monasqueen Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 I think it's 75 (or 74 if your licence is due before your next birthday). It's 75 TV License age exemption Can't Wait ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 or 74 if your licence is due before your next birthday Pro-rated so they can squeeze the last few quid out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 No, they don't have any right at all to enter your home. You can refuse them entry. They may try to play on the householders ignorance to gain entry but you have an absolute right to deny them entry. if they have a warrant that totally changes the situation. For interest I just asked a relative who has been a magistrate for the last 8 years in a UK city with population about 5 times that of the IoM how often they issued warrants to TV licence inspectors. His reply was that he had never done so himself nor heard of his colleagues doing it. He added that he did from time to time get involved in being asked to issue warrants for Gas, Elecrticity or Water staff to enter premises when bills were unpaid and services were to be disconnected. In those circumstances the guidelines for the magistrates are to check what the grounds are for seeking a warrant and then what other steps have been taken by the authority to resolve the issue and to check whether the premises to be entered has children or elderly persons living there - so that alternatives other than forced entry can be attempted before a warrant is issued. If you feel that way inclined the key thing seems to be not to voluntarily let someone in but to make them go through the proper procedures. Of course if they have a warrant you must let them in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_scrote Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 75 it is.. I've just rang my Mother...come and live in the States, No license..but you have to watch Ads interrupted by programs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevster Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 Firstly, I know how to spell TV Licence. Secondly, I'm quite happy to pay the £135.50 per year. I very rarely watch TV as I much prefer BBC Radio4, but for just under 38p per day, I think the licence fee is worth it and have no qualms whatsoever about paying it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Jampton Posted March 31, 2008 Share Posted March 31, 2008 A Radio 4 listener should be able to spell and know the difference between license and licence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancsboy Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 I don't have one and I don't want one - believe it or not, I don't watch telly at home and regard it as a waste of time. I sometimes watch the news at work or something, but that's about it - it's amazing how much spare time you get by not looking at the box - No BB, no X-Factor, nothing.. I was planning to get Sky at some point, but thanks to the location of my house, they would need to put the dish 50 meters up the hill to get some reception - not worth it...(only wanted Discovery Channel anyway) Normal reception is also pretty zero (the house is too close and underneath the big antenna thingy up the hill, so I guess it's sending it's waves in an angle that goes over my place) and I've tried everything to get some reception in the past, including Homer Simpson style roof excursions and other acts usually classified as "stuntwork", so I'm not bothered anymore.. Needless to say that I got some of them threatening letters in the past (which I personally regard as rude and totally inappropriate) and I've even called the muppets to tell them that I don't use a TV. Still get them now, so I shall ignore'em in the future - can't do more than tell'em (and baffle a phone monkey in the progress "What do you mean, you have no reception?" - seems, her handbook didn't give her the correct phrase to reply at that point) I guess my replacement is the Internet - more informative, more interactive and definitely more useful... do not watch tv so why should i pay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevster Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 A Radio 4 listener should be able to spell and know the difference between license and licence. I do.... Licence (with a C) is the noun and license (with an S) is the verb. So, TV Licensing (with and S) deal with your TV Licence (with a C). Check their website - http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Licence (with a C) is the noun and license (with an S) is the verb. So, TV Licensing (with and S) deal with your TV Licence (with a C). An easier way to remember the difference might be to think of TV Licensing run by 'Scurvy Shites' who come up with 'Complete Cobblers' as to why we have to buy a licence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 The agreement between the IoM and UK on TV licensing is just that, an agreement. Uk asks if we will enforce it, and we agree. Much the same as the common purse agreement, where the UK asks to enforce VAT (customs and Excise) which goes into the UK purse, we agree. Is it? When and how was this agreement made? When the Order in Council extended the Act of Parliament to IoM - or just before? What form did this agreement take? A nod and a quick phone call, a formal document? (who, where, when, how?) Was it presented to Tynwald for ratification and incorportation into Manx Law? (If not, is IoM unlike UK - and the CM/ or head of state can make binding municipal laws by signing treaties and international agreements?) When you say "UK asks if we will enforce it, and we agree" is this the nature of the 'agreement'? i.e. compliance with the legislation Westminster imposes on IoM? UK imposes tax on tea or tv - agreement is indicated by IoM provided there isn't a revolution (as happened in the American Colonies). Why do Manx courts enforce this? Is it because they are following an Act of Tynwald, or because they are following a dictat from Westminster? How exactly did having to pay this tax become incorporated into Manx law if not through Keys / Tynwald? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Does anyone know why Jersey has BBC Radio Jersey while IoM does not have an equivalent? (but instead has MR which has to be paid for by the taxpayer in addition to TV Licence fees). I'd have thought a BBC Radio service would be better than MR - cheaper, no ads, better experience in public service broadcasting, and probably would give better reporting and coverage of current affairs. Even if keep MR, isn't competition a good thing, and wouldn't having a local BBC radio service be worthwhile? It seems a bit like paying for your cake and not eating it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Does anyone know why Jersey has BBC Radio Jersey while IoM does not have an equivalent? (but instead has MR which has to be paid for by the taxpayer in addition to TV Licence fees). I'd have thought a BBC Radio service would be better than MR - cheaper, no ads, better experience in public service broadcasting, and probably would give better reporting and coverage of current affairs. Even if keep MR, isn't competition a good thing, and wouldn't having a local BBC radio service be worthwhile? It seems a bit like paying for your cake and not eating it. We have Newsbot - what else do we need? Personally, I prefer having our own national station - the less British things that get a foothold here the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 We have Newsbot - what else do we need? Personally, I prefer having our own national station - the less British things that get a foothold here the better. This wouldn't mean getting rid of MR so you could keep your own taxpayer funded national station (and your earplugs) - but it gives competition and choice and surely something BBC should be providing for the £2m odd it gets in Licence fees from IoM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
%age Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 An elderly retired neighbour has purchased a licence, never missed, in over 40 years I'm certain that if you neighbour is over 70 yrs old then the license should be free.. As Albert pointed out, it is 75 for a free licence. She is not there yet but is still extremely distressed. I believe that the reason the licence is free to over 75s is because they are the main group that make complaints to the BBC. Complaints such as the £millions paid to Jonathan Ross and all the smutty and embarassing comments he continually makes about sexual activity to his guests or, as he mentioned last time I was watching, his own masturbatory habits. Also his seeming revulsion of disabled people. One of the BBCs £multi-million newest celebs Graham Norton would likely have been in the complainers hit list too. They found it cheaper to shut the 'old fogeys' up by giving them a free licence and saving the salary of the peson that was needed to write condescending and patronising replies to the complainants. This also gave the BBC a freer reign to "push the envelope" even further of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted April 1, 2008 Share Posted April 1, 2008 Complaints such as the £millions paid to Jonathan Ross and all the smutty and embarassing comments he continually makes about sexual activity to his guests or, as he mentioned last time I was watching, his own masturbatory habits. That w***ker is on my top ten hit list, along with Jimmy Carr and Graham Norton and several other so called 'entertainers' of that ilk. He tries to be all things to all people, he thinks he's funny and he's not, and then expects us to take him seriously on film 2008 or whatever. Tosser! Which brainiac at the BBC thinks he's any good - probably the same idiot that gave Ann Robinson a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.