TV licence court summons

Schwade

melancholly wrote: »

to be honest, in your situation i'd just let them in and as the ariel isn't connected, it'll be the end of the matter.... the likelihood is that they won't send anyone anyway - they then to focus on houses full of students who don't tend to buy licenses. you have nothing to hide and i wouldn't think anything to be worried about.

That is a bad bad mistake. If you let them in, they may say you are watching TV - it is your word against theirs. Remember, these salespeople are paid by commissions on how many people they can get on summons or conviction. I.e. they have an big personal incentive to make your life difficult.

Schwade

melancholly wrote: »

but why make a huge deal out of it if you genuinely don't need a license? you could deal with them and end the matter, or you could start a compain against them that wastes time and energy! that just makes more hassle, and makes you look guilty.

have you ever dealt with people like the TV Licensing? You really think they will leave you alone? You might not be watching live TV today but what about tomorrow? or the day after? That is how TV Licensing thinks. They think it is abnormal to have a life without a TV.

carbonmonoxide

These "inspectors" are a joke. All they care about are their comissions. I got caught once and was threatened with court unless I paid up immediately. He gave me a mobile number and told me to call him with my bank details. I did this, leaving them on his voixe mail, out of sheer panic. He never got back to me. I then realised all I had to do is phone the TV license company directly and everything was sorted.

It sounds like this inspector is trying to make a few easy bucks of the OP

melancholly

Schwade wrote: »

have you ever dealt with people like the TV Licensing? You really think they will leave you alone? You might not be watching live TV today but what about tomorrow? or the day after? That is how TV Licensing thinks. They think it is abnormal to have a life without a TV.

maybe i just had an easy ride with them, but everything went smoothly after i contacted them directly and i wasn't bothered again...... again, i can't see the point of making a huge stand against them when it hasn't, in my experience been necessary. i don't see the point of starting a crusade when you can just jump through a couple of hoops with letters and have an easy life.

Schwade

melancholly wrote: »

maybe i just had an easy ride with them, but everything went smoothly after i contacted them directly and i wasn't bothered again...... again, i can't see the point of making a huge stand against them when it hasn't, in my experience been necessary. i don't see the point of starting a crusade when you can just jump through a couple of hoops with letters and have an easy life.

That's great - usually they are suscipious and wants to inspect your home to check. They are not legally required to do this and yet they give the false pretence that they do. And when you let them in, you are in the mercy of these "salespeople" - so depends on if you get a good one or a bad one. Remember they get an incentive to convict you rather than leave you alone.

Schwade

Scousebird wrote: »

My TV aerial is completely broken and has never worked since I moved in (I rent a house) but I still pay a licence because I have Virgin Media-at the end of the day-if you have a TV, then you need a TV licence, just like if you have dangerous dog you need a dangerous dog licence, or a car, you need a Motor Vehicle Licence-even if you car is off the road and you don't use it, it still belongs to you so you have to prove you are licenced to drive it. Whether you use the TV or not is irrelevant, the intention to use it is there because you possess one and that is something the courts decide. If you don't have a TV then there is no case to argue as a person stipulates they don't have a TV and therefore cannot intend to use one. The equipment is there and that's it.

Someone I know has been prosecuted 3 TIMES for not having a licence and personally it makes my blood boil when it works out something like 38p a day to have one.

I think it's unfair on those who do pay and are honest. And I see prosecution as the right thing, and the BBC do put on some good stuff occasionally!

No one here is discussing the merits of a TV licence.

esuhl

Schwade wrote: »

The TV guy wasn't even authorised to come into your house anyways. He was trepassing as you have asked him to leave.

If I understand the law correctly, you don't have to let the TV guy in to your house, but if he is able to gain entry, then you have no right to ask him to leave. Strange, but true, I believe.

JohalaReewi

I suggest that OP buys a TV licence and files a defence to the court.

The OP can say in his defence that the TVL agent was not invited in (he walked in uninvited); was asked to leave several times and did not; There are witnesses; The OP was told by landlord that there was a TV licence covering the house but since the agent's visit, he has contacted TVL and found out it may not and so has purchased a TV licence to be safe; that TVL have never contacted him before issuing the summons and despite buying a TV licence, TVL have refused to come to an out of court agreement and just want the case to go to court regardless.

For a court case to suceed, there should have been some attempt by the parties involved to come to an agreement beforehand. This hasn't happened even though the OP has tried to do this, and judges are not keen on those who 'waste thier time'.

I am not a lawyer by the way so you should get some legal advice quickly. The Citizen's Advice Bureau is a good place to go for a free consultation. It looks like TVL are going to push this all the way so you need to prepare your defence so you don't get a black mark on your record.

Schwade

esuhl wrote: »

If I understand the law correctly, you don't have to let the TV guy in to your house, but if he is able to gain entry, then you have no right to ask him to leave. Strange, but true, I believe.

Really?? I really want to see some regulations/legislation on that.

I really don't think these people have more powers than a salesperson and I definitely know that a salesperson must leave if you ask him/her to.

Schwade

JohalaReewi wrote: »

I suggest that OP buys a TV licence and files a defence to the court.

The OP can say in his defence that the TVL agent was not invited in (he walked in uninvited); was asked to leave several times and did not; There are witnesses; The OP was told by landlord that there was a TV licence covering the house but since the agent's visit, he has contacted TVL and found out it may not and so has purchased a TV licence to be safe; that TVL have never contacted him before issuing the summons and despite buying a TV licence, TVL have refused to come to an out of court agreement and just want the case to go to court regardless.

For a court case to suceed, there should have been some attempt by the parties involved to come to an agreement beforehand. This hasn't happened even though the OP has tried to do this, and judges are not keen on those who 'waste thier time'.

I am not a lawyer by the way so you should get some legal advice quickly. The Citizen's Advice Bureau is a good place to go for a free consultation. It looks like TVL are going to push this all the way so you need to prepare your defence so you don't get a black mark on your record.

With those facts, I really don't know why TV Licensing is pushing this, other than the fact that they think the OP is stupid and nothing has been recorded or written down (i.e. cannot show the judge). If there are witnesses and OP send written letters, the judge will not be happy that TV Licensing is wasting his time.