TELEVISION LICENCING OFFICER VISITED - worried about court summons - what next?

[needhelp001]

I need some advice.

 

Had a visit from a TV Licensing Officer last night - I signed the form (I know, I know ). I haven't had a summons yet.

 

Needless to say, I have spent the last 12 hours reading thread after thread on this subject, and it doesn't seem to matter what I DID say to him (he lied, there are omissions, and he summarised), it only matters what is recorded on the form. So, so here is the information that appears on the visit form I signed.

 

I should note, he DID gave me a copy of the form.

 

+

TV LICENCE

 

Do you have a television here? - YES

Do you have a TV Licence? - NO

 

 

TV SET SEEN

 

May I come in and inspect the set? - NO

 

The bits about Programmes seen/heard, Channels tested, Other? - BLANK (nothing filled in)

 

 

ADMISSIONS

 

Colour, digital box, power plugged in, aerial plugged in

TV Make: TOSHIBA

 

When was the set installed / Obtained? - JAN/FEB 2012

When did you first use the set at this address without an appropriate licence? - I DON'T KNOW. I WAS LIVING WITH MY MUM.

When did you last use the set for watching TV programmes here? - SOME POINT TODAY

Is the set owned, borrowed, rented? - IT'S MY MOM'S

 

Do you have either satellite, cable or digital (Freeview)? - NO

 

 

Contact details - phone number given

How long have you lived here? - JAN/FEB 2012

Date of birth? - given

Occupation? - DON'T WORK

National Insurance Number - I DON'T KNOW IT

I have to tell you that you may be

prosecuted for an offence under

The Communications Act 2003.

Is there anything else you want to say? - NO

 

Signed and dated (yesterday)

+

 

Needless to say, I purchased a TV Licence over the phone and had it backdated to Jan 1, 2012 (to Dec 31, 2012), as I don't know when I moved in and want to be covered, but I am now doubting whether I actually needed it.

 

My questions are these:

 

- All the people who have reported receiving court summons seem to be people whose set was inspected and channels tested, or people who didn't get a copy of the form and the Officer lied about seeing/testing the set. Does this seem to be the trend? Mine was NOT inspected or tested and I have a copy of the form showing that. I have read that not everyone receives a summons ... are there any examples of the reasons this doesn't not happen?

 

- Everyone seems to say that you should plead guilty, but I do not believe that any witness statement he could conjure up would hold up, as he would have to lie and say he inspected/tested the set, which would not match the interview record (he he gave me a copy).

 

- what the TV Licensing website says you need and what the Communications Act 2003 says seem to be 2 different things. can this not be argued?

 

Thanks for any advice.

[MaxxPower]

You say you're doubting whether you actually needed the TV license, yet say you also have and use a TV to watch live broadcasts. Therefore, you do need a TV License. (Most certainly morally if not legally)

[needhelp001]

You say you're doubting whether you actually needed the TV license, yet say you also have and use a TV to watch live broadcasts. Therefore, you do need a TV License. (Most certainly morally if not legally)

 

Nowhere in the record of interview does it say I watched a live broadcast.

 

I've read so many threads that it seems to be modus operandi for these officers to lie (eg. he said they don't prosecute), and it's his word against mine, so I'm trying to stick to what's on the form.

[needhelp001]

Also wanted to ask:

 

- Are court summons always sent by registered post? I've read that some people don't always receive them and they're for courts that are hundreds of miles away. Is there any way to check if you've received a summons by any court.

[Ganymede]

Also wanted to ask:

 

- Are court summons always sent by registered post? I've read that some people don't always receive them and they're for courts that are hundreds of miles away. Is there any way to check if you've received a summons by any court.

 

 

The Courts never use recorded/special delivery.

[ashmk]

Well I'm not gonna sugar coat it. You should expect to get a fine. As for the amount I don't know but it is probable they will fine you upto £1000 although I've never known anyone to get a £1000 fine and I know a few people who have been fined. Normally between £200-400.

 

If you have got away with no tv license for 5 years (for example) and you get a £200 fine then consider it a result as you just saved yourself a few hundred pounds.

[havinastella]

And just to make things worse, if you hadn't signed it, there is nothing he could have done about it.

 

NEVER sign ANYTHING at your own doorstep. (Unless it's for a delivery )

[needhelp001]

The Courts never use recorded/special delivery.

 

How can you check if you've been issued a summons?

 

Mail consistently goes to the wrong address where I live. Can I call up the courts every week?

[ashmk]

Just so you know, this is not like a court drama you see on TV. It's more like a cattle market. A que of people, your called, OK, no tv license how do you plead. Guilty. Ok fine £250 (or whatever they decide), rubber stamp your paperwork, goodbye, next case.

 

I'm pretty sure you can even plead guilty by post so you don't have to attend.

 

And sadly just because you rushed out and brought a license won't mean jack. On the day you were caught you didnt have one and thats that.

 

But honestly, don't fret over it... It will justbe a fine, nothing more. No jail cells, no bail, nothing like the tv.... In one door, say i'm guilty and out the other door, the end. (or do it by post)

[Ganymede]

The trust Royal Mail. Once the letter has been posted it is deemed served 2 days later regardless of whether it actually arrives or not...

[needhelp001]

The trust Royal Mail. Once the letter has been posted it is deemed served 2 days later regardless of whether it actually arrives or not...

 

Is there a way to check with the courts to see if I have been issued a summons?

[caledfwlch]

What area of the country are you in?

 

Because if your posted what your form states correctly, then you put NO to Cable/Sky/Freeview.

 

If your region has had Analogue television transmissions turned off, then your TV cannot be picking up live television at the moment.

[needhelp001]

What area of the country are you in?

 

Nearest magistrates court would be Birmingham.

[caledfwlch]

Nearest magistrates court would be Birmingham.

 

Well, from what I can see, all the West Midlands Transmitters have been switched over to Digital Freeview....

 

So I assume then, that if you plugged a normal aerial into your television set, all you get is static?

 

In which case, you cannot pick up live television and thus do not and did not need a Licence.

[Bang!]

You need a licence if you are watching a programme as its transmitted, or rather its being received by your equipment as its transmitted, so includes DVD recorders, videos, etc too.

 

If you were watching a DVD, other recording, using it as a monitor for a computer/security purposes, then it does not require to be licensed.

 

So do you need one or not?

 

Its worth remembering the guy at the door works on commission, so little things like the truth are easily forgotten or distorted so they get their money. Often anything they say will be to make you do/say/write something rather than having anything to do with the law/honesty/helpfulness.

[needhelp001]

What area of the country are you in?

 

Because if your posted what your form states correctly, then you put NO to Cable/Sky/Freeview.

 

If your region has had Analogue television transmissions turned off, then your TV cannot be picking up live television at the moment.

 

On the Admissions section, he circled:

 

- Colour,

- digital box,

- power plugged in,

- aerial plugged in

 

He did not enter or inspect/test the set, and I have the form.

 

Has anyone been able to successfully get them to drop the case without responding to the summons.

 

Everyone seems to recommend not contacting them once you receive a summons, but surely if you have a license, and you argue your corner (as some people have), there must be a chance.

 

I seem to be one of the few people that:

 

- was actually given a copy of my visit interview, so he can't add any lies to it.

- didn't have my set inspected or tested.

 

Maybe I'm grasping at straws (cue, the "it's your fault", "you signed it" posts), but I cannot believe it's best not to contact them and indicate you will challenge the process.

 

Everyone seems to indicate you should give in to pay less, but if there's a chance to get it dropped, isn't it worth challenging?

[Leakie]

Hi Needhelp001

 

The main problem you face is that you signed the for which they have a copy of.

 

If you had not signed it then you could dispute what was written down

 

My wife is a foreign national and has little understanding of written English

Helpful inspector got my wife so sign

when I returned home I asked the same questions on the sheet ,

90% of what was put on the sheet was incorrect.

 

I did not recieve a summons in the end because I paid up straight away.

I also let rip at them because of what was put on the form

The inspector had made a fraudulent statement which my wife could not read.

 

So you may be lucky as you paid straight away.

 

Leakie

[needhelp001]

Everyone has talked about pleading guilty, smaller fine, etc, but I have not read much on the implication of having a criminal record.

 

I've read it's "not a recordable offence", but it does show up on CRB checks (which might be important for jobs, etc), and that you won't be eligible for the US visa waiver scheme, and will have to check the visa requirements for other countries, etc.

 

Does it affect applying for a passport?

 

Here is a little known example I am aware of (or maybe you already know it):

 

- HOUSEHOLD INSURANCE - if I get a criminal record, the household insurance becomes invalid, even though the insurance is not in my name. You have to inform the insurance company immediately, who will then decide if they wish to continue insuring the household - most do not. If the household is already with a specialist insurer for judgements, etc, then they will most likely request an additional premium to continue the insurance.

 

Are there any other situations where having a criminal record will affect you?

[caledfwlch]

On the Admissions section, he circled:

 

- Colour,

- digital box,

- power plugged in,

- aerial plugged in

 

He did not enter or inspect/test the set, and I have the form.

 

Has anyone been able to successfully get them to drop the case without responding to the summons.

 

Everyone seems to recommend not contacting them once you receive a summons, but surely if you have a license, and you argue your corner (as some people have), there must be a chance.

 

I seem to be one of the few people that:

 

- was actually given a copy of my visit interview, so he can't add any lies to it.

- didn't have my set inspected or tested.

 

Maybe I'm grasping at straws (cue, the "it's your fault", "you signed it" posts), but I cannot believe it's best not to contact them and indicate you will challenge the process.

 

Everyone seems to indicate you should give in to pay less, but if there's a chance to get it dropped, isn't it worth challenging?

 

On the form he indicates he did not enter the property thus how does he know Colour, aerial plugged in etc. He then contradicts himself as he has circled NO on freeview box. So he is claiming something is attached, when his own form states he did not entry, he then claims the thing attached is not attached.

 

I should think this would be defendable in court if it went that far.

[queensclose]

is it your house or ur mums

[needhelp001]

is it your house or ur mums

 

My mom owns the house and pretty much everything in it, but she does not live in it - just me. She lives in a flat which she also owns which does have TV License.

[queensclose]

i think you have the grounds to plead not guilty but it needs to go into deeper

 

these officers are well known to twist the facts.

 

it all depends what was said and the impression you gave to the officer

[needhelp001]

i think you have the grounds to plead not guilty but it needs to go into deeper

 

these officers are well known to twist the facts.

 

it all depends what was said and the impression you gave to the officer

 

The reason I only posted what was on the form is that everyone seems to indicate that it's all that matters .

 

 

I want to hope that I won't get a summons, but everyone seems to think it futile.

Edited August 23, 2012 by needhelp001

[queensclose]

you are guilty of the offence and everything he wrote could lead to prosecution. my guess it will. he most like wrote it had the aerial and was plugged in because you said you watched it earlier. you could plead not guilty and act dumb saying you you misunderstand the questions because the way they were worded. but you have told him a lot. and its a lot to contradict. and you signed it

i think if you get the summons a guilty plea is best. it will be like a cattle market and every in your court will be the same offence

[caledfwlch]

you are guilty of the offence

 

How so?

 

The OP says he does not have any sort of digital box, indeed in that section of the form the TVL man ticked NO, contradicting himself. The op lives in the West Midlands, the West Midlands Analogue TV Transmitters have been turned off. Thus, a TV without freeview, sky or virgin is unable to pick up live television.

 

So erm, how is that guilty?

 

It doesn't even require a solicitor, anyone with half a brain could defend this idiot of an "inspectors" contradictory claims.