TV Licence/Court Summons

ShaneMW

I have received a court summons after my Direct Debit was missed and I spent around a month without a licence. I have valid reasons as to why this happened (I am currently am suffering from severe depression and agoraphobia, which at the time had not been diagnosed and I struggled severely to deal with. This included me not leaving my home for almost 3 months and cutting off any outside communication) and will obviously make the court aware of this.

However the court has sent me a plea form which I have to return prior to the attendance date. Although I intended to plead guilty to using my TV without a licence for just over a month owing to my circumstance, on said form under the Offences, Pleas and Attendance section, where I have to indicate my intention to plea, the offence is stated as ' I use a television set without a licence'. As I do not 'use' my TV without a licence and was only 'using' my TV for the short amount of time without a licence, I do not feel I am 'guilty' of the offence they have stated.

Due to my current health I do not want to prolong this matter and do not feel I will be able to attend court owing to my agoraphobia however I do not feel I am guilty of the offence they are accusing me of.

Does anyone have any advice on what action I should take to deal with this?

ValHaller

Can you give a little more detail on how the DD was missed?Worth looking at that to see if there is a defence

timbstoke

ShaneMW wrote: »

As I do not 'use' my TV without a licence and was only 'using' my TV for the short amount of time without a licence, I do not feel I am 'guilty' of the offence they have stated.

This part makes no sense. If you used your TV (for watching TV programs - DVDs, games and iPlayer don't count, generally speaking) while not licensed, then you 'used' your 'tv' without a 'license'. It doesn't matter how long you used it for in that state.

tinkerbell28

You are guilty of it though? Even if it was a month and there were exceptional circumstances. It is for the court to decide how they take that into account.

Just one months DD really!?!? I am shocked, dont waste any time do they :eek:

System

I thought when you paid by DD for a Tv license you are always 6 months ahead? Therefore just missing one DD payment should still mean you are ok?

On your actual offence you are actually guilty. As you can buy a TV license without leaving your house I don't really see why the agrophobia is relevant (although of course its not something good to have)

ShaneMW

timbstoke wrote: »

This part makes no sense. If you used your TV (for watching TV programs - DVDs, games and iPlayer don't count, generally speaking) while not licensed, then you 'used' your 'tv' without a 'license'. It doesn't matter how long you used it for in that state.

I have admitted I am guilty of not having a licence for that amount of time however to me it seems as if the court summons is inferring I consistently use my TV without a licence which I do not, only missing one Direct Debit payment.

ShaneMW

ValHaller wrote: »

Can you give a little more detail on how the DD was missed?Worth looking at that to see if there is a defence

As I stated, I am suffering severe depression. At the time of this happening, I had not been 'diagnosed' with this and was struggling to deal with what I was experiencing. This involved me cutting off all outside communication including not opening letters, checking my bank account etc. At the time there was insufficient funds in my account and the direct debit was returned to me. I understand this is not an excuse however I was in a very difficult place at the time.

ThumbRemote

tinkerbell28 wrote: »

You are guilty of it though?

goater78 wrote: »

On your actual offence you are actually guilty.

The OP is clearly not guilty of the offence they have written: "I use a television set without a licence". This is in the present tense; the OP presently does not use a TV set without a licence; therefore is not guilty.

Personally I would cross out the offence in the box and write in "Using a television set without a licence between <date> and <date>" to correct their mistake.

ShaneMW

goater78 wrote: »

I thought when you paid by DD for a Tv license you are always 6 months ahead? Therefore just missing one DD payment should still mean you are ok?

On your actual offence you are actually guilty. As you can buy a TV license without leaving your house I don't really see why the agrophobia is relevant (although of course its not something good to have)

The agoraphobia is not relevant in this situation however I was making readers of my post aware of my circumstances at the time. The main reason for missing the Direct Debit payment was owing to the depression and the fact I found it hard to deal with ANY issue at the time and as I stated cut off all outside communication.

iammumtoone

I suffer from depression and have missed lots of deadlines / appointments due to it. To a non-sufferer this may be hard to understand but you forget things can't concentrate or motivate yourself and cut yourself off from everything.

However you can't miss a DD it is paid directly from you bank (unless you didn't have the money in there to cover it). It does seem harsh that you are being penalised like this for 1 month surely a back payment of that month should have covered it.

The offence is not worded very fairly. It should state 'I USED a television set without a licence', I would not be happy signing to say 'I USE a television set without a licence' if you currently have one. Can you speak to them to point this out and say that you would be happy to sign to say you USED but not USE?

ShaneMW

ThumbRemote wrote: »

The OP is clearly not guilty of the offence they have written: "I use a television set without a licence". This is in the present tense; the OP presently does not use a TV set without a licence; therefore is not guilty.

Personally I would cross out the offence in the box and write in "Using a television set without a licence between <date> and <date>" to correct their mistake.

Thank you ThumbRemote, you have been extremely helpful and understanding.

I have admitted that I am guilty of not having a licence for the month and agree that should the court not deem my reasons for this as satisfactory then action should be taken, however I do not 'use' my TV without a licence and do not feel I should admit as such when until that point I paid my licence on time. I did not expect to be berated and mocked for merely asking for advice.

Many thanks to those who offered constructive advice.