected then you're golden.

In response to the original post, I'm not happy with the fact that elderly people get a free tv licence, no matter how many thousands of pounds they have sat in the bank.

Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by myblueheaven339
I had my tv at uni for watching DVDs and never had any problems. At the end of the day if you haven't got an aerial connected then you're golden. In response to the original post, I'm not happy with the fact that elderly people get a free tv licence, no matter how many thousands of pounds they have sat in the bank. Posted from TSR Mobile
Was that a labour policy?
No adverts during the Olympics, Doctor Who, Sherlock, etc. is great. :smile:
Reply 44
Avatar for RM5E10
RM5E10
You know what really grid my gears?? That you pay for TV lincense £145.50 yearly and they dont even bother to check if you have a working aerial in your property. I moved to a new house and magically the TV lincense letter came. I payed and expected someone to come and show me the conections or fix the aerial since it wasnt working at all. No one came nor received a call to check if everything was fine just a confirmation letter that Ive been fooled to pay the money.
Original post by James Flahey
Was that a labour policy?


I dunno, probably


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by RM5E10
You know what really grid my gears?? That you pay for TV lincense £145.50 yearly and they dont even bother to check if you have a working aerial in your property. I moved to a new house and magically the TV lincense letter came. I payed and expected someone to come and show me the conections or fix the aerial since it wasnt working at all. No one came nor received a call to check if everything was fine just a confirmation letter that Ive been fooled to pay the money.


Then you're not that bright are you. The aerial is you're or the landlords problem. If if we're up to the TV licensing authority to take responsibility for all TV aerials, get used to a £500+ a year license.


Has nobody sat you down and explained the ways of the world to you?
Original post by myblueheaven339
I dunno, probably


Posted from TSR Mobile


It's been policy for a long time. If it wasn't, taxes would just go up to pay for it as TV for many elderly is their only way of staying connected to the outside world. Giving them a free TV licence is probably cheaper than the administration charges of paying it through the normal taxation system.

It's a bit like winter fuel allowance. It works out cheaper to give it to all pensioners rather than introduce a means tested programme.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Kagutsuchi
No adverts during the Olympics, Doctor Who, Sherlock, etc. is great. :smile:


It is, but I don't think that the public should have to subsidise the BBC in order to legally receive live television broadcasts. There are people who pay for the licence fee, but never really make use of the BBC's services. I think that it's just an unnecessary tax, at least for some people.
Original post by TheTranshumanist
It is, but I don't think that the public should have to subsidise the BBC in order to legally receive live television broadcasts. There are people who pay for the licence fee, but never really make use of the BBC's services. I think that it's just an unnecessary tax, at least for some people.


People pay for a lot of things that they don't receive. Healthcare, Higher Education, Armed Forces, Emergency services.
Original post by MatureStudent36
People pay for a lot of things that they don't receive. Healthcare, Higher Education, Armed Forces, Emergency services.


So? That doesn't mean that the public should have to subsidise the BBC. Is the BBC really as important as the public services you mentioned above? Anyway, it's not as if the BBC would necessarily cease to exist if it stopped receiving public funding via the licence fee.
Reply 51
Avatar for Jdizzle15
Jdizzle15
3
I don't understand how people can compare the BBC (a form of entertainment) to things such as education, health care and armed forces. The last three benefit the country in numerous ways such as a qualified work force, high standard of living and national security. The BBC provide east enders...
Original post by Jdizzle15
I don't understand how people can compare the BBC (a form of entertainment) to things such as education, health care and armed forces. The last three benefit the country in numerous ways such as a qualified work force, high standard of living and national security. The BBC provide east enders...
And public broadcasting in an impartial manner. That kind of stuffs actually key in a modern society.
Original post by chefdave
Do you want to live in a country where the media is domination by people like Murdoch? Because that's the alternative to the licence fee model.


Which can be remedied by stronger competition laws.

Original post by Moura
i think the BBC is great. it produces some of the best quality british TV, great documentaries, news, radio... i really think the BBC is the best, i wouldn't want it to change.


HBO produces some of the best TV shows in the world yet is a private venture.
Reply 54
Avatar for chefdave
chefdave
Original post by Hannibal Lecter
Which can be remedied by stronger competition laws.


Surely an oxymoron?
Original post by MatureStudent36
Difficult one. Technically no. But how do you prove it to them that your not going to use it for watching TV.

Like it or not. You'll be paying for it.


Not necessarily - if it literally has no way of receiving live television (cables, aerials etc) and is basically a screen, you shouldn't (and don't have to) pay.
Original post by TheTranshumanist
It is, but I don't think that the public should have to subsidise the BBC in order to legally receive live television broadcasts. There are people who pay for the licence fee, but never really make use of the BBC's services. I think that it's just an unnecessary tax, at least for some people.


Well I thank them for their contribution for no advert interruptions during my Doctor Who.

Sherlock is back soon too, so I thank the general public even more for their contributions.
Original post by MatureStudent36
As soon as you move into halls they'll know who you are and which room you'll be staying in.

I've spoke to some other people in person today, as long as you don't have an ariel and have it tuned in then it's fine and they won't hassle you! :smile:
Reply 58
Avatar for kumori
kumori
11
Because the BBC thinks they don't earn enough for selling the Olympics and nature world on DVD.

And to answer all the other questions, they have to prove you are using it to watch live TV not the other way around. In some halls it's known for people from TV licencing private hassle company to get refused entry. That's if they even come to check. I knew a load of people who watched TV with no licence and never heard anything about it. there was loads of flats with big TVs in the kitchen with the blinds open and never got asked.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 59
Avatar for c.a1979
c.a1979
I personally don't mind adverts.

That said, a TV licence is harsh IMO.

I'd prefer they set up a subscription channel for those who want it without a mandatory TV licence. So essentially we have a tax to watch TV lololol.. And it IS a tax, even if it's not called that.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you