TV Licence article Discussion

andie23

Until last year I was a carer for someone over 75 so no tv licence was needed. Last time we had a licence I used to buy weekly stamps from the post office. Anyway after informing them of my change in circumstances I was allowed to pay £24.25 over 6 months which I was told would then change to a 12 month payment scheme.

I made my last £24.25 payment this month and assumed I wouldn't hear from them until November when the licence runs out. Today I received another payment card starting from next month with 12 monthly payments on it. I was amazed that they were already asking me to pay next year's licence. I rang up and was told if I waited until November I would be back to the 6 monthly payments.

Is this right? Surely I should be able to make the 12 monthly payments when the licence actually ends, not 6 months beforehand.

quidsinquentin

I gather that I'm about to be 'taken to court' by TV Licencing, at least the letter I received today states that.

I've found this site: http://www.televisionlicence.info/ very helpful (mentioned earlier in this thread, ta) but I understand that, even if I do not require a licence, TVL can still take me to court. The burden of proof is then upon me to prove I do not watch live broadcast TV.

Will the fact that I do not have an aerial, or connection for an aerial stand in my favour, would anyone know?

derrick

quidsinquentin wrote: »

I gather that I'm about to be 'taken to court' by TV Licencing, at least the letter I received today states that.

I've found this site: http://www.televisionlicence.info/ very helpful (mentioned earlier in this thread, ta) but I understand that, even if I do not require a licence, TVL can still take me to court. The burden of proof is then upon me to prove I do not watch live broadcast TV.

Will the fact that I do not have an aerial, or connection for an aerial stand in my favour, would anyone know?

The burden of proof is on them not you.

Your aerial situation is irrelevant as you can watch LIVE TV via your computer/laptop/mobile phone, without an aerial, again the burden of proof is on TVL to prove you are watching TV as it is broadcast.

.

quidsinquentin

derrick wrote: »

The burden of proof is on them not you.

Your aerial situation is irrelevant as you can watch LIVE TV via your computer/laptop/mobile phone, without an aerial, again the burden of proof is on TVL to prove you are watching TV as it is broadcast.

.

Ta. Scary though, as the letter is worded 'when' we take you to court not 'if' we take you to court.

rexmedorum

In this time of cuts and with tha vast majority of people having a TV why not cut the TV license company & pay the BBC from tax (which would work out cheaper per had than the license as well)?

rexmedorum

492800 wrote: »

I guess that would mean that everyone in the UK would be paying for something, even if they aren't using it.

Well that's not such a new idea is it? And what proportion are we talking about?

quidsinquentin

I've found this site that may or may not help other MSE'ers.

http://www.tvlicensing.biz/

And this article on the BBCs strong arm tactics which I found interesting.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/article801989.ece?token=null&offset=24&page=3

And this:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2006-05-15c.69812.h#g69812.r0

And this:

http://www.bushywood.com/tv_detector_vans.htm

groggs

Why do I need to pay for a years tv license that starts next month and will last till December, to then be renewed again in January? I am really angry! I have just applied for a tv license after moving into my first property and I do not see why I am being charged £145 for only the next five months.
This is very unfair! I do not not mind paying for a tv license but I do mind being charged for a years license when I am only using it for five!
Can someone give me some advice on this please????

KevinTC

I have just move to a flat, previously I lived in shared accommodation and therefore never required to own a TV. I have a notice sent to me from "TV Licensing" telling me "Whatever you're watching, however you're watching it, your home needs a TV licence"(sic)
Apparently I am also required to inform them if I think that I don't require a license and they will visit to confirm the truth of this!
Is this England or Stalin's USSR? Am I innocent until proved guilty?
So if Joanne Osborne reads this site I say that I will never say if I watch TV, so send Solent Enforcement Division to investigate now!

[Deleted User]

quidsinquentin wrote: »

I gather that I'm about to be 'taken to court' by TV Licencing, at least the letter I received today states that.

I've found this site: http://www.televisionlicence.info/ very helpful (mentioned earlier in this thread, ta) but I understand that, even if I do not require a licence, TVL can still take me to court. The burden of proof is then upon me to prove I do not watch live broadcast TV.

Will the fact that I do not have an aerial, or connection for an aerial stand in my favour, would anyone know?

Ignore them.

We have not had a TV for over ten years. NO TV FOR OVER TEN YEARS (just in case TV Licensing are reading this). They decide to believe us for a while and then the letters started again. I now just ignore them. However, I removed the right for them to set foot on the property. If they do I will film them and sue them for trespass and also post the footage on the internet. I have also sent them a letter stating ...

" We do not appreciate being treated like criminals for having done nothing wrong whatsoever. Should you still feel it necessary to take us to court then we look forward to a nice day out. Please note that as we are not breaking any laws you will not win the case. Also, note that if we do have to go to court then we will be seeking legal redress from TV Licensing in order to recoup our costs. This will include legal costs, travelling costs, loss of earnings, redress for our wasted time in the form of financial compensation and any other expenses incurred."

Can you tell that I am sick of them? Since sending this last letter a van turned up for the first time in ten years (parked across the street of course as they are not allowed in the property).

Now their letters get shredded unopened.