Cancel Your Tv Licence And Save £145 A Year

1192022242584

Comments

  • Thine WonkThine Wonk Posts: 17,190
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Bedsit Bob wrote: »
    Excuse me Dan's Dad, but what has any of that got to do with breaking the law :confused:

    And, what has a link about the origin of the phrase, got to do with it :confused:

    Sounds like the Dan's Dad is trying to be smart by quoting posts and some silly phrase rather than posting their opinion or chipping into the discussion.

    It's simple, currently as the law stands people can either plug a PC into their TV and watch the iplayer and save £145 a year, or they can pay for a TV service like Sky or Virgin which costs £20 + a month and pay £145 as well.

    Big companies know the law and will work around costs if a loophole exists and I don't see why consumers are any different. You can get some lovely little tiny cube style PCs for £300 that will play HD content and any other online service you subscribe to as well, such as lovefilm or netflix in HD.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 59
    Forum Member
    Because it is common courtesy, it is politer, and it is helpful.

    To view it otherwise, or to view it in the terms that you have just posted is to my mind being bloody-minded.


    Mossey2103 May i just say being polite to these people does not help, I have been polite but they just turn nasty, have you ever actually spoken to any of these sales people at your property.
  • Katana1000Katana1000 Posts: 750
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'm disgusted to be from the UK.

    The superior ... I'm alight Jack attitudes are out in force here today.

    However, its just a matter of time before the real short sharp shock of the new Tory's Policys hit home, cutting back and cutting all the time is going to decrease spending on even silly luxury's like the TV Tax when the belt is tightened, then one day those that really worship the BBC are going to have to face the harsh reality to have to pay lots more or do without.

    One day and that day is spoon, mugs like us just wont be able to subsidise your BBC habit any-more, we'll need food on the table to feed our family's first and foremost or rather spend that money on Winter fuel bills.

    The BBC tax is rightly at the very bottom of the list of tax's that can be claimed these days by a corrupt Government, as soon as people realise TV is non essential ... and it is utter garbage these days ... The better.

    No doubt Cameron will have us paying for I-Player soon too to try make the gradual shortcoming.

    Its just a matter of time.


    Oh Yeah, and it will be Labours fault, so that will be OK then.

    IDIOTS.
  • mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,307
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    symonpi wrote: »
    Mossey2103 May i just say being polite to these people does not help, I have been polite but they just turn nasty, have you ever actually spoken to any of these sales people at your property.
    I guess that had I been in a situation where contact was likely, I would have initiated the contact myself via the phone, negating the need to have anyone call round just because I had not politely informed them of a material change or because I had simply cancelled the DD without bothering to inform them.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 59
    Forum Member
    mossy2103 wrote: »
    I guess that had I been in a situation where contact was likely, I would have initiated the contact via phone, negating the need to have anyone call round


    If you phone them up to explain they send a person round to search your property to make sure you are not lying.


    If you don't phone them they send someone round.
    If you do phone them they send someone round.


    You just can't please some people.
  • mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,307
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    symonpi wrote: »
    If you phone them up to explain they send a person round to search your property to make sure you are not lying.
    Which would be a reasonable thing to do if someone cancels a TV Licence, especially as it might be the case that some will simply lie.
    If you don't phone them they send someone round.
    If you do phone them they send someone round.
    The latter is as a direct result of them not being aware of what is going on.
  • Thine WonkThine Wonk Posts: 17,190
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Katana1000 wrote: »
    I'm disgusted to be from the UK.

    The superior ... I'm alight Jack attitudes are out in force here today.

    However, its just a matter of time before the real short sharp shock of the new Tory's Policys hit home, cutting back and cutting all the time is going to decrease spending on even silly luxury's like the TV Tax when the belt is tightened, then one day those that really worship the BBC are going to have to face the harsh reality to have to pay lots more or do without.

    One day and that day is spoon, mugs like us just wont be able to subsidise your BBC habit any-more, we'll need food on the table to feed our family's first and foremost or rather spend that money on Winter fuel bills.

    The BBC tax is rightly at the very bottom of the list of tax's that can be claimed these days by a corrupt Government, as soon as people realise TV is non essential ... and it is utter garbage these days ... The better.

    No doubt Cameron will have us paying for I-Player soon too to try make the gradual shortcoming.

    Its just a matter of time.


    Oh Yeah, and it will be Labours fault, so that will be OK then.

    IDIOTS.

    Labour introduced the TV licence.;)
  • CornucopiaCornucopia Posts: 19,440
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    mossy2103 wrote: »
    Well, I don't know about that, but if TV Licensing have not been informed of the cancellation, they will still try to collect. And I guess that would raise an error of some description on their billing system. How would the system know that it had been cancelled due to the person wishing to pay by other means for example (rather than wishing to cancel their licence). If no-one tells them they are none the wiser are they.
    So they send a letter - given that they send 80m+ per year, another one doesn't strike me as particularly significant.

    I know someone who recently defaulted on their "TVL" payment card. "TVL" simply wrote to him and told him that they were cancelling the scheme for him, and that his licence would expire in July, based on the payments already made. Simple enough, no drama, and I can imagine them doing exactly the same in the very similar situation of DD default or cancellation.

    It does stike me as odd that there is the constant effort to anthropomorphise the faceless, automated bureaucracy of "TVL" into something it clearly isn't. There are simply not going to be bewildered "TVL" employees sitting around scratching their heads wondering what a cancelled DD actually means. It doesn't work like that.
    Because it is common courtesy, it is polite, and it is helpful (especially as it takes little time) .

    To view it otherwise, or to view it in the terms that you have just posted is to my mind being bloody-minded.
    No. You still seem to be missing the point. IF "TVL" were known to be polite to people, you could legitimately suggest that people are polite to them.

    Since we know that they aren't polite (not in the least bit), I wouldn't extend them any particular courtesy, nor would I criticise anyone for not doing so.

    Furthermore, since I know that citizens have a wide range of rights against "TVL", I would still not criticise someone for behaving within the law, even if I personally thought it was discourteous. Organisations are there to do their jobs, and they don't have feelings that can be offended by discourteousness.
  • Katana1000Katana1000 Posts: 750
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Thine Wonk wrote: »
    Labour introduced the TV licence.;)

    Then let the Tories take it away ... as they love to oppose and blame everything they do ...., what's that you said? I never thought so.
  • Thine WonkThine Wonk Posts: 17,190
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Katana1000 wrote: »
    Then let the Tories take it away ... as they love to oppose and blame everything they do ...., what's that you said? I never thought so.

    Eh? so you changed your tune, attacking the Tories (which I am by no means supporting, I'm neutral) without knowing it's Labour (who you seem to think are brilliant) who started the TV licence.
  • Bedsit BobBedsit Bob Posts: 24,344
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    mossy2103 wrote: »
    How would the system know that it had been cancelled due to the person wishing to pay by other means for example (rather than wishing to cancel their licence).

    It doesn't need to.

    Cancelling a DD results in the "enforcement process" commencing, whatever the reason for cancelling.
    Because it is common courtesy, it is polite

    You should be courteous and polite, to people who don't treat you with politeness :confused:
  • Katana1000Katana1000 Posts: 750
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Cornucopia wrote: »
    It does stike me as odd that there is the constant effort to anthropomorphise the faceless, automated bureaucracy of "TVL" into something it clearly isn't. There are simply not going to be bewildered "TVL" employees sitting around scratching their heads wondering what a cancelled DD actually means. It doesn't work like that.

    .

    Cumulivtly it will effect them and they are worried sick about the growing feeling of resentment the TV Tax has upon a family in these tights times, Tory or Labour.

    They want to try enforce this unfair tax even more.

    Cant you see that?

    But only the blind could not see the way its going, this outdated tax is going the way of the Dinosaur very soon, the I'm all right Jack smug gits are getting fewer and fewer every year and the poorer .. ot just those that never gave a damn about watching TV all the time are having more of an audience.
  • Bedsit BobBedsit Bob Posts: 24,344
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    mossy2103 wrote: »
    negating the need to have anyone call round

    You really think they will just take your word for it, that you no longer need a licence?
  • Katana1000Katana1000 Posts: 750
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Thine Wonk wrote: »
    Eh? so you changed your tune, attacking the Tories (which I am by no means supporting, I'm neutral) without knowing it's Labour (who you seem to think are brilliant) who started the TV licence.

    Google Devils Advocate you fool

    All Politicians are born liars.
  • Bedsit BobBedsit Bob Posts: 24,344
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    mossy2103 wrote: »
    Which would be a reasonable thing to do if someone cancels a TV Licence, especially as it might be the case that some will simply lie.

    Didn't you just say that informing them would have the effect of "negating the need to have anyone call round" :confused:
  • Thine WonkThine Wonk Posts: 17,190
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Katana1000 wrote: »
    Google Devils Advocate you fool

    All Politicians are born liars.

    No politicians are individuals with their own minds, personalities and morals. You can't say 1 person is the same as another, if you think this then you probably need to get some help as I'm sure that's some kind of mental condition / paranoia.
  • Katana1000Katana1000 Posts: 750
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Thine Wonk wrote: »
    No politicians are individuals with their own minds, personalities and morals..

    Howls of derisive laughter, you poor Mug.
  • mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,307
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Cornucopia wrote: »
    So they send a letter - given that they send 80m+ per year, another one doesn't strike me as particularly significant.

    I know someone who recently defaulted on their "TVL" payment card. "TVL" simply wrote to him and told him that they were cancelling the scheme for him, and that his licence would expire in July, based on the payments already made. Simple enough, no drama, and I can imagine them doing exactly the same in the very similar situation of DD default or cancellation.
    it is quite possible of course, but why not be polite, and take the moral high ground if you see it that way and simply inform them beforehand. It's a reasonable thing to do, it's the polite thing to do, and it's an easy thing to do.
    It does stike me as odd that there is the constant effort to anthropomorphise the faceless, automated bureaucracy of "TVL" into something it clearly isn't. There are simply not going to be bewildered "TVL" employees sitting around scratching their heads wondering what a cancelled DD actually means. It doesn't work like that.
    No you are right, it doesn't, because it's going to be an automated system.
    No. You still seem to be missing the point. IF "TVL" were known to be polite to people, you could legitimately suggest that people are polite to them.

    Since we know that they aren't polite (not in the least bit), I wouldn't extend them any particular courtesy, nor would I criticise anyone for not doing so.

    Furthermore, since I know that citizens have a wide range of rights against "TVL", I would still not criticise someone for behaving within the law, even if I personally thought it was discourteous. Organisations are there to do their jobs, and they don't have feelings that can be offended by discourteousness.
    This has been discussed time and time again by both yourself and many others. i have read through such discussions to a point where the repeated points become increasingly repetitive and quite frankly, tiresome. Therefore I won't get drawn any further into this.
  • mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,307
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bedsit Bob wrote: »
    You really think they will just take your word for it, that you no longer need a licence?
    No, as evidenced by an earlier reply of mine. Of course they will want to check, and why not - people might lie (as some people might want to skip paying the LF and continue watching live TV just because it's easy to do so).

    And if they do want to call round - that's fine, I would accept that they will need to check (as some people can be deceitful).
  • Katana1000Katana1000 Posts: 750
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    mossy2103 wrote: »

    This has been discussed time and time again by both yourself and many others. i have read through such discussions to a point where the repeated points become increasingly repetitive and quite frankly, tiresome. Therefore I won't get drawn any further into this.

    Looks like you are finally seeing two sides.
  • Bedsit BobBedsit Bob Posts: 24,344
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    mossy2103 wrote: »
    No, as evidenced by an earlier reply of mine. Of course they will want to check

    So informing them won't make one iota of difference?

    So why bother :confused:
    And if they do want to call round - that's fine

    Good for you.

    If, on the off chance, they do fabricate a case against you, I'm sure you know where to go for advice.
  • mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,307
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bedsit Bob wrote: »
    So informing them won't make one iota of difference?

    So why bother :confused:
    Because it is polite and reasonable (and may help to avoid any issues later on). But some will see it as a waste of time (even though it only takes a few minutes). But what's a few minutes time where politeness and reasonableness is concerned.

    Anyway, I'm repeating myself here, and am repeating what other posters have said on many other such threads. Such repetition is tiresome and circular arguments go nowhere.
  • JustmadeitJustmadeit Posts: 7,512
    Forum Member
    some links if anyone wants to go tv free or look at tv viewing from a critical point of view

    scroll down once you've clicked on this one below for more great links, loads of thought provoking articles too http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/


    http://pupaganda.com/originals/Total_indoctrination.html



    http://immissingallofmyshows.blogspot.co.uk/


    http://www.whitedot.org/issue/iss_front.asp


    http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/commentary/negativemedia/HaveYouFallen.htm


    this one below is a really interesting read from a guy who was trying to quit the tv habit

    http://setsallset.hubpages.com/hub/Effects-of-Quitting-Television
  • Dan's DadDan's Dad Posts: 9,880
    Forum Member
    Thine Wonk wrote: »
    Labour introduced the TV licence.;)
    Whilst the combined TV & Radio licence was introduced under the post-war Labour government, the principle was established in November 1922.

    The United Kingdom general election of 1918 was the first to be held after the Representation of the People Act 1918
    .....The election was won by a coalition of the Conservatives under Andrew Bonar Law, the pro-coalition Liberals under David Lloyd George,
    and a few independent and former Labour MPs including the anti-socialist National Democratic and Labour Party.
    It resulted in a government which retained Lloyd George as Prime Minister.

    The United Kingdom general election of 1922 was held on 15 November 1922.
    .... and was won by Andrew Bonar Law's Conservatives, who gained an overall majority over Labour, led by John Robert Clynes, and a divided Liberal Party.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 59
    Forum Member
    Because it is polite and reasonable (and may help to avoid any issues later on). But some will see it as a waste of time (even though it only takes a few minutes). But what's a few minutes time where politeness and reasonableness is concerned.


    I wish i had the foresight to record them the last time they called at my property, I would love you to watch and listen to them and then see if you think being polite to them is beneficial in anyway. I would love to see you try and defend their attitude to me when i am being nice and polite to them.
This discussion has been closed.