Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Woman who failed to pay TV licence fine taken to jail in five-hour taxi trip

1…1214161718

Comments

  • #392
    Baby Jane
    Closed Accounts Posts: 227 ✭✭Baby Jane


    If you receive a licence fee invoice, there's no escaping it unfortunately (I've tried :pac:). It's just one of those things that's sh*t but refusing to pay it won't eventually lead to you slipping off the radar, it will only incur a fine.
    There's no way around it. If a person receives a TV licence invoice and is struggling financially, this isn't an issue - An Post knows there are people in this situation. But you have to contact them as early as possible, they're not psychic, and they can set up a payment plan.

    I really don't understand the thing of blaming the guards for her simply not paying and leaving a fine be added. People talk about her making an effort to pay, but she didn't - that's the whole point. The guards' involvement was completely avoidable. Talking about people getting light sentences for heinous crimes, while worth pointing out, doesn't change that she knew there would be avoidable consequences.


  • #393
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,014 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Baby Jane wrote: »
    If you receive a licence fee invoice, there's no escaping it unfortunately (I've tried ). It's just one of those things that's sh*t but refusing to pay it won't eventually lead to you slipping off the radar, it will only incur a fine.
    There's no way around it. If a person receives a TV licence invoice and is struggling financially, this isn't an issue - An Post knows there are people in this situation. But you have to contact them as early as possible, they're not psychic, and they can set up a payment plan.

    I really don't understand the thing of blaming the guards for her simply not paying and leaving a fine be added. People talk about her making an effort to pay, but she didn't - that's the whole point. The guards' involvement was completely avoidable. Talking about people getting light sentences for heinous crimes, while worth pointing out, doesn't change that she knew there would be avoidable consequences.
    nobody blamed the gards. she made more then an effort to pay, she payed some of it off. the law doesn't allow her to do that which is stupid. she didn't know there were avoidable consiquences

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #394
    Baby Jane
    Closed Accounts Posts: 227 ✭✭Baby Jane


    end of the road wrote: »
    nobody blamed the gards. she made more then an effort to pay, she payed some of it off. the law doesn't allow her to do that which is stupid. she didn't know there were avoidable consiquences
    She made an effort to pay (how on earth is paying some of it beyond its due date "more than" an effort to pay"? :confused:) way too late though; the fine was incurred at that stage.
    Of course she knew there were avoidable consequences - it's made clear to everyone that there are these consequences.
    The law is stupid but she's not going to change it by ignoring it. Yes people have blamed the guards.
    It's actually incredible how the responsibility is being shifted from her. Why would people give an excuse for themselves to be punished? It's like people giving out about clampers and the satisfaction they get from clamping, when this opportunity to clamp could easily be denied them.


  • #395
    Gerry T
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    end of the road wrote: »
    she shouldn't have to pay us back, as she doesn't owe us anything. the government on our behalf decided the punishment for people like her, so its our job to pay for it. if we want people jailed, we have to pay for it, and its dead money. taxes would not be lower if such and such happened. taxes don't go down, they go up

    No your totally wrong. we deide who we think is best to represent us, run the country. they make the laws and over time the laws reflect the collective wishes of us all.
    If theres a punsihment the the person responsible has to pay, you seen to be lacking the very basic of decision making. This woman didnt have a lisc, so she pays a fine...thats basic. Unless you think that the way we should live is do what you want, rob lie abuse, once you get what you want its ok. Then yes I apologise your right, people should do what the want and the rest of us should pay


  • #396
    Gerry T
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    end of the road wrote: »
    nobody blamed the gards. she made more then an effort to pay, she payed some of it off. the law doesn't allow her to do that which is stupid. she didn't know there were avoidable consiquences

    She didn't know.
    Who gives a fick, she should know. I don't for a min believe this woman couldn't aford the TV lisc. I have two kids, they cost a feckin fortune between sport, presents, nights out, school. Theres no excuse pay the poxy lics and move on, no sympathy


  • Advertisement
  • #397
    Gerry T
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    end of the road wrote: »
    nobody blamed the gards. she made more then an effort to pay, she payed some of it off. the law doesn't allow her to do that which is stupid. she didn't know there were avoidable consiquences

    Don't be a moron.
    She has to pay for a lisc---not done
    She gets a fine, part paid---not good enough
    Se starts to moan -- who gives a fick
    I think double the fine, then idiots like this will stop wasting peoples time


  • #398
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,014 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Gerry T wrote: »
    No your totally wrong. we deide who we think is best to represent us, run the country. they make the laws and over time the laws reflect the collective wishes of us all.

    actually, no they don't. there are a number of laws i don't agree with, same for others who will have laws they don't agree with
    Gerry T wrote: »
    If theres a punsihment the the person responsible has to pay, you seen to be lacking the very basic of decision making.

    i'm lacking nothing. your the one suggesting criminals should have to pay back the costs of enforcement, i've told you its a non starter and why as has been proven.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    This woman didnt have a lisc, so she pays a fine...thats basic. Unless you think that the way we should live is do what you want, rob lie abuse, once you get what you want its ok.

    how does suggesting one shouldn't be jailed for paying a fine mean one believes one should do what they like? its a tv licence, nobody was harmed or died because this woman didn't have one

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #399
    Bongalongherb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Bongalongherb


    Gerry T wrote: »
    She didn't know.
    Who gives a fick, she should know. I don't for a min believe this woman couldn't aford the TV lisc. I have two kids, they cost a feckin fortune between sport, presents, nights out, school. Theres no excuse pay the poxy lics and move on, no sympathy

    Maybe you aren't aware of my previous post regarding a free day-trip to Dublin city all expenses paid. Why would you pay for this 'unjust' forced licence when you can go on a day-trip and come home relaxed in the knowledge that you enjoyed the day ?. #215


  • #400
    Gerry T
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    end of the road wrote: »
    actually, no they don't. there are a number of laws i don't agree with, same for others who will have laws they don't agree with
    It doesn't matter what you think, its meaningless. you or others may not agree, who cares. Its what the majority thinks that matters. the majority elects the govt. they write the laws and that reflects the wishes of the majority. You or any other person not agreeing doesn't matter a jot. So yes the majority does make the decisions, you just argue but really get nowhere
    end of the road wrote: »
    i'm lacking nothing. your the one suggesting criminals should have to pay back the costs of enforcement, i've told you its a non starter and why as has been proven.
    I do think people that break laws should have to pay their way. Its a personal view and may or may not reflect what others think. Your right the system at the moment doesn't work that way, but I live in hope

    end of the road wrote: »
    how does suggesting one shouldn't be jailed for paying a fine mean one believes one should do what they like? its a tv licence, nobody was harmed or died because this woman didn't have one
    Actually you make a good point, because no one died she shouldn't have to pay the fine. So by your logic I can rob a car and beat up the owner,,,but sure no one died so its ok


  • #401
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,014 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Gerry T wrote: »
    She gets a fine, part paid---not good enough

    it is good enough
    Gerry T wrote: »
    I think double the fine, then idiots like this will stop wasting peoples time

    they won't. doubling the fine will equal more debt, more non compliance and increase costs.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • Advertisement
  • #402
    conorh91
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    Bongalongherb wrote: »
    Why would you pay for this 'unjust' forced licence when you can go on a day-trip and come home relaxed in the knowledge that you enjoyed the day ?. #215
    Recognising the authority of the courts in a democratic society/ the pure mortification of being escorted to prison... those considerations are usually sufficient to ensure compliance.


  • #403
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,014 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Gerry T wrote: »
    It doesn't matter what you think, its meaningless. you or others may not agree, who cares. Its what the majority thinks that matters.

    no, all opinions matter. we all have a say, via the elections
    Gerry T wrote: »
    the majority elects the govt. they write the laws and that reflects the wishes of the majority.

    problem is, they don't always reflect the wishes of the majority
    Gerry T wrote: »
    You or any other person not agreeing doesn't matter a jot.

    it does
    Gerry T wrote: »
    So yes the majority does make the decisions

    no, the government makes the decisians, the majority have to put up with them whether they want to or not.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    I do think people that break laws should have to pay their way. Its a personal view and may or may not reflect what others think.

    but your view is impossible to implement. its not feasible
    Gerry T wrote: »
    Your right the system at the moment doesn't work that way, but I live in hope

    well, you will be living in hope as its not happening. the system is that way all over the world
    Gerry T wrote: »
    Actually you make a good point, because no one died she shouldn't have to pay the fine. So by your logic I can rob a car and beat up the owner,,,but sure no one died so its ok

    stop twisting what i said. i never said its okay not to pay the licence, all i said was nobody should be jailed for it and its not the worst crime in the world.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    She didn't know.
    Who gives a fick, she should know.

    should know what? that she couldn't pay it off in installments? how would she.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    I don't for a min believe this woman couldn't aford the TV lisc.

    but you have nothing to say she couldn't. only she knows that for definite
    Gerry T wrote: »
    Theres no excuse

    there is lots of excuses.
    Gerry T wrote: »
    pay the poxy lics and move on

    we will if we like

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #404
    Baby Jane
    Closed Accounts Posts: 227 ✭✭Baby Jane


    It says it on the licence invoice itself that a monthly payment system can be set up.

    There are loads of excuses not to pay the licence for sure, but none that will result in it being waived/an eventual fine not being slapped on top of it.

    I'd love if it were done away with but it's here, and it's true that it doesn't matter if people don't want to pay it - that won't make it go away.


  • #405
    Cienciano
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,208 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    bjork wrote: »
    They should confiscate the television and any other receiving devices

    OR even better, just block out rte until you pay. Make it voluntary, like sky sports. Wonder how many would subscribe?


  • #406
    Bongalongherb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Bongalongherb


    conorh91 wrote: »
    Recognising the authority of the courts in a democratic society/ the pure mortification of being escorted to prison... those considerations are usually sufficient to ensure compliance.

    No. It wouldn't be mortifying at all when the authority of the courts come pissing down on you for something so trivial regarding this waste of taxpaying citizens monies.

    A democratic right to refuse an unjust law is more important. All over a tv-licence.


  • #407
    Gerry T
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Bongalongherb wrote: »
    No. It wouldn't be mortifying at all when the authority of the courts come pissing down on you for something so trivial regarding this waste of taxpaying citizens monies.

    A democratic right to refuse an unjust law is more important. All over a tv-licence.

    You don't have a democratic right to refuse a law. The law is the democratic right of the people. IF you don't agree then change the law, you don't have a right to ignore the law


  • #408
    Bongalongherb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Bongalongherb


    Gerry T wrote: »
    You don't have a democratic right to refuse a law. The law is the democratic right of the people. IF you don't agree then change the law, you don't have a right to ignore the law

    Unjust law :rolleyes: does that ring a bell to you ?.


  • #409
    Gerry T
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 1,633 ✭✭✭Gerry T


    Bongalongherb wrote: »
    Unjust law :rolleyes: does that ring a bell to you ?.

    No it doesn't. name one


  • #410
    shaymus27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 223 ✭✭shaymus27


    People in Ireland today are having to choose between putting heating on or buying food, clothes etc. or paying a tv licence. Criminalising poor people is reprehensible.


  • #411
    A Primal Nut
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,949 ✭✭✭A Primal Nut


    Surely with digital they can encrypt the signal and then just not allow decryption for people who refuse to pay the license. Problem solved. That's what sky do or any other digital television provider.


  • Advertisement
  • #412
    shaymus27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 223 ✭✭shaymus27


    People in government make laws. They represent themselves, their cronies and the wealthy. We have a democracy in theory but in reality FG,FF are business and self interest parties who pass laws to suit their own. Notice no wealth taxes or University fees based on assets - farmers in those parties wouldn't allow it.
    Martin Luther King said it was the duty of people to stand up to unjust laws.
    When you are barely getting by as many are today, to pay a tv licence is a kick in the teeth. Especially when so much of it goes towards TG4 which I would prefer not to exist and save me part of my licence fee.


  • #413
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,014 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Gerry T wrote: »
    You don't have a democratic right to refuse a law. The law is the democratic right of the people. IF you don't agree then change the law, you don't have a right to ignore the law
    sometimes it has to be done. IW for example

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #414
    conorh91
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,328 ✭✭✭conorh91


    shaymus27 wrote: »
    Martin Luther King said it was the duty of people to stand up to unjust laws.
    Are you comparing the Jim Crow laws to the television licence fee?


  • #415
    Baby Jane
    Closed Accounts Posts: 227 ✭✭Baby Jane


    shaymus27 wrote: »
    People in Ireland today are having to choose between putting heating on or buying food, clothes etc. or paying a tv licence. Criminalising poor people is reprehensible.
    Any time someone is in financial difficulty they should contact companies that bill them to advise them of this, agreements can be set up for them.
    It's really important for anyone struggling financially to do this - if they enter into dialogue with the company, the company will then know they don't have the funds. If they say nothing though, the company will just keep at them - it can't know of their situation until they tell them.


  • #416
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,014 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Baby Jane wrote: »
    Any time someone is in financial difficulty they should contact companies that bill them to advise them of this, agreements can be set up for them.
    It's really important for anyone struggling financially to do this - if they enter into dialogue with the company, the company will then know they don't have the funds. If they say nothing though, the company will just keep at them - it can't know of their situation until they tell them.
    not always true. some companies couldn't give a ****

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #417
    MarkAnthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭MarkAnthony


    conorh91 wrote: »
    Are you comparing the Jim Crow laws to the television licence fee?

    Free at last, Free at last, Thank God almighty Fair City is free at last.


  • #418
    shaymus27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 223 ✭✭shaymus27


    not comparing any laws - just reminding people of a principle - laws can be unjust.

    People struggling to make ends meet - they don't always manage things well - unending struggle and barely getting by will do that to you. No amount of managing can make money go as far as it needs.

    I have spent most of this winter without heat as I have the last few winters and it doesn't do your ability to think properly any good.


  • #419
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,985 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Some people on here seem to be struggling with the basic principle of why having to pay a licence to own a piece of private equipment that cannot be used irresponsibly would be an anathema to many people.

    Apart from it being based on a thoroughly outdated concept, the fact that it is required to be paid, even by people who don't watch national, or even international broadcasting is an absolute farce of the highest order.

    People who derive nothing from RTE or TG4 still have to fork over money to subsidise the already ridiculous amount of revenue these channels receive from advertising. Even if one doesn't switch on their privately purchased and owned TV or just watches privately purchased media like DVDs, they are still required to put money into a fund that goes into the pockets of dubious "talent" like Ryan Tubridy.

    That, alone, should be considered unjust by anybody claiming to have a cogent level of critical thinking.

    Furthermore, having the law get involved to jail non-payers, or even late payers (in this case) is the tragic icing on a truly farcical cake. This, in fact, should be NONE of the courts business and is a waste of court time and public money that could and should be used in a far more efficient manner.

    We need to get rid of an outmoded and troublesome concept such as a government sanctioned, law enforced, licence to own a piece electrical entertainment equipment. This should be a matter between the broadcaster and the user of their broadcasts and such a way to achieve that is to move to a subscription fee, which if it isn't paid, results in a denial of service and nothing more.

    Jailing people for non-payment of something like this, while there are dangerous criminals with multiple convictions, walking in one door of a court and out another is ludicrous.


  • #420
    Tony EH
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,985 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Baby Jane wrote: »
    It's really important for anyone struggling financially to do this - if they enter into dialogue with the company, the company will then know they don't have the funds. If they say nothing though, the company will just keep at them - it can't know of their situation until they tell them.

    Yeh, but in this case the "company" is government and in matters such as this, they are ONLY interested in the accrual of finance.

    It used to be the case (and still is for a time anyway) that people who were struggling financially could forgo the TV and the TV licence and watch material on their computer equipment, such as a laptop. I knew a number of people who did this in the last recession, when they lost their jobs and couldn't find a new one. They would watch DVDs of TV shows and films.

    However, now that "company" wants to bring in a universal "broadcast licence", which effectively means that the private purchaser, owner and user of computer equipment will be forced to ante up for Ryan Tubridy's already obscene pay packet, even if they use it exclusively for purposes other than streaming rubbish RTE (and even worse TG4) programs from time to time.

    Even the simple minded "just pay it", or "it's the law" crews can't think that that's anything but outrageous.


  • Advertisement
  • #421
    Streetwalker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,906 ✭✭✭Streetwalker


    shaymus27 wrote: »
    People in Ireland today are having to choose between putting heating on or buying food, clothes etc. or paying a tv licence. Criminalising poor people is reprehensible.

    There is a section of our population who think this is made up im afraid. I hear it all the time, rubbish like "well they should give in their sky TV" and other crackers like that. They don't see people like my neighbours who twice in the last month had their gas cut off. Wife works and get's just enough (think it's 400 a week) so the husband isn't entitled to dole. Two kids in "fee education" :pac:, mortgage etc.. and yet people think they should pay a made up tax to keep people like Tubs and Duffy in the lifestyle they have become accustomed to? Feck that.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement