Really Worried - The TV Licence - Unnecessary Trial

Not_Another_Username

Please forgive me for the lengthy explanations below but I feel these are necessary to give you the full picture.

Whether you agree with the TV licence is down to personal opinion. We accept that it is required by law and therefore has to be paid. Fpr your information we have always had a TV licence until last year, when we realised that we were only ever watching previously recorded programmes or using an ever-increasing amount of "On Demand" services, such as the BBC i-player, etc.

For the record, you DO need a licence to record live TV, even if you are only watching the recordings. The key is in the word 'live'. If you only use the On Demand services you DO NOT need a licence. Recent changes in the law also mean that you do not need to have a licence solely because you have a television or an outside antenna.

We had only just moved into our new property a year ago when we were promptly swooped on by a man from TV LIcencing, demanding we buy a TV licence there and then. Feeling somewhat pressured, my wife filled in an apparently necessary form, agreeing to continue with the TV licence which we held for our previous property, which was about to expire anyway. For future reference, please note that he DID NOT enter the property due to us having two large (Rottweiler) dogs.

Since we realised that 90%+ of the TV we watch is pre-recorded/watched "On Demand" and usually watch this several days later, we thought "enough is enough, let's just take down the aerial and use On Demand 100% of the time. We phoned TV Licencing, who confirmed that we did not need a licence for On Demand and put us straight through to the their Cancellations department. We received a letter a few days later, by post, confirming everything.

Several months later, a court summons arrived through the post, adfdressed to my wife, to appear at a Magistrate's court. We managed to speak to a clerk at the ourst and explained the situation. He advised to plead Not Guilty and not to worry about attending the hearing as the case would probably be thrown out of court anyway, asking us to provide a copy of the TV Licencing letter which confirmed we did not need a licence. The problem was, a statement was attached, from the TV Licencing official who visited us to begin with, implying that he had been inside our property and viewed the television in "Standby", yet he did not actually enter the property, as he would have needed to do to see the TV. This isn't visible from outside the property as it's tucked away in a corner, well away from any window. He also stated he did not enter the property as there were "two big dogs in the garden".

A few days after the hearing, we receive a letter from the court advising that the case was adjourned and that my sife MUST attend her TRIAL in March. Needless to say, my wife is starting to panic, mosr so because she had two previous fines for not having a TV licence many years ago, long before we met. She fears she will receive a sentence this time.

Frustrated and slightly concerned, we felt we were being forced into buying a licence NO MATTER WHAT and decided that we would buy one again, so I telephoned TV Licencing and explained everything. TV Licencing said they could stop the trial, only if we bought a TV licence and pay IN FULL before the trial, with one other condition, that my wife changed her plea to GUILTY. This will stop the trial and nothing more will be done. No fine. No court costs. No trial! I wonder if this is actually true. Can they really stop a trial? Surely the courts have the final say in this, don't they?

We just don't know whether to trust TV Licencing. A guilty plea is surely an admission and therefore could lead to a fine, or worse. Can anybody advise if this is normal procedure? It's not as if we are actually guilty of anything.

Of course, we could still contest the whole thing, but we feel it would be simpler to go ahead and get another licence.

We cannot afford to pay for the TV licence in full in the time anyway so I don't know what we are going to do. We are currently trying to sell things on Ebay to cover the cost. Does anybody know if paying monthly/weekly will still have the effect of getting this trial stopped? I do not trust TV Licencing one bit. Their tactics stink and they have lied to us about things in the past too.

Sorry for the long story, but I think that's everything there for you in black and white.

Thanks

John

duchy

I'd have a word with your MP if government departments are telling their constituents to plead guilty to a crime they didn't commit.

molerat

Buying a licence now will have no effect on the previously alleged offence despite what lies they tell you on the phone. You buy a licence - they win but they still take you to court, you plead guilty - they win. They have then achieved their goal - a successful prosecution and another licence sold.

Did your wife sign any paperwork during the visit, the form they ask you to sign as acknowledging the visit which is in fact a form acknowledging your guilt.

The licencing officials or whatever they call themselves are nothing to do with TVL but are a private company, Capita, and are on a commission so will lie through their teeth to increase their revenue.

prowla

I suppose that the case is brought be the TV licensing people, so if they withdraw the claim then there is no longer a case, and thus no need for proceedings to proceed.

And I suppose that if they did try and renege on it and then proceed with a case, then having a letter saying that they would not proceed if a licence was bought would pretty much bring that to a halt.

However, if you are not watching "live" TV whilst it is being broadcast, then you don't need a licence.

Can they prove that you have been watching "live" TV?

Not_Another_Username

But this is so wrong. How can they get away with this?

My wife did sign a form when the licence representative visited. At that time we had planned to continue our TV licence anyway and hadn't fully considered, nor knew about using On Demand 100% of the time.

I remember when we moved into our previous premises a few years ago. The man who called regarding the TV licence was VERY heavy handed. I thought he was going to assault me if I didn't pay him some money there and then - THAT'S how he came across.

After a quick discussion with my wife, she is keen to take this to our MP. We are in two minds as to whether to continue with On Demand or just get the TV licence and just get that bit over and done with. At least we are covered then. I don't know how that will affect the trial. I can only hope the judge is lenient if she can show them the actual licence.

Not_Another_Username

Sorry Prowla - our messages crossed.

We are still 50/50 on challenging this in the court and continuing the On Demand service. We really don't know what to do.

Marktheshark

If she signed this "form" the TV licence salesman had she will be found guilty, sorry, but that is how it works.
You dont sign "forms" you sign contracts or confessions.
In this case the form was a TVL 178 and it is a signed confession statement that she was watching TV without a licence.

Now you say you had a licence from the other property, whos name was on it and was it still valid at the time the confession was signed.

Not_Another_Username

Thanks for this Mark.

So she has admitted to needing a licence by signing the form, thus invalidating an other correspondence which says the contrary I assume (?). Not nice but I think I understand.

I was the licence holder for our previous property and that licence was about to expire anyway and had already been paid for in full.

Marktheshark

Was about or had expired.
One date, the date she signed this form was the other licence in force on that date ?
No confusion, that one date.

Not_Another_Username

As always, the documents you want aren't there! But the previous year's licence expired on 28-02-13, so presumably last year's would have been up to 28-02-14, a few weeks after we had moved in our new place. I can check with TV Licencing tomorrow to be certain - and that was in my name, not my wife's.

Marktheshark

Was this TVL 178 signed before the 28th.

A house can not buy a TV licence, it has to be a person and it covers all persons living at the same address to watch TV.
If you were living together in one dwelling and you could prove this and produce a licence the address change is an admin issue not a legal one.