Do I need to inform that I don't need a TV licence?

prowla

B0bbyEwing said:

Still pestering....



So, having already told them that I don't need a licence 12 months ago, they're saying if I don't tell them again that nothing has changed then an officer "could" visit me to check. 

Although how much checking they'll be doing when I say no you're not coming in, I don't know.

But then if you fill out the form & tell them nothing has changed they tell you that an officer may come round to check.

So basically it doesn't matter what you do, you may get a visit.

And if they visit then they may will be told to be on their way.

"Act now to avoid breaking the law." is (ahem) factually flawed; you don't have to do anything.

(Unless you consider choosing not to act is an action in itself...)

"This means we may have to investigate."; no this means they may choose to investigate.

"You must buy a TV licence or claim No Licence Needed to avoid further action"; they contradict this by a. stating "We may visit to confirm this." and b. expiring the "claim" after a set time, so it does not "avoid further action".

"Claim No Licence Needed"; this implies that you are making a "claim", which they are inclined to disbelieve, as opposed to a statement.

Cornucopia

prowla said:

B0bbyEwing said:

Still pestering....



So, having already told them that I don't need a licence 12 months ago, they're saying if I don't tell them again that nothing has changed then an officer "could" visit me to check. 

Although how much checking they'll be doing when I say no you're not coming in, I don't know.

But then if you fill out the form & tell them nothing has changed they tell you that an officer may come round to check.

So basically it doesn't matter what you do, you may get a visit.

And if they visit then they may will be told to be on their way.

"This means we may have to investigate."; no this means they may choose to investigate.

There isn't really an "investigation", as such.  

Not if we believe they mean:  "to examine a crime, problem, statement, etc. carefully, especially to discover the truth".   

What they mean is more of a fishing trip:  "to make a nuisance of oneself in the hope that evidence of an offence will inadvertently become known, or we can make a plausible claim that it has".

B0bbyEwing

Nick_C said:

One thing that annoys me about these letters is that they are so badly written, and from (the agents of) an organisation that was created to educate and inform.

"As your claim expired on 31/10/25, this address is now unlicensed".  What nonsense.  The address was already unlicensed.  And you haven't made a claim that has expired.  

The inability to use the English language clearly and correctly is one reason why I decided to stop funding the BBC.  

The way it reads to me is like a subscription. You telling them no has a 12 month lifespan & if you don't keep them updated every 12 months then you could be in trouble. 

Hate to think how someone like say an old woman living on her own would feel reading this. They probably want her to be frightened in to paying up or something.

Also wonder at what point it comes to be that they can actually enter your house.

But anyway, until they put something worthwhile on the TV that's live then I'll not be needing a licence.

Cornucopia

B0bbyEwing said:

Nick_C said:

One thing that annoys me about these letters is that they are so badly written, and from (the agents of) an organisation that was created to educate and inform.

"As your claim expired on 31/10/25, this address is now unlicensed".  What nonsense.  The address was already unlicensed.  And you haven't made a claim that has expired.  

The inability to use the English language clearly and correctly is one reason why I decided to stop funding the BBC.  

Also wonder at what point it comes to be that they can actually enter your house.

For most people, it's effectively never.  

Without a Warrant, they can't enter the premises without your consent.   And why would anyone ever give that?

TVL Warrants are extremely rare, and they require prior suspicion of an offence.    Even with a Warrant, they can't force someone to give a confession statement, and they probably won't be equipped or trained to capture physical evidence.

It's all a bit of a mess (for them), and that presumably explains their extensive use of word-play when communicating with the Public.

lorcedandfound

Just filled in the NLN form so that they don’t pester my autistic son. It has ‘trick’ questions, when you go down the tick list saying no I don’t watch these channels, the last two are worded so that you have to say ‘yes’, then of course it says you do need a licence. It has questions repeated in various ways, making you feel like a criminal. I really resent having to do this when we are perfectly capable of buying a licence should we need one.

Cornucopia

The NLN questions are as shown below, and the "correct" answers are as you say: No/No/No/No/Yes/Yes.

nln.jpg

B0bbyEwing

For anyone who may be interested, the blackbeltbarrister is currently getting harassed by the TV licence folk & is posting the journey on his YouTube channel.

For anyone not aware of this chap, as I understand it he's a barrister who's also a black belt in some form of martial arts. He posts videos on legal matters on his channel.

Nick_C

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81943010#Comment_81943010

The first problem with the NLN form is that you can answer the questions honestly and it tells you you need a license when you don't.

"Do you or does anyone in your household ever watch TV on any channel?" - Yes, I watch TV when I am staying in hotels or self catering accommodation in the UK.

"Do you or does anyone in your household ever watch foreign channels on TV or live online?" - Yes, when I'm on holiday abroad, I watch foreign channels on TV.

So the form is not fit for purpose.

The second problem with the NLN form is that the BBC gathers personal data about you - name, phone number, email address. They do not need this data for people who are not their customers.

I made my first NLN declarations over the phone, withholding my phone number, and refusing to give my name. In response to questions when I first informed them that no license was needed, my answer to each of their questions was "no activity takes place at this address which requires me to buy a license". Renewing the declaration has been through an automated phone system.

I would urge people not to use the NLN form.

rowan222

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81944582#Comment_81944582

You do not need to give any personal info when filling in a NLN form. Simply put Occupier or Resident in the name field and use a bogus email address. The only info that they have is the postal address. They have no idea who lives there.

Cornucopia

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81944582#Comment_81944582

I agree with pretty much all of that.

The only proviso for me is that different people have different situations. I'm in the position where BBC/TVL don't know who lives at my address and never have. That's the best possible scenario and I wouldn't want to spoil that by doing NLN.

Other people might already have their name known by BBC/TVL, and prefer not to receive the threatening letters. Those people might consider NLN to be worthwhile.