NEWS: TV licence fee now applies to over 75s from 1st Aug

There is nothing outrageous or bizarre about it go on the government.uk website and read the BBC promised to cover the cost of over 75’s TV licence in agreement with that then Chancellor George Osborne on the understanding that they the BBC could carry on putting up the license fee this is a fact.

I've asked you once already. Do you have a link?
 
You know when you look back in history at key points in time, when specific decisions were made, that make or break a company, and it's that single decision, that defines where it all goes right or goes wrong.
I wonder if the BBC insisting on the 75 licence fee, irrespective of all the current negative press they are already getting is one of these key moments in time.
In 5, 10 20 years time, when the licence fee is gone. And it WILL be gone.
We'll look back at this moment in time and think, yes, that was the BIGGEST mistake they made, and where they basically dug their own grave from.
 
Do you have a link for that outrageous bizarre statement?

Seems to be some truth in that. Very first google hit


Obviously the very left-wing Guardian comes up with a headline about George Osbourne forcing it upon them, but in the actual article even they concede that it was a give and take agreement between the two.

Reading the text, it was to be phased in, with the BBC paying a third, then two thirds and then full but they reneged before it got to full.

Cheers,

Nigel
 
Last edited:
For the record I don't support the over 75's charge either.

That's very kind VM, but why should I (taking my TG hat off) be given something for free when I can easily afford it?

Surely the fairest way would be free for those on pension support and the rest of us over 75's pay our share.
 
I want choice, my choice. Netflix, sky, apple, Now, Disney and BBC. Time for the license to be binned if they go under they go under would we really miss them? Probably not.
 
Just cancel your daily paper and with the money saved pay for your tv licence and have enough left over to buy a few drinks. What's all the fuss about ?
 
That's very kind VM, but why should I (taking my TG hat off) be given something for free when I can easily afford it?

Surely the fairest way would be free for those on pension support and the rest of us over 75's pay our share.

I'd agree, as long as the means testing is there to help those on a limited income it's only fair that well off pensioners (who are likely to make more use of the BBC's services) pay.
 
Yes 100% agree about this.
I never know, as I hear stories of people having zero issues, they filled out the form, perhaps get 1 letter a year, and that was that.
Other people have a ton of grief.
Mind you, some people do bring trouble onto themselves as they refuse to fill out any form to tell the BBC they don't watch it, and just seem to take joy in all the trouble and posting on Youtube.

I will admit, I'm still unsure about what path to take.
If they come round to check, just be difficult and say, can't come in and ignore them (which whilst totally within your right, it kinda just feels like you have something you are hiding and don't want them see)
Or let them in, offer them a tea/coffee, be super friendly, explain you don't watch Live TV, show them you took down your TV antenna's and have no arial leads where your TV is.

Logically being friendly, open, and showing them nothing to see here, feels like they would go away and leave you in peace as opposed to looking guilty by shutting the door in their face.

But perhaps I'm just a naive idiot on this one.

In a free society you shouldn't need to fill in a form to a private company to prevent ongoing harassment. I would never let them step foot on my property because it's private property and they are a private individual and want nothing to do with them. It's not me being difficult, it's they harassing a private individual on private property who are causing the problem.

Where I live now in the US could very well get you shot for those sorts of tactics.

Also the 'being friendly and open' approach has resulted in innocent people landed in court, so it doesn't work.
 
BBC should just be its own thing like a Netflix sub. If it's such a great service, value and so important to the public there shouldn't be a problem as they will get more than enough subscribers. If not they should allow ads....like almost every other nonsubscription based tv service. Why should they charge for other non-BBC live tv channels? Shouldn't that entitle these non-BBC channels to a cut of that TV licensing money?
 
^ It's classic BBC Logic. :rotfl:

We've done surveys and asked many people and the vast majority say they love the BBC and agree it's amazing value for all the content and services they provide.

Ok, so go to a subscription based model, where all these people that want the BBC pay for it.

Oh no that's not possible as we'd not get enough money if we used that system.

But I thought you just said so many people love you and think you are great value!

:facepalm:
 
Does anyone buy a daily paper anymore?
Well, I for one do, and will keep doing so and long as they’re printed and my eyesight holds up. It makes refreshing change to actually read printed media, rather than have to rely on an electronic gadget. I read printed books too. I’m sure that that makes me a luddite. In any event, the news reporting in quality newspapers is far better than the biased rubbish churned out by the BBC, bringing this back on topic, which is reason enough to not have to pay the licence fee in my book.
 
In my 40s now. Barely watch live TV. I think this TV license fee is a big con and has to be entirely abolished. BBC can fund itself via advertisements.
 
Seems to be some truth in that. Very first google hit


Obviously the very left-wing Guardian comes up with a headline about George Osbourne forcing it upon them, but in the actual article even they concede that it was a give and take agreement between the two.

Reading the text, it was to be phased in, with the BBC paying a third, then two thirds and then full but they reneged before it got to full.

Cheers,

Nigel

You know, your the first poster on this thread to get it bang on and your exactly right, because thats actually exactly what happened.
 
You know, your the first poster on this thread to get it bang on and your exactly right, because thats actually exactly what happened.

The BBC agreed to a new settlement with the Tory government in 2015 over its funding model.


The director general was happy to accept an increase in funding for the organisation and for that increase they agreed to cover free license fees. Bit late to moan about it now, perhaps he could give the money back.
 
As others have said, the BBC negotiated the current charter that started in 2016. The BBC got the right to increase the cost of a TV license, it was also expanded in scope to include iPlayer (meaning more people would need a tv license), and they also got more funding for the BBC World Service. in exchange for this, the BBC undertook to take on the funding of the free TV licenses for over 75s.

It is a bit rich for the BBC to be complaining now about the deal they did and agreed. Or maybe they assumed a Labour government would have been voted in by 2020 (then the date of the next general election) and overturned the previous deal? Either way, it is the BBCs fault. They get zero sympathy from me, and I think what they are doing in the middle of a pandemic is terrible.

It’s also been mooted the government are looking to decriminalise license fee evasion. The sooner that happens the better - the first step to moving to a new funding model for the BBC that hopefully doesn’t involve threatening and harassing some of the most vulnerable in society to hand over £160.
 
No problem whatsoever with the BBC Licence mostly as it stands.
You watch the BBC/content then you pay for the licence.
You don't watch it, you tell them, and you don't pay then any money.

Only grumble is, and will always be that if I watch say TV Russia News Live, beamed direct from russia to my dish, then I need to pay the BBC for some bizarre reason
Agreed.....!!!
I've had a 1.5 metre Motorized Dish since 1993 & love all the culture I can watch. Especially Middle Eastern Baltic, & Russian Music & Dance.
I never watch BBC....!!!! So why should I pay for a TV licence fee.....????
More importantly as a 83 year old Pensioner why should I contribute to Jonathan Ross MILLIONS....!!!
ITS TOTALLY IMMORAL..!!!!. & UNFAIR......!!!!!
If I had the money Jonathan Ross has I would challenge this in a court of law.....!!!
 
No problem whatsoever with the BBC Licence mostly as it stands.
You watch the BBC/content then you pay for the licence.
You don't watch it, you tell them, and you don't pay then any money.

Only grumble is, and will always be that if I watch say TV Russia News Live, beamed direct from russia to my dish, then I need to pay the BBC for some bizarre reason
Agreed.....!!!
I've had a 1.5 metre Motorized Dish since 1993 & love all the culture I can watch. Especially Middle Eastern Baltic, & Russian Music & Dance.
I never watch BBC....!!!! So why should I pay for a TV licence fee.....????
More importantly as a 83 year old Pensioner why should I contribute to Jonathan Ross MILLIONS....!!!
ITS TOTALLY IMMORAL..!!!!. & UNFAIR......!!!!![/SIZE]
If I had the money Jonathan Ross has I would challenge this in a court of law.....!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now here's a thought for all who pay a licence fee....!!!!

Since all licence holders pay for the very existence of the BBC.
Doesn't that mean "We all own the BBC....????"

Therefore aren't we all shareholders in the BBC & shouldn't we have a say in the policies of the BBC....?????
Like paying Jonathan Ross millions or not even having him on the payroll for example.....!!!???

What do you Guys reckon.......?????
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now is a good time to cancel. Its not like they're going to be able to send the goons round to check. What with social distance and all that. Who is going to let a complete stranger into their home and in particular the over 75's.

This is how I deal with them.

 
All die the BBC....

It would be a sad day if it ever went.....
 
The BBC agreed to a new settlement with the Tory government in 2015 over its funding model.

Yes and let me tell you why this change happened...

The BBC (or someone in the BBC) realised they get millions more views via iPlayer than live TV.

So they went to the Govt and asked for the law be changed to include the iPlayer under the licence fee. The Govt said yes, but in increments the BBC would have to bear the cost of OAPs free licence fees, to which the BBC agreed.

They are now renegading on that deal.
 
I want choice, my choice. Netflix, sky, apple, Now, Disney and BBC. Time for the license to be binned if they go under they go under would we really miss them? Probably not.

Ah. A joke comment.
 
What is the BBC anyway.....???
Is it a company, a charity, or part of the government.....???

No. Its none of these things......!!!

Its an out-of-date organisation that came into being when there was no alternatives.
Therefore It did serve a purpose in its time....!!!

But things have moved on and so it should be reformed into something more flexible and not an outdated organisation that is effectively "A-Law-unto-itself".
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom