TV Licensing [Removed]

tangotonyb

So I paid for a TV license for many years by direct debit without actually ever watching TV. There was a short period when my ex lived here where she occasionally watched TV, but that was that.
Haven't required a TV license for over 12 months, so I cancelled my direct debit and wrote to the Licensing dept telling them I no longer required a license and would they refund me.
They refused to refund me without me giving them one of their reasons for cancelling (no longer needing one was not on the list). So in the end I gave up - I think it was only a matter of £20 or so anyway i had to claim.

Now I get a letter from them threatening a visit from an enforcement officer who can apply to court for a search warrant!!

[Removed]??

On what grounds can a search warrant be issued? The mere fact that I no longer pay for a TV License?

Cornucopia

I think what they told you regarding your refund is wrong. If you are giving up your Licence because you will no longer be watching TV broadcasts or using iPlayer, then they should make a refund without the need for any further evidence (because there can be no evidence). I think your "Adviser" has it wrong, and you could probably get a refund (of up to £70) by escalating.

The letter that you have is likely to be a standard letter sent to many unlicensed households on a monthly basis. You can see a full catalog of their shameful correspondence on the link below. In theory, your "Adviser" should have flagged your address as no longer needing a Licence, and in theory this should mean no letters - but it doesn't always happen.

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/


edit: There is no warrant. This is just a hollow threat.

edit2: Expect your thread title to be censored by the Forum Team in due course. (Or you could change it yourself).

tangotonyb

Kind of as I expected.

So if an "officer" turns up, am I required to undergo the interview, or can I simply tell them to [Removed] off?

Cornucopia

tangotonyb wrote: »

Kind of as I expected.

So if an "officer" turns up, am I required to undergo the interview, or can I simply tell them to [Removed] off?

Yes. You have the full range of options in dealing with them...

- Ignore them entirely and they will leave after a couple of minutes.

- Open the door and shut it again when they identify themselves.

- Say, "I'm sorry it's not convenient right now, please feel free to call some other time". (This would be my recommendation for various reasons).

Be aware that they sometimes play games over identifying themselves, and will attempt to engage with householders before doing so. Therefore watch out for anyone with a clipboard and PDA who opens conversation without identifying themselves, but uses gambits like: "I'm undertaking a survey about TV viewing", "Are you Mr. X?", "Have you just moved to this address?", etc.

I would not get any deeper into conversation than one of those listed options, though ultimately if they do get as far as cautioning you, that brings in other possibilities like:-

- Right to consult a Solicitor

- Right to Silence

- Right to Decline to be Interviewed

There is no obligation to state your name, or confirm any name they already have, and I would recommend not doing so.

Anthorn

tangotonyb wrote: »

So I paid for a TV license for many years by direct debit without actually ever watching TV. There was a short period when my ex lived here where she occasionally watched TV, but that was that.
Haven't required a TV license for over 12 months, so I cancelled my direct debit and wrote to the Licensing dept telling them I no longer required a license and would they refund me.
They refused to refund me without me giving them one of their reasons for cancelling (no longer needing one was not on the list). So in the end I gave up - I think it was only a matter of £20 or so anyway i had to claim.

Now I get a letter from them threatening a visit from an enforcement officer who can apply to court for a search warrant!!

!!!!!!??

On what grounds can a search warrant be issued? The mere fact that I no longer pay for a TV License?

In fact no longer needing a tv license is a valid reason for not needing one:

You can request a refund for your TV Licence if:
you won’t need your licence again before it expires, and you have at least one complete month left on it*
OR
your licence has already expired and less than two years have passed since the expiry date*.
* If you’re eligible for an over 75 or blind concession, you can apply at any time and for any length of time left on your licence.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/refunds-and-cancellations/apply-for-a-refund

To request a refund fill out the online form.

TV Licensing have a duty to determine who needs a TV License and the only way they can do that is to search the premises. But they don't have right of entry so they need to get a warrant if entry is refused.

I think overall that where entry is refused TVL will not apply for an entry warrant and will instead seek to enforce payment of the TV License fee. It is then your responsibility to defend it. Additionally what matters is that you have the capability to watch TV and not whether you actually watch it. Also since the comparatively recent requirement to have a TV License to access BBC iPlayer owning a computer and having internet access or a mobile phone with data access is enough to require a TV License.

boliston

Anthorn wrote: »

......Additionally what matters is that you have the capability to watch TV and not whether you actually watch it. .....

Surely this is like saying you need a driving licence if you have the capability to drive, even if you don't drive.

mije1983

Anthorn wrote: »

Additionally what matters is that you have the capability to watch TV and not whether you actually watch it. Also since the comparatively recent requirement to have a TV License to access BBC iPlayer owning a computer and having internet access or a mobile phone with data access is enough to require a TV License.

Sorry but this is nonsense.

In fact, under 'Streaming' on the TVL website it even says:

No, you don't need a TV Licence if you only ever watch on demand or catch up programmes on services other than BBC iPlayer

How can you stream something with no internet access?

Cornucopia

Sorry to "slice and dice" your post, but you've managed to post a surprisingly large number of misconceptions, and they need a bit of corrective comment.

Anthorn wrote: »

TV Licensing have a duty to determine who needs a TV License...

A duty to whom, and where does it originate?

... and the only way they can do that is to search the premises.

Hardly, but if it were their only tactic, then searching about 100 addresses a year (as they do) is not going to get them very far, with up to 3.2m unlicensed addresses to cover.

But they don't have right of entry so they need to get a warrant if entry is refused.

Warrants are a bit of a red-herring due to the tiny numbers involved.

I think overall that where entry is refused TVL will not apply for an entry warrant and will instead seek to enforce payment of the TV License fee.

In what way?

It is then your responsibility to defend it.

So not "innocent until proven guilty" then?

Additionally what matters is that you have the capability to watch TV and not whether you actually watch it.

That's not what TVL says, and I assume that they would know.

Also since the comparatively recent requirement to have a TV License to access BBC iPlayer owning a computer and having internet access or a mobile phone with data access is enough to require a TV License.

That's also wrong.

Anthorn

boliston wrote: »

Surely this is like saying you need a driving licence if you have the capability to drive, even if you don't drive.

mije1983 wrote: »

Sorry but this is nonsense.

In fact, under 'Streaming' on the TVL website it even says:




How can you stream something with no internet access?

Cornucopia wrote: »

Sorry to "slice and dice" your post, but you've managed to post a surprisingly large number of misconceptions, and they need a bit of corrective comment.


A duty to whom, and where does it originate?


Hardly, but if it were their only tactic, then searching about 100 addresses a year (as they do) is not going to get them very far, with up to 3.2m unlicensed addresses to cover.


Warrants are a bit of a red-herring due to the tiny numbers involved.


In what way?


So not "innocent until proven guilty" then?


That's not what TVL says, and I assume that they would know.


That's also wrong.

It is in fact all the foregoing posts which are wrong and not my post.

You buy a TV, the retailer tells TV Licensing and TV Licensing tell you that you need a TV Licence. The only evidence is that you own equipment which is capable of accessing TV and/or BBC iPlayer. There is no evidence that you are watching TV or BBC iPlayer and indeed none is required. The same applies if TV Licensing search your premises: If you own equipment which is capable of accessing TV or BBC iPlayer then a TV License is required. I don't need to post evidence because this is common knowledge or at least common knowledge to those who have common sense.

Do I really need to keep on repeating myself to prove that what I say is true. Conversely if anyone thinks what I say is untrue let's see your evidence.

Warrants are something of a will they or won't they scenario> But the small numbers of such warrants issued compared with the comparatively high number of prosecutions point to TV Licensing preferring to prosecute without evidence of equipment ownership.

Peter999_2

Anthorn wrote: »

It is in fact all the foregoing posts which are wrong and not my post.

You buy a TV, the retailer tells TV Licensing and TV Licensing tell you that you need a TV Licence. The only evidence is that you own equipment which is capable of accessing TV and/or BBC iPlayer. There is no evidence that you are watching TV or BBC iPlayer and indeed none is required. The same applies if TV Licensing search your premises: If you own equipment which is capable of accessing TV or BBC iPlayer then a TV License is required. I don't need to post evidence because this is common knowledge or at least common knowledge to those who have common sense.

Do I really need to keep on repeating myself to prove that what I say is true. Conversely if anyone thinks what I say is untrue let's see your evidence.

Warrants are something of a will they or won't they scenario> But the small numbers of such warrants issued compared with the comparatively high number of prosecutions point to TV Licensing preferring to prosecute without evidence of equipment ownership.

Completely wrong. You do not automatically need a licence to own a TV set.


See the TV Licensing website :


http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16

Is a TV Licence required to own a television set? You don’t need a TV Licence to own or possess a television set. However, if you use it to watch or record programmes as they are being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, or to download or watch BBC programmes on demand, including catch up TV, on BBC iPlayer, then you need a TV Licence in order to do so.

Anthorn

Peter999 wrote: »

Completely wrong. You do not automatically need a licence to own a TV set.


See the TV Licensing website :


http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-legal-framework-AB16

Is a TV Licence required to own a television set? You don!!!8217;t need a TV Licence to own or possess a television set. However, if you use it to watch or record programmes as they are being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, or to download or watch BBC programmes on demand, including catch up TV, on BBC iPlayer, then you need a TV Licence in order to do so.

Oh dear.

That FAQ also states:

Do I need a TV Licence if I don!!!8217;t watch BBC programmes?
A TV Licence is a legal permission to install or use television equipment to receive (i.e. watch or record) TV programmes, as they are being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, and to download or watch BBC programmes on demand, including catch up TV, on BBC iPlayer. This applies regardless of which channel you're watching, which device you are using (TV, desktop computer, laptop, mobile phone, tablet or any other), and how you receive them (terrestrial, satellite, cable, via the internet or in any other way).
The licence fee is not a subscription to watch BBC programmes but mandated by law. Under the Communications Act 2003, the BBC in its role as the licensing authority has a duty to issue TV Licences and collect the licence fee.

Ergo it's owning the equipment which requires a TV License and not whether or not BBC programmes are watched.

The reverse of the TV License states:

This license lets you use and install TV receiving equipment at the licensed place. You are covered to (Bolding theirs not mine)

b) watch and download BBC programmes on demand, including catch up TV, on BBC iPlayer

Conversely if you do don't have a TV License you are not authorised to use and install TV receiving equipment and you are not allowed to download BBC programmes on BBC iPlayer.

Nuff said I think. Go read your TV License!