Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

TV license - do you pay?

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    MorningStar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,031 ✭✭✭MorningStar


    Aren't most of the car TVs just DVD players without any reciever?


  • Options
    #33
    Talliesin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,314 ✭✭✭Talliesin


    MorningStar wrote:
    I don't think that can be right as you only need one per household not by item. So in a shared house each person who owns a TV does not need to buy a licence each but they could all be charged for not having one each as each had responsibility.
    Not sure of it all but it's definitely by household not item.
    Yes, I meant that the possession of one or more of such items requires a license - hence if you don't have a TV but you do have a TV card you still need a license.


  • Options
    #34
    garred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,036 ✭✭✭garred


    Sadly and I am ashamed, as of yet I have not got my T.V. licence. Years ago the Irish channels were crap but now they have improved 10 fold so I have no excuses. So just to clarify, if you have 2/3 tvs in an apartment you only need one licence?
    Talliesin wrote:
    Yes, I meant that the possession of one or more of such items requires a license - hence if you don't have a TV but you do have a TV card you still need a license.
    Is that true, if you have a tv card? Technically would you need a tv licence if you had a rabbits ears but no tv?


  • Options
    #35
    Civilian_Target
    Registered Users Posts: 5,618 ✭✭✭Civilian_Target


    seamus wrote:
    The UK has a population 15 times greater than ours, so let's assume they've 19.5m households. 19.5 * €175 = €3,412m. A budget in fact 17 times more than RTE have.

    And I believe that accounts for less than 50% of the BBCs total income. BBC makes an *ENORMOUS* amount of money selling some of their excellent programming abroad, not to mention that they sell news coverage to smaller networks like RTE who can't afford, for example, a Turkmeinistan correspondant of their own.

    And to answer the original topic, of all the places I've rented, there's only one where we didn't pay the TV license - and in just over 3 years of rental I've been inspected once.


  • Options
    #36
    Chalk
    Registered Users Posts: 3,317 ✭✭✭Chalk


    garred wrote:
    Sadly and I am ashamed, as of yet I have not got my T.V. licence. Years ago the Irish channels were crap but now they have improved 10 fold so I have no excuses. So just to clarify, if you have 2/3 tvs in an apartment you only need one licence?

    Is that true, if you have a tv card? Technically would you need a tv licence if you had a rabbits ears but no tv?
    i suppose by saying "having a tv card" he presumes youll also have a pc and a monitor,
    and therefore the ability to receive and view terestial tv signals.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Baz_
    Registered Users Posts: 2,660 ✭✭✭Baz_


    i suppose by saying "having a tv card" he presumes youll also have a pc and a monitor,
    and therefore t[he ability to receive and view terestial tv signals.

    according to the link above: http://www.oasis.gov.ie/public_util...v_licences.html not only does your presumption appear to be wrong on the pc/monitor/screen issue:
    Every household, business or institution in Ireland with a television or equipment capable of receiving a television signal (i.e., an aerial, satellite dish, etc.,)

    it also appears to be wrong in relation to the terrestrial issue:
    Every household, business or institution in Ireland with a television or equipment capable of receiving a television signal (i.e., an aerial, satellite dish, etc.,)

    However as is standard on that type of site, the information does fall under the caveat:
    No document on the site is a legal interpretation and should not be seen as such. If you need professional or legal advice you should consult a suitably qualified person.
    so you would really have to look at the legislation or contact a solicitor to be fully sure, it seems proposterous to expect someone to have a tv licence who doesnt have a screen to watch what is received on the rabbit ears, but then again a lot in law is proposterous...


  • Options
    #38
    MorningStar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,031 ✭✭✭MorningStar


    Baz_ wrote:
    ... it seems proposterous to expect someone to have a tv licence who doesnt have a screen to watch what is received on the rabbit ears, but then again a lot in law is proposterous...
    Not really people used to hide the TV when inspectors came along so they changed it so that if there was the evidence of TV viewing they could charge. If they find rabit ears they won't really prosecute.


  • Options
    #39
    SixShot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 104 ✭✭SixShot


    its when you don't pay it the feckers will knock on your door


  • Options
    #40
    SixShot
    Closed Accounts Posts: 104 ✭✭SixShot


    yeah Hideing the TV tryed that once with the Dogs when the Dog Lnc person came to the door the Dog's were barking like Crazy & we tryed to say we did not have DOg's but now we get what ever Lnc is needed dog,TV,Pi5sing one & the other crap you have to pay for


  • Options
    #41
    crazymonkey
    Registered Users Posts: 224 ✭✭crazymonkey


    When i lived in usa, they would get a good laugh at our expense, whenever the subject of having to get a tv licence ever came, they could not understand why we would be required to have one,


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    MorningStar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,031 ✭✭✭MorningStar


    crazymonkey wrote:
    When i lived in usa, they would get a good laugh at our expense, whenever the subject of having to get a tv licence ever came, they could not understand why we would be required to have one,
    From the country that uses 90% of the earth resourse and doesn't pay the most . I'd rather people paid their way :D


  • Options
    #43
    po0k
    Registered Users Posts: 15,815 ✭✭✭✭po0k


    Sleipnir wrote:
    That's completely wrong. You have to have one for each T.V. on the premises. They made a fortune going after pubs because of this recently.

    No, you're wrong.

    You need a license for the house if you own one or more devices capable of receiving tv [and/or radio?] signals.
    It was once 1 license per device, but with the proliferation of TVs (alot of households would have a TV and a VCR at the minimum, probably more than one TV) has made that pointless.

    Also, you can now move the license around with you if you move home, speak to your local post-office, check anpost.ie or look at oasis.ie


  • Options
    #44
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,388 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    crazymonkey wrote:
    When i lived in usa, they would get a good laugh at our expense, whenever the subject of having to get a tv licence ever came, they could not understand why we would be required to have one,
    Yes, but if you don't have cable / satellite in the states, TV just isn't worth watching, at all.


  • Options
    #45
    Captain Trips
    Closed Accounts Posts: 944 ✭✭✭Captain Trips


    homeOwner wrote:
    It should be state subsidised and get the rest of moeny from ads if they want to keep a state-run tv station and expenses should be cut way back.


    Yes! Make the government pay for it!!! They have loads of money and billions to spend in a budget! And then let the government carry the expenses! Ha! That will teach those idiots! Who will they get the money off then, huh?

    FYI, it *is* state subsidised and also gets money from ads. Either pay the fee or else we get *no license fee* and a *higher amount in tax that could be going to healthcare*.

    TV is a luxury without doubt. It's neither education nor is it healthcare, etc., . You can choose to have a TV or not. Having one supports the national broadcaster.


  • Options
    #46
    MorningStar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,031 ✭✭✭MorningStar


    Captain Trips wrote:
    TV is a luxury without doubt. It's neither education nor is it healthcare, etc., . You can choose to have a TV or not. Having one supports the national broadcaster.

    It's very hard to call TV a luxury in this day in age. I agree with what you are saying about tax etc... It's not really a luxury anymore as I would guess 99% of the population have access in their home. It may make more sense to pay for it from a central fund rather than hope people pay their way. It is obvious from some comments here that people don't pay their way so a tax for TV might make sense.


  • Options
    #47
    Baz_
    Registered Users Posts: 2,660 ✭✭✭Baz_


    MorningStar wrote:
    It's not really a luxury anymore as I would guess 99% of the population have access in their home.

    Just Because a large amount of people can afford luxury, doesn't make it any less of a luxury, thats a stupid argument.

    And 99% seems a bit high...


  • Options
    #48
    garred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,036 ✭✭✭garred


    Don't know if I would classify it as a luxury. Sure you can get versions (plasma, flat screen) that could be classified as a luxury but not a joe bloggs tv. Like I would'nt classify a bed as a luxury or a car (some people need them because of lack of public transport).
    Think a tax would be a fair system (can't believe I'm agreeing to another tax) for the licence issue. Also think an extra small tax to get rid of that bloody toll bridge but thats another story.


Advertisement