Tv Licence Summons

Kurtis_Blue

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

I dont understand this.

Didnt the OP say he was staying at a friends for two weeks? Didnt he say he. He also said in a later post he owned nothing but clothes.

how can he be guilty here? he doesnt own the TV, and doesnt own or rent the property. How can he be guilrty of anything here?

The owner of the TV may be guilty, or the occupant of the house - but not the OP surly.

Surly the defence if any would go along the lines of "I was a guest at the property and neither lived there permantly or owned the TV in question". This can be prooved as well so??

No, this is all incorrect.

LittleMissAspie

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

No, this is all incorrect.

What's all incorrect? The OP stated that he stayed there for two weeks, he never lived there properly. Sounds like he's couch surfing, he's not responsible for the licence in a house that isn't his. Otherwise I could stay overnight at a friend's house, they pop out in the morning to get some milk for my tea and a TV officer knocks on the door, finds out that the house has a live TV but no licence and *I* get fined for it. That makes no sense.

Kurtis_Blue

LittleMissAspie wrote: »

What's all incorrect? The OP stated that he stayed there for two weeks, he never lived there properly. Sounds like he's couch surfing, he's not responsible for the licence in a house that isn't his. Otherwise I could stay overnight at a friend's house, they pop out in the morning to get some milk for my tea and a TV officer knocks on the door, finds out that the house has a live TV but no licence and *I* get fined for it. That makes no sense.

You would be liable if you were viewing live TV without a licence, I would suggest if someone knocks at a door to a property you donot own that you donot open it, engage in conversation and sign legal documents.

LittleMissAspie

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

You would be liable if you were viewing live TV without a licence,

But the licence is for the property, not the person. The OP isn't responsible for his friend's property. There's no evidence of him being resident there - his name won't be on the electoral role, the bills won't be in his name, presumably he never had post sent there, his bank account will have a different address.

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

I would suggest if someone knocks at a door to a property you donot own that you donot open it, engage in conversation and sign legal documents.

Don't worry I rarely answer my own door let alone other people's! But others might make this mistake - someone with a disability, an elderly person who is easily confused, a teenager, a foreign visitor, etc.

Kurtis_Blue

LittleMissAspie wrote: »

But the licence is for the property, not the person. The OP isn't responsible for his friend's property. There's no evidence of him being resident there - his name won't be on the electoral role, the bills won't be in his name, presumably he never had post sent there, his bank account will have a different address.

And you would be watching TV in a property without a licence, that is the offence.

neil9313

LittleMissAspie wrote: »

What's all incorrect? The OP stated that he stayed there for two weeks, he never lived there properly. Sounds like he's couch surfing, he's not responsible for the licence in a house that isn't his. Otherwise I could stay overnight at a friend's house, they pop out in the morning to get some milk for my tea and a TV officer knocks on the door, finds out that the house has a live TV but no licence and *I* get fined for it. That makes no sense.

Kurtis is correct, however TVL's own guide lines say they would not normally prosecute a visitor not sure you could use their guide in court and get off though.

neil9313

neil9313 wrote: »

Kurtis is correct, however TVL's own guide lines say they would not normally prosecute a visitor not sure you could use their guide in court and get off though.

It does have to be live TV but I think you meant that.

jayme1

the OP has signed a declaration specifically saying they were watching live TV without a licence, I cannot see any argument that could be used against that, you wouldn't be able to shift the blame to the property owner because they could just say that they do not watch live TV (and they weren't the ones watching it) and the visitor was watching without any permission, if you hadn't signed the declaration then it would probably be a whole different story, but as I see it they have you bang to rights by your own admission.

Kurtis_Blue

jayme1 wrote: »

I cannot see any argument that could be used against that.

Thats why lawyers have big houses.

laticsfan

Thanks for all the replies, the tv which my friend has is not tuned into any channels, the man who turned up couldnt see the tv, it has a door into the front room which has wierd curved glass so i know for a fact he couldnt have made out what was on (fifa 10), i can very easily prove its not my address as their are no bills their in my name and i recieve no post there, im living directly across the road so it has a similar address.