TV Licensing DIRTY CHEATING SCUM!!!!

auntie_pie

ok, found an answer on another thread! from what i can work out in between lots of opposing comments is that if you have the equipment to receive, then you have to pay whether you receive or not!
was just trying to work out my monthly budget really, and thought i could save some money somewhere, but not on this one!
..... although i may still freecycle the tv after all!

JEG1965

I have every sympathy - what a dreadful way to treat anyone let alone someone battling depression. I have a bee in my bonnet regarding bonus payments. I've been ranting on another post about parking attendants issuing tickets in a similar fashion.

As for practical help it sounds like your approach checking every bureaucratic i was dotted and t crossed is worthwhile to trip up a jobsworth with their own red tape. But this is very draining on you so best wishes with that.

I think your best solution may lie in the requirement to prove intention. Clearly your friend lacked such intention. Any proper forum deliberating on this issue would agree I'm sure.

You might be able to require the Licencing Authority to disclose whether or not bonuses form part of the enforcement system. This might, at least, indicate that the enforcer acted in a manner influenced by profit which would undermine any discretion which they may have to employ.

As for the expiry date of the licence. Investigate the point noted by a previous poster that online licences seem to last a complete year whereas your friend's payment led to a month effectively being lost. That sounds very unfair to the extent of being unlawful. It may also amount to the Licensing Authority being unjustly enriched at the expense of the payer. Though I remember I had to pay my mortgage provider for the whole month of April when I took entry of my property in the last days of April.

JEG1965

Further, one of the ‘Principles of European Contract Law (prepared by the Commission on European Contract Law 1999 & 2002) is Article 4:109 ‘Excessive Benefit or Unfair Advantage’ which notes: ‘(1) A party may avoid a contract if, at the time of the conclusion of the contract:
(a) it was dependent on or had a relationship of trust with the other party, was in economic distress or had urgent needs, was improvident, ignorant, inexperienced or lacking in bargaining skill, and
(b) the other party knew or ought to have known of this and, given the circumstances and purpose of the contract, took advantage of the first party's situation in a way which was grossly unfair or took an excessive benefit.
(2) Upon the request of the party entitled to avoidance, a court may if it is appropriate adapt the contract in order to bring it into accordance with what might have been agreed had the requirements of good faith and fair dealing been followed.
(3) A court may similarly adapt the contract upon the request of a party receiving notice of avoidance for excessive benefit or unfair advantage, provided that this party informs the party who gave the notice promptly after receiving it and before that party has acted in reliance on it.

moonrakerz

auntie_pie wrote: »

ok, found an answer on another thread! from what i can work out in between lots of opposing comments is that if you have the equipment to receive, then you have to pay whether you receive or not!

There is a lot of incorrect info floating around about TV licencing.

If you have a TV in every room in your house and you do not watch any of them you do not need a TV Licence.

This is off the TVLA website:

"You need a TV Licence to use any television receiving equipment such as a TV set, set-top boxes, video or DVD recorders, computers or mobile phones to watch or record TV programmes as they are being shown on TV."

The operative word is "use" - not "own or possess"

niccy

i lived in a fairly affluent part of town once (big detached houses) and noticed a TV detector van one night.Being a nosey so and so i followed them in my car, they stopped at one house done a bit of knocking, no-one answered, and so off they went,packing up for the night and drove out of town.
About a month later i was round a friends who lived on a fairly poor council estate, middle of afternoon ( just as the kids come home) and yup you guessed it,the detector van was doing a roaring trade:mad: :mad: :mad:

Chester_Draws

Auntie pie,
I used to work in a video store, and we had several tv's for playing the videos.
All our tv's had the reciever disabled so we did not need to pay the tv licence.

Cannot help to explain how to disable the reciever, but it can be done.
Suggest you dont try it yourself though ..

Freddie_Snowbits

http://www.tvlicensing.biz/

If you go to the Info on TV Licensing page, it will tell you what you need to do. As far as I am aware from next year when we get our digi box that cannot work because of the hill, I do not know what the BBC Storm Troopers will do!

MORPH3US

auntie_pie wrote: »

from what i can work out in between lots of opposing comments is that if you have the equipment to receive, then you have to pay whether you receive or not!

From what I understand, this is incorrect.

If you have a tv, as long as a) its not connected to an ariel and b) its not tunned in to any channels then you are not breaking the law.

However you CAN still use the tv for watching dvd's etc without having a licence.

In reality (from what i've heard), be prepared to get eyed suspiciously and have your tv inspected by the licensing people if you go down this route.

I would love to be able to live without tv (although sadly I can't) because i'd love to argue with the licence inspection people when they tried to get me done for not having a licence and I knew that I was in the right!!!

M

moonrakerz

MORPH3US wrote: »

I would love to be able to live without tv (although sadly I can't) because i'd love to argue with the licence inspection people when they tried to get me done for not having a licence and I knew that I was in the right!!!

M

I have put several posts on this and a similar thread about TV licencing, the reason being that I have been refurbishing an empty house. Over the past 9 months I have been getting a steady stream of "threatening" letters from the TVLA, who quite honestly I have now developed complete and utter contempt for !

I am completely sure of the legal ground on which I stand:

For a long period the house had no television in it at all. This didn't stop the threatening letters though !. It does actually have a television built into the kitchen furniture now, but as I do not watch this television I do not need a licence.
The TV 'snoopers' do not have any right of access to my house without a warrant from a Court. To get this they have to show 'reasonable cause' to believe that I am using a TV without a licence. To be able to state to a magistrate that this is so, they will have to sit in their detector van until they can prove I am using an unlicenced TV - they will have a long wait !!!

The TVLA send out letters and put "pseudo" legal statements on their website to try and frighten people. Stand you ground against these bullies - if you are watching TV without a licence, I fully support them, but the way they behave towards a minority of people who quite legitimately don't have a licence is quite disgusting !

When I move to the new house I shall transfer my licence from my present house. I shall also write to the TVLA and complain about their completely unwarranted threats that they have sending me through the post.

georgina_fenwick

kimevans wrote: »

The TV license (not television tax) is a fee paid to watch TV. If you can afford a TV you can afford to pay it, it's barely more than £2 a week. We pay sky £73.50 a month, I think the TV license is fabulous value compared to that.

Not being cheeky, but why are sky charging you £73.50 a month? Their top package is £43.50 a month, well thats what it says HERE.