The thing I disagree with is why am i still watching the last of the summer wine on BBC1 at peak viewing time when it was made about 15 years ago ?? the BBC once produced some great comedy.. Dad’s Army, fawlty towers, It aint alf hot mum, Frank spencer (so old i can’t remember the name of the series!), Likley Lads, and many many more …..What classics have they come up with in the last five years ???
About 2 or 3 ????

I don’t see why I shoud pay for the constant repeats (oh no ..another dose of fools and horses) when I actually helped pay for the making of that with my licence fee from 10 years ago !!

ps., In reply to Billy Bob…

Why should we have to inform this TV company (BBC) that we do not use their service?? I don’t have to tell Sky that I’m not paying them because I don’t have Sky.

As I clearly mention in the blog post, the letter *only* includes an 0870 number by which you can inform them if you don’t need a license. I mentioned this in the blog post: That is a premium number. They are making a profit off of that number. That’s where the extortion comes in. They are basically saying, either pay us a small amount of money via the phone call or a larger amount of money via the TV License. There is no third option you can use to inform them without paying to use a premium number.

Of course, I won’t even get into how you’re guilty until proven innocent again.

Couple of points –

Firstly, as you say – in your case you don’t require a TV Licence. So I’d be interested to know how much effort you’ve made to let TV Licencing know of your situation?

I’ve gone periods without having a licence, sometimes for a few months for one reason or another, and it never reached the stage of receiving letters as aggressive as that. So if all you’ve done is repeatedly ignore letters over a long period of time, what do you expect? Them just to think ‘Oh well, we won’t bother then….’

If you don’t inform them of your situation, you can’t really expect them to stop trying to find out what your situation is. The letter clearly provides a number to call, presumably where you can simply advise them of your position.

Secondly – I think you’re being a little melodramatic about the whole extortion thing. Are people similarly exhorted if they withold income tax, on the principle that they don’t use a particular public service?

Discussing this issue with the natives, they generally leap to the defence of the BBC (Jason is a good example) and completely miss the point. The issue is not about the quality or usefulness of the BBC, but the backward, inefficient method of collecting funding for that organisation.

It still boggles my mind that someone thought it made sense to fund an essential part of British society by enforcing and collecting a separate tax using men in vans and surveillance equipment and lists of residences with televisions. When 99 percent of people in this country DO watch television, does it not make sense to take funding directly out of the general tax pool, and allow the 1 percent of people who do not watch television to apply for an exemption?! To choose the alternative, and monitor compliance of 99 percent of people is stupidity and inefficiency on a breathtaking scale!

Those that may argue it somehow makes the BBC more independant probably do not know it is the government that sets the licence rate in the end anyway, and of course there’s nothing to stop legislation stating a certain percentage of tax dollars should go to the BBC.

Getting the exact same letter when you actually *do* have the sodding licence, and phoned, two weeks hence, to transfer said licence to said property.

Grr.

I agree with Aral that the ‘enforcement’ tactics employed by the BBC are dispicable but the licensing fee is (at this moment in time) great value for money. On the other hand the amount of advertising on other channels such as ITV or C4 is nowhere near as bad as it is in Germany. There TV is almost unwatchable apart from the licensed channels.

Thanks to HD recorders/PVRs I no longer have to endure ads these days.

Yeah, unfortunately Murdoch is global. He owns a large number of media outlets over here too (Sky, The Sun, etc.) and was instrumental in getting Tony Blair elected back in the day. Alongside him, Clear Channel are also over here, etc. I just don’t think that the British public is as aware of these issues as the American public is (we seem more aware of what’s going on in the US and unaware that the same stuff is going on here.)

But yeah, those letters are quite offensive, especially for non-television users such as yourself Aral. It’s definitely in BBC’s best interest to soften them up, and be a bit more professional.

The police in the US often broadcast commercials which inform people that officers are going to be taking stronger anti-drink & driving measures, and the best of them are informative and entertaining, the “doom & gloom, almighty hand of the law” threatening approach isn’t nearly as effective, and typically only encites anti-police sentiments.

Crap, I didn’t realize the UK was burdened with Murdoc’s BS also!!! I thought Fox was only polluting a few corrupt minds over here! Apparently they’re a much larger enterprise than I imagined! Scary…