TV Licensing in Houseshares

falcieri

All the landlords I have lived with have had tenancy agreements.

falcieri

Rosemary7391 wrote: »

What is this new rule change? It still says on the TVL website that you only need a licence if you watch/record TV, and the new bit is use of bbc on demand services. If you only do that in communal areas I can't see that they can require you to have a licence just because you own a laptop.

Here you go: http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/for-your-home/tenants-and-lodgers-aud2

EmmyLou30

It's always been the same for halls of residence and student houses where you can lock your own bedroom door....I don't know a single person who would actually pay it though!? We always paid as students for one licence for the one house we lived in as we all saw that as fair and reasonable and in no way trying to avoid having to pay for the licence. Why should we pay for 5 when next door has 1? Madness. so long as an address has one the licencing people won't ever look into it - only houses without one flag up as 'unusual'.

Annabee

The criteria for needing a TV licence is not 'if you have a device capable of picking up live TV', though. It's if you actually DO watch live TV. And also, from 1 September, if you watch on demand TV (catchup) from the BBC, via Iplayer. If you only watch catch-up TV from Channel 4, etc, you still won't need one.

Rosemary7391

falcieri wrote: »

Here you go: http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/for-your-home/tenants-and-lodgers-aud2

That still doesn't say just owning the relevant equipment means you need a license - I think it's meant to be read along with the "You need a licence if you do..." bits.

falcieri

It does because if you have equipment that can potentially receive it, it's then down to you to prove that you don't use it. It's like owning a tv and saying you only watch DVDs. I had a friend who didn't have a tv but had a laptop and they regularly called and she had to prove every time that she couldn't watch live tv on it.

GwylimT

falcieri wrote: »

It does because if you have equipment that can potentially receive it, it's then down to you to prove that you don't use it. It's like owning a tv and saying you only watch DVDs. I had a friend who didn't have a tv but had a laptop and they regularly called and she had to prove every time that she couldn't watch live tv on it.

She didn't have to prove anything, its a choice to invite people into your home.

falcieri

If the licensing people are on your doorstep telling you you don't have a licence and ask you to prove that you don't receive tv channels can you just refuse to give them that information then? I found this on their website which suggests they can:

'Please note that it's TV Licensing's policy to visit some addresses to check that the occupants don't need a TV Licence. This is because when we visit and make contact, we find almost one in five people that tell us they don't need a TV Licence actually do need one. If we find that you're watching TV illegally you could risk prosecution and a fine of up to £1,000.*'

brewerdave

I suspect many students now use their parent's (or friends) log ins for things like Sky Go to watch live TV on laptops whilst away from home -can't see any of them paying for a licence at any time!!

falcieri

A lot of the articles I read about not having to prove anything are pre the new September rules. Now that they are covering everything and every kind of device for every kind of watching it's going to be harder to prove you don't use a certain device for a certain kind of service. This is going to be particularly hard on houses that don't have any kind of licence at all and who stand out more. It might be a case of 'you don't have to prove you were watching it' but if they decide you were or you own say a laptop and therefore you have inbuilt capability, are they just going to slap you with a fine that you then have to argue against afterwards?