Options
TVL Dealer notification ended on 25th June 2013
cyril-furr
Posts: 1,518 Forum Member
✭✭✭
http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/legislation-and-policy-AB9/
Quote: "The Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1967 (as amended) has been repealed meaning from 25 June 2013 onwards television dealers are no longer required to notify TV Licensing of all their sales and rentals of television sets".
Thanks to Vince Cable, this outdated nonsense will be ended from the 25th of June 2013.
I assume this will include Freeview recorders & similar?
Quote: "The Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1967 (as amended) has been repealed meaning from 25 June 2013 onwards television dealers are no longer required to notify TV Licensing of all their sales and rentals of television sets".
Thanks to Vince Cable, this outdated nonsense will be ended from the 25th of June 2013.
I assume this will include Freeview recorders & similar?
0
Comments
BBC Revenues are reduced compared to Do Nothing Option after 2013.
Effects on BBC Revenues are not relevant to one in one out calculations because BBC is not classed as neither a business nor a civil society organisation.
See http://www.parliament.uk/documents/impact-assessments/IA12-014K.pdf
It makes interesting reading - including the value of our leisure time!!!!
but the BBC will be worse off!
Advance warning - for those that want to keep a bit of protection to their data, hang on buying "Stuff" until after the 25th of June - your point?
That is a very interesting document - thanks for linking to it.
Interesting, that they do not seem very sure what the BBC actally is:) I think of it as a public corporation, but perhaps that is not right? Also, they think the evasion figure is quite high, but Capita in all their publicity - claim it is low.
Somebody not being in harmony with the truth?
Some very dubious figures and claims there. "Customers spend two and a half minutes providing information"? I have worked for several retailers, from a small company with three branches to a large chain. None of them did anything other than fill out the normal customer invoice with their name and address, which was then automatically processed by the system to produce a print out for TVL.
Apart from supermarkets where you pick up a cheap TV and take it through the till, where Tesco and Asda don't usually take customers name and address, there is no extra work.
If you buy a TV or Freeview box from Currys or John Lewis they will still take the customers details including name and address just as they have done up to now. The only difference will be the customer can now refuse to give it if they don't want to, unless their big TV is being delivered of course...
Personally giving your details can help you. You could lose your receipt for example and if you didn't give your details they can't look it up if your TV develops a fault. Or if there is a manufacturers safety recall if they don't have your details they can't write to you. My Bosch dishwasher was one of a batch that could catch fire and burn the house down! With the retailer having my details they can track me down and write to me. (As it happened the retailer I bought it from, and worked for, had gone bust so they couldn't write to me anyway)
In practise I doubt this will make much difference. Those who want to evade the TV licence always knew they could give a false name anyway. In a decade I spent selling TVs I maybe had four or five customers who said they had any problem with giving their details and paying the TV licence. Literally that few, though of course there may well have been others who said nothing and just gave a false address. The simple fact is the vast majority of people are happy to pay it.
It is "low" in the sense that it is lower than when the Post Office ran the collection system. It is also probably far lower than the percentage of people who fiddle their benefits or self employed who fiddle their taxes.
You said "ended", past tense. This is happening in the future. It hasn't ended yet.
And can you warn people that if they choose to not give their details they should make very sure they keep their receipts safe in case their equipment develops a fault?
You can show other proof of purchase such as a credit card statement, but that means showing the retailer your credit card statement. If you are concerned with privacy that seems to be a poor trade off.
And if you can't provide other proof of purchase the retailer could refuse to repair or exchange your faulty item.
[In all fairness, the one I was talking to only yesterday seemed exceptionally knowledgeable; maybe things are looking up.]
OK, I should have used the word "Ending" rather than "ended" a slip of the keyboard - sorry:D.
But yes, folks should always keep reciepts of course - I always do until the warrenty runs out, then it & the box are recycled.
I must admit I am pleased, though surprised that this change in this petty law was passed - as it is an aid to those naughty Licence dodgers to a small extent, perhaps David Cameron was fed up with getting threatograms through the door at number 10 downing street?:D
Not my problem.
New alias, same PBU.:D
Not mine either.
But thanks for your contribution.
You're welcome.
But your remarks about evasion are not welcome.
Not your decision.
Just because you have a problem with pesky facts and the truth doesn't mean you can demand people don't post them.
The fact that you say such comments are "not welcome" just proves to everyone that you do not believe in an open discussion but want all comments who disagree with you censored.
No wonder you don't like the BBC...
I think you've forgotten which site you're at, this one allows open discussion unlike the one you came here from.
Why?
So you obviously want people censored.
Quite amused by this in one respect. Yes Cyril, it is outdated. Some obviously will see this as some kind of victory. However, I think it is just another factor to make the move to general taxation more likely.
Ireland is planning to make this move, anyone know the latest there?
The usual suspects will be crying in their beer if/when it happens here - and I believe it is when rather than if.:D;)
Capita are bound to say it is low - they are running the contract & want to keep it, there are so many unknown factors, the 5.2% is just an educated guess - the government does not even know the true population of the country, with lots of illegals coming in.
I just find it rather surprising that the government makes yet another move which will probably result in less TVL revenue for the BBC, following the TVL price freeze, the over 75s now funded by other licence payers & the World service also being funded by the BBC, rather than a government grant. There is a "patten" (sorry Lord:D) forming here - the BBC is steadily being financially throttled down by the government, a right wing government that has complained about the BBC's percieved left wing leaning - as it sees it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9890162/Conservatives-go-to-war-on-bias-at-the-BBC.html
Is this the slimming down of the BBC by stealth?
What is the next move? a special new tax on BBC employees at Salford?:D
More than likely. Much as they dislike the BBC the Conservatives know the BBC is far too popular to openly cut. I believe the licence fee freeze was meant to reduce the quality and quantity of the BBCs output so that the government could then say "well it's not as good and popular as it was so we''re going to cut it" without the public realising it was they who did the damage in the first place.
Good, about time. i am not planning on buying a new TV for at least another 12 months or so, but it will make things a lot better.
http://www.thejournal.ie/government-considers-household-charge-to-replace-tv-licence-fee-331574-Jan2012/
I found this dated January 2012, google also uncovered Irish suggestions of RTE being funded by the Irish lottery. - now that might be a good idea here in the UK, once the Government has slimmed down the BBC to it's correct weight:D
And which site is that?
Was the over 75 plan not proposed? perhaps they swapped it with the world service?
As I recall, it was quoted as an option that Jeremy Hunt was putting forward, it might have been an either/or option with the finding of the World Service.
But the World service being LF funded make a lot of sense as it reinforces its independence in this world - to be paid for by the British People (not the government) ..
but the top slicing for Broadband ( like to some extent the DSO help scheme) is another hidden cut.....