Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

erat_forte

Tv License Law Change

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26492684

Talking about it.

Insane to prosecute 180,000 per year and criminalise 155,000.

If they process it like a parking fine though they'll still get their money and presumably prosecute if you don't cough up, which is a marginal improvement but still ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26492684

Talking about it.

Insane to prosecute 180,000 per year and criminalise 155,000.

If they process it like a parking fine though they'll still get their money and presumably prosecute if you don't cough up, which is a marginal improvement but still ridiculous.

180000!!!

so how many go through the prosecution process, how much in lawyers fees, and how much is recouperated( generally from some of the poorest in society?)

it's a regressive tax that shouldn't exist.

subscription is probably the fairest model.

if they produce crap they will get less viewers..and so less money.

simple...otherwise if you can handle all the pop-ups then commercial TV will do.

same thing happening with youtube etc.

(frankly I find all the commericals very annoying)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently the prosecutions are done en masse. It's literally a case of 'all guilty', they dont bother with a proper process of justice. Most convicted are single mothers on benefits types. (Women are more likely to be home when the enforcement goons come round, and probably less likely to tell them to eff off.)

I am not sure to what degree the BBC (or more correctly the benefits claimants they prosecute) cover the cost of the court time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does it work then, if it is a civil offense, they can only sue you for their actual loss i.e. nothing?

No, it's a debt to them.

So they can sue you, and if you don't pay get a CCJ and eventually bailiffs if you don't pay.

But obviously there would be much less incentive to pay - a CCJ is only a problem for your credit record if you don't pay it. It would be sensible for everyone not to pay and just wait for them to sue, since there is presumably no penalty - you just pay the licence fee and £30 court costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's a debt to them.

So they can sue you, and if you don't pay get a CCJ and eventually bailiffs if you don't pay.

But obviously there would be much less incentive to pay - a CCJ is only a problem for your credit record if you don't pay it. It would be sensible for everyone not to pay and just wait for them to sue, since there is presumably no penalty - you just pay the licence fee and £30 court costs.

That could be worse, in my view. A CCJ or other credit black mark can seriously affect employment situations. Plus, if they don;t have to go to court, the ability to show them up for the lying, greedy buggers they are goes away...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   218 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.