TV Licence - ALL TV licence discussion/queries in this thread.

Fred Swanson · 25-10-2017 12:57pm

This post has been deleted.

gzckrg · 25-10-2017 1:01pm

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

thanks. And what do you think about the licence fee. Do i need to pay it because of the NTL box on the wall?

Johnboy1951 · 25-10-2017 1:35pm

I would respond to the card ...... telling them that the addressee is not known at this address.

Also state there is no TV at the address and sign it as 'occupier'.

Without a response they will keep chasing at the address looking for the previous tenant and his licence.

Fuzzy Clam · 25-10-2017 5:19pm

gzckrg wrote: »

thanks. And what do you think about the licence fee. Do i need to pay it because of the NTL box on the wall?

No. The licence is for a TV, working or non working.
Do nothing if you want or return the card as advised if you want to.

JaneR5 · 10-11-2017 1:34pm

Here’s the exact breakdown:
RTÉ One – €58.01
RTÉ Two – €31.21
RTÉ Radio One – €13.40
RTÉ Raidió na Gaeltachta – €8.33
RTÉ Lyric FM – €4.79
RTÉ Performing Groups – €9.26
RTÉ Support for TG4 – €6.39
Broadcasting Authority of Ireland levy – €1.75
TG4 Deduction – €6.71
BCI Sound and Vision fund – €10.53
Collection Costs from An Post/Communications and Social Protection Departments – €9.62

JaneR5 · 10-11-2017 1:40pm

Don't think its fair to be forced to pay for something we don't want to use they should privatised it and let people choose whether they want to subscribe I don't have any tv subscription kids use tv for video games but we still have to pay for something we can't afford its scandalous paying for their high wages and biased talk shows there should be a referendum on the tv license

Harry Palmr · 10-11-2017 1:45pm

JaneR5 wrote: »

Here’s the exact breakdown:
RTOne – €58.01
RTTwo – €31.21
RTRadio One – €13.40
RTRaidi Gaeltachta – €8.33
RTLyric FM – €4.79
RTPerforming Groups – €9.26
RTSupport for TG4 – €6.39
Broadcasting Authority of Ireland levy – €1.75
TG4 Deduction – €6.71
BCI Sound and Vision fund – €10.53
Collection Costs from An Post/Communications and Social Protection Departments – €9.62

So 2 FM gets nothing? So it's making money then? The wedge that RnG gets is notable when one considers it's audience.

Fred Swanson · 10-11-2017 2:13pm

This post has been deleted.

filbert the fox · 10-11-2017 2:34pm

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/tv-licence-model-broken-with-evasion-at-14-6-pac-told-1.3286154

What a mess. And I pay my TV licence.

The system is broken and a level playing field must prevail for all. I resent having to pay when others claim it doesn't apply to them and boast about default.

The Minister must act now.

runawaybishop · 10-11-2017 2:38pm

filbert the fox wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/tv-licence-model-broken-with-evasion-at-14-6-pac-told-1.3286154

What a mess. And I pay my TV licence.

The system is broken and a level playing field must prevail for all. I resent having to pay when others claim it doesn't apply to them and boast about default.

The Minister must act now.

A lot of people do not have a TV and the license fee doesn't apply to them, but they are lumped in as "evaders".

NinjaTruncs · 10-11-2017 2:56pm

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The license is for "television or equipment capable of receiving a television signal" so if one's setup allows them to receive a TV signal regardless of whether they use a TV or monitor, they need a TV license.

What would be interesting is to see the definition of "television signal" would having a mobile phone capable of installing the RTE app be considered receiving a TV signal?

Harry Palmr · 10-11-2017 3:45pm

All of which illustrates why the licence must be binned and a "data tax" be introduced this could be slung onto the property tax as far as I'm concerned. Easy to administer.

Fred Swanson · 10-11-2017 3:57pm

This post has been deleted.

Johnboy1951 · 10-11-2017 4:11pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

All of which illustrates why the licence must be binned and a "data tax" be introduced this could be slung onto the property tax as far as I'm concerned. Easy to administer.

I would have a preference to its addition to a utility bill such as the electricity bill.

brightspark · 10-11-2017 4:28pm

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I would have a preference to its addition to a utility bill such as the electricity bill.

Add it to the property tax, revenue have a good record of collecting, any defaulting then recovered when property is sold.

Falcon L · 10-11-2017 5:17pm

Add it to nothing! Make it a pay for use service. You don't use it... you don't pay. If their content was decent, surely people would pay. Are they saying that their output wouldn't attract viewers?

They still have a huge income from advertising. If they are struggling, they should reduce payments to their "stars". No way in hell are Tubs and Darcy worth a half a million each.

Harry Palmr · 10-11-2017 5:20pm

The idea that pay cuts is going to fix RTE's income is laughable. It makes a good headline but really if you slashed everyone who is on 100k or more by 50% it would reduce the bill by a few million.

Falcon L · 10-11-2017 5:23pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The idea that pay cuts is going to fix RTE's income is laughable. It makes a good headline but really if you slashed everyone who is on 100k or more by 50% it would reduce the bill by a few million.

You know the old saying: look after the pennies...

What about my first suggestion then? Pay per view. I reckon that they know they'd have feck all viewers if they went that route, so they'll still try to follow the "screw everyone" model.

Harry Palmr · 10-11-2017 8:13pm

PPV clearly is not going to work either, I'd get rid of the orchestras and choirs first - €15m. If the Dept of arts and cultural stuff wants them they can fund them out of income tax.

Johnboy1951 · 10-11-2017 8:18pm

Falcon L wrote: »

Add it to nothing! Make it a pay for use service. You don't use it... you don't pay. If their content was decent, surely people would pay. Are they saying that their output wouldn't attract viewers?

They still have a huge income from advertising. If they are struggling, they should reduce payments to their "stars". No way in hell are Tubs and Darcy worth a half a million each.

You seem not to realise that the licence fee is NOT a payment for service.

If you want PPV then that would be in addition to the licence fee, just like you might pay Netflix for its content.

Rubberchikken · 10-11-2017 8:19pm

Let those who want to watch rte pay for it. Those that don't should be left alone.
I pay the licence every year. Don't have Rte don't watch tv as such. Mostly box sets and occasionally Netflix (that probably counts as tv!
Makes my heart warm to think my 160 euro is keeping those presenters in rte in the high earning talentless bracket.

Sam Russell · 10-11-2017 8:31pm

Falcon L wrote: »

Add it to nothing! Make it a pay for use service. You don't use it... you don't pay. If their content was decent, surely people would pay. Are they saying that their output wouldn't attract viewers?

They still have a huge income from advertising. If they are struggling, they should reduce payments to their "stars". No way in hell are Tubs and Darcy worth a half a million each.

They are hamstrung by regulations that favour TV3 and harm RTE.

1. They run four channels two of which are in HD. TV3 run three channels - none of which is in HD.

2. RTE are restricted on RTE NN to having no paid advertising, and on RTE Jr no advertising. On the balance of that channel they are restricted to RTE 1+1, a time delay version that adds no advertising revenue. So 50% of their channels are non-advertising.

3. TV3 are allowed twice as many minutes of advertising per hour than RTE.

4. RTE are subject to Ministerial approval for schedule changes. No such restrictions apply to TV3.

5. RTE are obliged to provide cultural programmes and other activities, such as running two orchestras, and other performing groups. [The RTÉ Performing Groups are made up of the RTÉ National Symphony Orchestra, the RTÉ Concert Orchestra, the RTÉ Vanbrugh Quartet, the RTÉ Philharmonic Choir and the children's choir RTÉ Cór na nÓg]

So TV3 are allowed a free pass and RTE are closely controlled yet expected to quality programmes on a tight budget. Now they may have a generous attitude towards their 'stars' but in terms of their total budget, that is small potatoes. Currently they are selling the family silver to pay redundancy and day to day expenses. That cannot last.

The cost of running Saorview is €12 m per year of which RTE pay €8m /year instead of a more equitable cost of €6m if they were to restrict themselves to one mux and leave TV3 and TG4 pay for the second one. If TV3 and TG4 were to pay the full price of mux 2, they would go HD immediately because they could and at a cost of slightly more than they currently pay. Why is this not done?

The OTV channel was kept from Saorview, but paid for on Sky - why? Because the Oreachtas refused to pay RTE a red cent for it.

If you do not travel on a bus or a train, you are paying a subsidy to CIE through your taxes but not benefiting from it, so why not complain about that - it is much more money than the TV licence?

Put it on the Lecky bill, no-one can dodge that. Even €12 or €13 a month would cover it when you remove the avoiders and An Post from the total.

You know it makes sense.

JaneR5 · 10-11-2017 11:24pm

Boo hoo I have no interest or sympathy for Rte and they're budget my priority is feeding my family I'm not dodging anything and its offensive to be called an evader

JaneR5 · 10-11-2017 11:28pm

Maybe you don't realise it should be a choice to subscribe to Rte not forced on people

Fuzzy Clam · 10-11-2017 11:46pm

JaneR5 wrote: »

Maybe you don't realise it should be a choice to subscribe to Rte not forced on people

The licence fee is not for watching RTE. Its for processing equipment capable of receiving television broadcasts, regardless of which station you watch.

10-11-2017 11:58pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

All of which illustrates why the licence must be binned and a "data tax" be introduced this could be slung onto the property tax as far as I'm concerned. Easy to administer.

The property tax details might have no bearing on who has a tv at an address, it's a short sighted to arbitrarily apply it that way, it looks like they will find some excuse to bill people who don't watch rte anyway, I'd planned on getting a monitor and not paying again, having not watched rte in years I consider it reasonable to not pay for something I don't use.

10-11-2017 11:59pm

Harry Palmr wrote: »

All of which illustrates why the licence must be binned and a "data tax" be introduced this could be slung onto the property tax as far as I'm concerned. Easy to administer.

The property tax details might have no bearing on who has a tv at an address, it's a short sighted to arbitrarily apply it that way, it looks like they will find some excuse to bill people who don't watch rte anyway, I'd planned on getting a monitor and not paying again, having not watched rte in years I consider it reasonable to not pay for something I don't use.

Sam Russell · 11-11-2017 12:02am

JaneR5 wrote: »

Boo hoo I have no interest or sympathy for Rte and they're budget my priority is feeding my family I'm not dodging anything and its offensive to be called an evader

I referred to 'avoiders' not 'evaders'.

RTE need to improve their management performance and they need to deflate the bubble they live in. However, they have a significant effect on Irish culture, mostly to the good.

Do you visit the National Gallery, or the National Museum? Thy are free entry and worth visiting. You taxes pay for them.

Harry Palmr · 11-11-2017 12:03am

I don't watch RTE either beyond news and the odd game but I do listen to the radio. Someone needs to pay for it and a pick and choose approach will weaken native media and when that happens others will fill the void.

Not sure we really want TV3 as the nations primary news and current affairs outlet.

JaneR5 · 11-11-2017 12:05am

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

The licence fee is not for watching RTE. Its for processing equipment capable of receiving television broadcasts, regardless of which station you watch.

The license fee goes to Rte if you look at the breakdown previously posted I don't use any of Rte s service nor is my TV soar view ready sky aren't looking for money off me because I have a TV that" could "be used to watch a sky subscription people shouldn't be forced to fund Rte

11-11-2017 12:09am

What have the national gallery got to do with things, people are voicing a justifiable complaint about being obligated to pay for a tv licence, or why is tv3 being raised? How much of the licence fee do they receive?

JaneR5 · 11-11-2017 12:13am

Sam Russell wrote: »

I referred to 'avoiders' not 'evaders'.

RTE need to improve their management performance and they need to deflate the bubble they live in. However, they have a significant effect on Irish culture, mostly to the good.

Do you visit the National Gallery, or the
National Museum? Thy are free entry and worth visiting. You taxes pay for them.[/
quote]

same thing
like i said i don't use their services so i should have a choice whether or not to purchase them

I wouldn't mind contributing to a national cultural fund annually

JaneR5 · 11-11-2017 12:25am

Sam Russell wrote: »

I referred to 'avoiders' not 'evaders'.

RTE need to improve their management performance and they need to deflate the bubble they live in. However, they have a significant effect on Irish culture, mostly to the good.

Do you visit the National Gallery, or the
National Museum? Thy are free entry and worth visiting. You taxes pay for them.[/
quote]

same thing
like i said i don't use their services so i should have a choice whether or not to purchase them

I wouldn't mind contributing to a national cultural fund annually

JaneR5 · 11-11-2017 12:26am

Sam Russell wrote: »

I referred to 'avoiders' not 'evaders'.

RTE need to improve their management performance and they need to deflate the bubble they live in. However, they have a significant effect on Irish culture, mostly to the good.

Do you visit the National Gallery, or the
National Museum? Thy are free entry and worth visiting. You taxes pay for them.[/
quote]

same thing
like i said i don't use their services so i should have a choice whether or not to purchase them

I wouldn't mind contributing to a national cultural fund annually

Falcon L · 11-11-2017 9:36am

Sam Russell wrote: »

Put it on the Lecky bill, no-one can dodge that. Even €12 or €13 a month would cover it when you remove the avoiders and An Post from the total.

You know it makes sense.

No, it doesn't. If I don't have any interest in owning a TV, but want to run, say, a fridge, or have heating, I should pay for everyone else's TV bill?

icdg · 11-11-2017 10:31am

Just a general warning about conduct on this thread. While the subject of the TV licence is a legitimate topic of debate, posters must do so in such away that there is no advocacy of anything illegal.

For example, you can complain all you like about having to pay a TV license.

The minute you start telling people not to pay the TV license, you have crossed the line. Warnings or bans may issue.

Harry Palmr · 11-11-2017 11:06am

Falcon L wrote: »

No, it doesn't. If I don't have any interest in owning a TV, but want to run, say, a fridge, or have heating, I should pay for everyone else's TV bill?

News just in you are paying for the Army, Navy and Air Corp, you are playing for trains and buses, you are paying for the public works to stop flooding across the country. None of the above may be of any importance to you but paying for them is part of the deal.

If the levy on the electric offends it could go on property tax or out of the general tax fund, whatever but one way or another almost all "family units" will end up paying.

Falcon L · 11-11-2017 11:25am

Harry Palmr wrote: »

News just in you are paying for the Army, Navy and Air Corp, you are playing for trains and buses, you are paying for the public works to stop flooding across the country. None of the above may be of any importance to you but paying for them is part of the deal.

If the levy on the electric offends it could go on property tax or out of the general tax fund, whatever but one way or another almost all "family units" will end up paying.

Why do people keep giving examples of useful services, and then compare them to the wasteful luvvy fest that is RTE?

How many hours of "teleshopping" do RTE indulge in? How about programmes that were crap in the eighties, being repeated ad nauseum. RTE are so inwardly focused and insulated from their audience that they have wandered a long way off course.

I'm sure that people would be prepared to fund a broadcaster that was fit for purpose. Produce something that people want and they will consume it. Force crap on people and they will resist. Human nature 101.

Johnboy1951 · 11-11-2017 11:45am

Why do people insist on equating the TV licence with receiving broadcasts from RTE?

Surely it must have been explained many times in this thread that the licence is to support public service broadcasting in Ireland.

Like it or not you are expected to contribute to that if you have specified equipment.

Hopefully in the future it will be changed and all households will have to contribute regardless the presence of specific equipment.

While they are at it, they should announce the abolition of the "TV Licence" and introduce something like a "Public Service Contribution".
I wonder would that stop people deliberately misrepresenting what the 'tv licence' is for?

09-12-2017 7:20pm

I have just got out all the channels and I am going to get a 40 inch monitor to game/ watch netflix on. Will I still get hassled to pay for a license with just a monitor?

Elmo · 09-12-2017 7:22pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I have just got out all the channels and I am going to get a 40 inch monitor to game/ watch netflix on. Will I still get hassled to pay for a license with just a monitor?

Do you have a monitor connected to an STB from any TV provider?

09-12-2017 7:36pm

Elmo wrote: »

Do you have a monitor connected to an STB from any TV provider?

I have no tv provider at all. I have virgin broadband in and thats all. The whole family watches netflix on the ps4, so we watch no tv at all.

Elmo · 09-12-2017 9:22pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I have no tv provider at all. I have virgin broadband in and thats all. The whole family watches netflix on the ps4, so we watch no tv at all.

Then you should be good, as long as you have no TVs or STBs, in the house.

09-12-2017 11:52pm

Elmo wrote: »

Then you should be good, as long as you have no TVs or STBs, in the house.

Cool, I never watch TV in the traditional sense and dont fancy paying money for something I dont watch. They better not bring in that new idea I heard floating around about anyone with a device that can connect to the Internet will have to pay for a TV license.

styo · 11-12-2017 12:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I have just got out all the channels and I am going to get a 40 inch monitor to game/ watch netflix on. Will I still get hassled to pay for a license with just a monitor?

so the law says that you must have a tv license if you have equipment capable or receiving a terrestrial tv signal, whether used for this or not.

this means if you have a screen sold as a monitor, and not as a tv, you are fine as regards that screen. The key test is whether the set was sold/advertised as a TV. What this boils down to is does it have a tv tuner built in. this is what the authority told me when i asked.

if your monitor is genuinely just that (rather than being for example a 4k tv being used as a monitor) then you do not have to have a tv license for the screen. but if you have a sky box for example, then you would have to have a license for it.

There was a case where someone disabled a tv tuner and thereby got away in court without having to pay the license, but its impossible to find any detail on that. it may be urban myth.

It is not possible in this country to buy a so-called tunerless tv set of the kind manufactured by vizio.com. This would be the ideal solution.

MentalMario · 11-12-2017 12:56pm

Tried to pay this today. Site won't take payments. Keep getting an error.

11-12-2017 2:15pm

Elmo wrote: »

Do you have a monitor connected to an STB from any TV provider?

Elmo wrote: »

Then you should be good, as long as you have no TVs or STBs, in the house.

A television licence is required for a television set, for the purposes of the act, a television set is something capable of receiving and exhibiting a tv signal.
The definition of exhibit is to manifest clearly, or to be able to view. You cannot view anything from a STB so this is clearly wrong, despite what I have been told myself by an An Post tv licence inspector when I said I don't have a tv (which I didnt at the time), you do NOT need a licence for a STB. There is no mention of STB in the act. I was also told as there was an existing satellite dish that I had to have one, another pile of manure.

To try and suggest as much is like saying if you have an aerial to receive saorview then you are obliged to have a tv licence, which would also be incorrect. An Post inspectors know this and are just trying to pull a fast one on people, based on the usual, we know everyone has a tv, which just isnt the case anymore.

styo wrote: »

so the law says that you must have a tv license if you have equipment capable or receiving a terrestrial tv signal, whether used for this or not.

this means if you have a screen sold as a monitor, and not as a tv, you are fine as regards that screen. The key test is whether the set was sold/advertised as a TV. What this boils down to is does it have a tv tuner built in. this is what the authority told me when i asked.

if your monitor is genuinely just that (rather than being for example a 4k tv being used as a monitor) then you do not have to have a tv license for the screen. but if you have a sky box for example, then you would have to have a license for it.

There was a case where someone disabled a tv tuner and thereby got away in court without having to pay the license, but its impossible to find any detail on that. it may be urban myth.

It is not possible in this country to buy a so-called tunerless tv set of the kind manufactured by vizio.com. This would be the ideal solution.

Can this fallacy be put to rest, both incorrect, the law says, if you have a "TV set" you must have a "TV licence"

142.—(1) Subject to the exceptions mentioned in subsection (3), a
person shall not keep or have in his or her possession anywhere in
the territory of the State a television set save in so far as such keeping
or possession is authorised by a television licence for the time being
in force.

“television set” means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving
and exhibiting television broadcasting services broadcast for general
reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on
the use of anything else in conjunction with it) and any software or
assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus;

A sky box nor any other STB does not fulfill this requirement, unless it is one Ive not come across which includes a built in monitor, maybe such a device exists, but Ive never heard of it and usually they do not. The act specifies that the apparatus must be able to receive AND exhibit television broadcasting signals.
regardless of the definition you interpret as the meaning of "apparatus". Eitheras a single complex piece of equipment (digital tv) or an assembly of items (analogue tv+STB+aerial) combined that fulfill the task. You cannot fulfill that requirement unless you can RECEIVE AND EXHIBIT a tv broadcasting signal.

I would go so far as to say that since the digital switchover, if you have an analogue tv and no digital tuner (STB) or even a TV and a STB but no aerial, then the apparatus you have can no longer carry out that task and the requirements to have a tv licence no longer exist.
I would love to be well off enough to take a test case on that basis, not being wealthy and as I suspect the ignorance is strong, they wont want to be undermined.

The stupid thing is, I would actually be happy to pay a tv licence for cultural and essential public services, but for a lot less than the extortionate fee currently. If there was an option for PPV services, people could avail of that by choice, but we are obligated by RTE for services that exceeds public necessity or benefit, programming of no value and programming that is just paid for from abroad, old repeats and cults of personality that would put north Korea to shame, (all that and the nepotistic hangers on).
Pare that away, the second unnecessary tv channel, and the appallingly biased news.
RTE receives the lions share of the fee, in an effort to suggest they would reduce costs, they say they would get rid of the Orchestra,which is a benefit, it would be much better to keep a full Orchestra and get rid of the overpaid nobody's!

When they hint or suggest at a broadcasting charge, there is nothing to reduce the cost given that there would be an enforced 100% compliance, which is in effect the same as a percent increase equivalent to the current recovery costs of 9-10%.

It would simply be better RTE and their proponents be honest (a laugh) about it, let everyone be in the net for a significantly less cost (€100), have large cutbacks in the overpaid cults of celebrity presenters and services that are of no public value or that are clearly competing commercially (let people choose to pay for additional programming-pay per view if they want) AND have less excuse for people to be reluctant to pay.

160 euro is a lot of money for people, it is an expensive rip off to be shoved down your throat.

Johnboy1951 · 11-12-2017 3:36pm

“television set” means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving
and exhibiting television broadcasting services broadcast for general
reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on
the use of anything else in conjunction with it) and any software or
assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus;

A monitor, being dependent on some other apparatus (tuner/stb), if such is present, then requires a TV Licence ...

because it is capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasting services when combined with the tuner/STB.

styo · 11-12-2017 4:01pm

the relevant act refers to equipment capable of receiving a signal, which covers tv sets and set top boxes and the like.

styo · 11-12-2017 4:04pm

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

A monitor, being dependent on some other apparatus (tuner/stb), if such is present, then requires a TV Licence ...

because it is capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasting services when combined with the tuner/STB.

no. that is not the case. a monitor does not have to be licensed.

i asked this question of the relevant licensing authority.

it really is quite simple. if the screen has equipment on board to receive signal, then it must be licensed. If it doesn't then it doesn't require a license.

A good example is a laptop. It has a screen. one could add a tv card, in which case it requires a license, but does not if it does not have a card added.

its the receiving equipment and not the screen that is the issue. If you have equipment in a house that is capable of receiving a terrestrial tv signal, even analog signals which rte no longer broadcast, then it must be licensed under the act.

TV Licence - ALL TV licence discussion/queries in this thread.

Comments