Donate SIGN UP

Another TV licence question

Avatar Image
flashpig | 15:06 Sun 29th Aug 2004 | Film, Media & TV
4 Answers
Last year a few friends at uni had a tv but did not bother to buy a licence. The tv was capable in a sense of picking up a signal, but we were in a really weird position where, not matter what arials or doodahs were plugged in it COULD not pick up any channels. We also found it hard to get a signal for our mobiles if that sheds anly light on what was up. The question is - should they have bothered to buy a licence just to own the television that they could not have seen anything on even if they'd wanted to?
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 4 of 4rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by flashpig. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Question Author
(it was just used for dvds and xbox)
Question Author
And I assure you, at least as far as I can see this is different from the previous licence question. I am not meaning to do a blanks and blanks with you.
If the tv has the components in it receive a signal then you are required by law to purchase a tv licence even if you are in an area where you cannot receive a signal.
Did you try a fork? At uni I found that a fork worked much better than an ariel. Shove a prong in the hole and see what happens

1 to 4 of 4rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Another TV licence question

Answer Question >>