Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

TV license fine without owning a TV

  • 11-05-2018 8:50am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭


    Hi Guys,

    Yesterday I received a letter in the post by the TV license inspector issuing a fine for not paying my license.

    A few things on this:
    1) The letter was not headed it simply contained "Occupier"
    2) I have only been living in the apartment a little over a month, travel a lot with work and haven't even had time to purchase a television because I am never there
    3) I use my laptop the odd time when I'm in bed to watch Netflix, I haven't activated Sky, Virgin etc - how have they come to this conclusion?

    To the best of my knowledge the apartment was vacant for a few months before i moved in so I don't think it's the case that the previous occupant had a TV and just didn't bother paying.

    I don't mind paying the TV license fee, it's the law but I'm slightly pissed off considering I don't even own one. I am not paying for something that I don't own - are they chancing their arm?


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 108 ✭✭EdEd


    Bin it. How can they fine you when they don't know your name?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,068 ✭✭✭DenMan


    Do you have the ability to receive a television signal in your place of residence? If you have an aerial on the roof or if it's been disconnected they check for that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 452 ✭✭letsseehere14


    Unfortunately you don't need to have a tv to need a tv licence. Once the place has the capability of receiving a signal you need a licence. That's an aerial, dish or even just a cable. Doesn't matter if you don't have a tv.

    Also you can buy a licence online so the excuse of not bring around won't fly with them either.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,909 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Also you can buy a licence online so the excuse of not bring around won't fly with them either.


    Do they really need a license?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 479 ✭✭rgace


    Sounds like a fishing excercise and I'd say they are basing it on nothing other than the fact there is no tv licence at that address.

    As mentioned above there is no name on the letter so you have nothing to worry about.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    Every household, business or institution in Ireland with a television or equipment capable of receiving a television signal (using an aerial, satellite dish, cable or other means) must have a television licence. A television licence is a certificate that states that you have paid the appropriate fee to the government and contributed to the cost of public service broadcasting in Ireland. Your television licence is issued for 1 year in general.

    So online inlcuded?

    Nope!
    If your household, business or institution possesses a television or equipment capable of receiving a television signal, you are required by law to have a television licence. Even if the television or other equipment is broken and currently unable to receive a signal, it is regarded as capable of being repaired so it can receive a signal and you must hold a licence for it. Failure to produce evidence of a television licence to an inspector can result in a court appearance and on conviction, you can receive a substantial fine. People who have been fined and who have breached court orders directing them to pay their television licence can be imprisoned.

    You do not require a television licence to watch television on your computer or mobile phone. However, the computer must not be able to receive a signal distributed by conventional television broadcasting networks, for example, cable, satellite or aerial.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,825 ✭✭✭Doctors room ghost


    If they haven’t even put a name on it how can you be held accountable.either burn it or pass on the good luck and post it in your neighbors letterbox.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,474 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Unfortunately you don't need to have a tv to need a tv licence. Once the place has the capability of receiving a signal you need a licence. That's an aerial, dish or even just a cable. Doesn't matter if you don't have a tv.

    This is absolutely false. The license is for possession of a television set.
    “television set” means any apparatus for wireless telegraphy designed primarily for the purpose of receiving and exhibiting television programmes broadcast for general reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on the use of anything else in conjunction therewith) and any assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,824 ✭✭✭✭28064212


    Unfortunately you don't need to have a tv to need a tv licence. Once the place has the capability of receiving a signal you need a licence. That's an aerial, dish or even just a cable. Doesn't matter if you don't have a tv.
    Incorrect. From the Broadcasting Act 2009:
    142.— (1) Subject to the exceptions mentioned in subsection (3), a person shall not keep or have in his or her possession anywhere in the territory of the State a television set save in so far as such keeping or possession is authorised by a television licence for the time being in force.
    “ television set ” means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasting services broadcast for general reception
    An aerial or dish is not capable of exhibiting a broadcast.

    Boardsie Enhancement Suite - a browser extension to make using Boards on desktop a better experience (includes full-width display, keyboard shortcuts, dark mode, and more). Now available through your browser's extension store.

    Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/boardsie-enhancement-suite/

    Chrome/Edge/Opera: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/boardsie-enhancement-suit/bbgnmnfagihoohjkofdnofcfmkpdmmce



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 46,321 ✭✭✭✭muffler


    rgace wrote: »
    As mentioned above there is no name on the letter so you have nothing to worry about.
    Not true. The letter can be sent the owner or occupier


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 969 ✭✭✭Greybottle


    Don't bin it. Write back a short letter stating when you moved in, that you don't have TV or anything that can receive a signal and that you have no intention of purchasing one.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 479 ✭✭rgace


    How will this fine be enforced on the occupier?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,825 ✭✭✭Doctors room ghost


    Greybottle wrote: »
    Don't bin it. Write back a short letter stating when you moved in, that you don't have TV or anything that can receive a signal and that you have no intention of purchasing one.

    I wouldn’t waste your time with them.lazy parasites can’t even be bothered to find out who lives there.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    theballz wrote: »
    Hi Guys,

    Yesterday I received a letter in the post by the TV license inspector issuing a fine for not paying my license.

    A few things on this:
    1) The letter was not headed it simply contained "Occupier"
    2) I have only been living in the apartment a little over a month, travel a lot with work and haven't even had time to purchase a television because I am never there
    3) I use my laptop the odd time when I'm in bed to watch Netflix, I haven't activated Sky, Virgin etc - how have they come to this conclusion?

    To the best of my knowledge the apartment was vacant for a few months before i moved in so I don't think it's the case that the previous occupant had a TV and just didn't bother paying.

    I don't mind paying the TV license fee, it's the law but I'm slightly pissed off considering I don't even own one. I am not paying for something that I don't own - are they chancing their arm?
    I wouldn’t waste your time with them.lazy parasites can’t even be bothered to find out who lives there.

    How would you discover the ID of someone who has barely touched down and almost certainly has not notified anyone with statutory powers that they are at this new address?

    All An Post have done is note that an address is not covered by a licence and sent a "demand" out. Deal with it on that basis.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,040 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    muffler wrote: »
    Not true. The letter can be sent the owner or occupier

    There's no one in my place called occupier or owner so any mail to them is shredded.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 108 ✭✭EdEd


    I thought it was illegal to interfere with mail addressed to someone else. Unless my name is on the letter then it isn't worth the envelope it was sent in.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭theballz


    Thank you for the responses! Appreciate all of the help

    A few of you have mentioned that I would still have to pay if their is simply an aerial on the roof (TV or no TV.)

    I can confirm that the Apartment block owners ran Sky cables into all of the apartments. The cables where simply ran incase the tenant wanted to subscribe to Sky. As mentioned i have not done this and have absolutely zero intention of doing so


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭theballz


    How would you discover the ID of someone who has barely touched down and almost certainly has not notified anyone with statutory powers that they are at this new address?

    All An Post have done is note that an address is not covered by a licence and sent a "demand" out. Deal with it on that basis.

    The entire basis of the letter is that i need to pay for something that I do not own. It's ridiculous


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    theballz wrote: »
    Thank you for the responses! Appreciate all of the help

    A few of you have mentioned that I would still have to pay if their is simply an aerial on the roof (TV or no TV.)

    I can confirm that the Apartment block owners ran Sky cables into all of the apartments. The cables where simply ran incase the tenant wanted to subscribe to Sky. As mentioned i have not done this and have absolutely zero intention of doing so

    Don’t worry about that, incorrect information was given.

    You require a licence if you have a TV set (even if it is broken or if it is an analog one which can’t pickup digital signal), or if you have any combination of devices which lets you pickup aerial, cable, or satellite TV signal. This second category could be a computer monitor connected to a sky box itself connected to your Sky access point. But just having the access point in your home definitely doesn’t require a licence.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    theballz wrote: »
    The entire basis of the letter is that i need to pay for something that I do not own. It's ridiculous

    Sure it is from your point of view - but as I say they have no idea who you are or your circumstances. It's a machine spitting out a piece of paper.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,861 ✭✭✭Cushie Butterfield


    They don’t even know if there’s anyone living there at all OP, just put it completely out of your head NOW


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,565 ✭✭✭K.Flyer


    As already said, If you do not have a T.V. you do not need a licence.
    If you want, sent the notification back to them with a note saying that there is currently no T.V. apparatus at your address and that if ever one is purchased a licence will be purchased for it and you would prefer no further contact on the matter. Do not give them your name because that gives them a contact to persue and to send a fine or summons to if they do not believe you.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    On the other hand, them assuming you have the capability and them proving it is another, however you have the laptop, so you are obliged. It's a rip off and unfair, but legal.
    Personally I wouldn't pay, because there is no name, therefore they cannot send you a notice to appear or to pay a fine.
    I would say the local TV lad was doing his rounds and dropped those letters in any mystery house he passed.

    DO NOT:
    K.Flyer wrote: »
    As already said, If you do not have a T.V. you do not need a licence.
    If you want, sent the notification back to them with a note saying that there is currently no T.V. apparatus at your address and that if ever one is purchased a licence will be purchased for it and you would prefer no further contact on the matter. Do not give them your name because that gives them a contact to persue and to send a fine or summons to if they do not believe you.

    They'll know someone is there. Someone likely has a smart phone, laptop etc. Someone is aware they have no licence.
    Say nothing, act casual.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,172 ✭✭✭FizzleSticks


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26 guestwifi


    As already stated you don't need a license unless you have equipment in the house capable of displaying a received broadcast, i.e. a tv, a satellite decoder, freeview box, tuner card in PC etc. You don't need one for a laptop (without a tuner card), games console, PC monitor etc, even if you have a dish/aerial on the house.

    Been through this with my local inspector many times, the first time he called I'd just moved into the house (owned by family) and wasn't sure if there was a license....he said there wasn't, and that to expect a fine. It arrived a couple of weeks later, with the threat of court action if not paid. I looked into what exactly a license is needed for, and discovered that I had no equipment in my house that I needed one for. Emailed the inspector, he arrived back a few weeks later, checked out my setup (console, laptop and monitor), saw the cables from dish and aerial were hanging loose behind the corner unit, and told me to disregard the fine.

    Once in a while I see a slip through the door telling me an inspector had called as they don't have a record of a licence for this address, each time I just email them to say nothing has changed and they're welcome to come back when I'm home for an inspection, never seen them in person again though. Don't pay.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,920 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard


    theballz wrote:
    A few of you have mentioned that I would still have to pay if their is simply an aerial on the roof (TV or no TV.)

    One person said that and they were wrong.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    OmegaGene wrote: »
    What has a smart phone or laptop got to do with anything ??
    These letters come in the post when a licence is no longer at the address
    Like I and nearly everyone has said ignore the letter you don’t have a tv so wait for the fella to call to the door and if he manages to find you at home deal with him then

    My complete mistake. I recalled Pat Rabbitte talking of a Communications element to the licence, including anything capable of receiving internet etc.
    You do not require a television licence to watch television on your computer or mobile phone. However, the computer must not be able to receive a signal distributed by conventional television broadcasting networks, for example, cable, satellite or aerial.
    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/consumer_affairs/media/tv_licences.html


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 46,321 ✭✭✭✭muffler


    Dial Hard wrote: »
    One person said that and they were wrong.
    You obviously don't know much about TV licences. Any antenna capable of receiving a signal would require a licence regardless of the presence of a TV


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    muffler wrote: »
    You obviously don't know much about TV licences. Any antenna capable of receiving a signal would require a licence regardless of the presence of a TV

    This is incorrect. The antenna doesn’t require a licence. What matters is whether you have equipment with a tuner capable of receiving terrestrial, cable, or satellite TV broadcast.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,963 ✭✭✭Dr Turk Turkelton


    muffler wrote: »
    You obviously don't know much about TV licences. Any antenna capable of receiving a signal would require a licence regardless of the presence of a TV

    Somewhere there is a barstool missing it's lawyer.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,474 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    Bob24 wrote: »
    This is incorrect. The antenna doesn’t require a licence. What matters is whether you have equipment with a tuner capable of receiving terrestrial, cable, or satellite TV broadcast.
    The legislation has a very vague line about how you need a licence if you possess anything capable of receiving a TV signal, whether it needs extra equipment or not to do anything with it. If you were pedantically inclined you could argue that technically any piece of conductive material is capable of receiving a signal (it just needs a TV set attached to display it) and needs a TV license.

    I would challenge the same pedantic person to find any court judgement that this means anything other than a TV set or tuner/monitor-combo though.


  • Moderators, Regional South Moderators Posts: 5,843 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quackster


    OmegaGene wrote: »
    Remember the old days of a wire coat hanger lol
    If the idea of an Ariel being present meant we need a tv licence anyone with a wardrobe and wire coat hanger would also need one

    Believe me, those wire coat-hangers still do the job for Saorview! :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    muffler wrote: »
    Not true. The letter can be sent the owner or occupier

    They can send all the letters they like.

    From a legal point of view, a summons can’t issue to “the occupier.” They need a name to send a summons to. They also need someone to open the door to the inspector and confirm their name.

    The tv licence guys can be quite sneaky in this regard. Someone in my sisters estate once rang the guards after they all saw a weird person interfering with peoples bins. Turns out to be the TV license inspector taking name from bins, ha ha. Friend also got a notice with their name on it despite not having met tv licence inspector. They phoned an post to find out what happened to be told by the phone operator that the person who opened the door (on a Saturday so they could not claim they were in work) identified himself as my friend and said he had a tv but no licence. The reality is no one opened the door as no one was there. Well, my friend lives alone and was abroad so just sent in his flight itinerary.

    Next you will get a letter to “ the occupier”asking you to complete the statutory declaration.

    If you don’t, then TV license inspector will call round so just fill him in when he does.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,985 ✭✭✭mikeym


    Bin the letter and dont answer the door in the evenings because it could be the Tv Licence man.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭theballz


    anewme wrote: »
    They can send all the letters they like.

    From a legal point of view, a summons can’t issue to “the occupier.” They need a name to send a summons to. They also need someone to open the door to the inspector and confirm their name.

    The tv licence guys can be quite sneaky in this regard. Someone in my sisters estate once rang the guards after they all saw a weird person interfering with peoples bins. Turns out to be the TV license inspector taking name from bins, ha ha. Friend also got a notice with their name on it despite not having met tv licence inspector. They phoned an post to find out what happened to be told by the phone operator that the person who opened the door (on a Saturday so they could not claim they were in work) identified himself as my friend and said he had a tv but no licence. The reality is no one opened the door as no one was there. Well, my friend lives alone and was abroad so just sent in his flight itinerary.

    Next you will get a letter to “ the occupier”asking you to complete the statutory declaration.

    If you don’t, then TV license inspector will call round so just fill him in when he does.

    How is this type of thing legal? This country is backwards


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    theballz wrote: »
    How is this type of thing legal? This country is backwards

    It’s not legal. No one challenges them.

    They told my friend “the person”who opened the door identified himself as my friend.

    My friend knew no one could have possibly opened the door as
    (A) he lives alone and
    (B) no one had Keys and the alarm never went off.

    Only he had a flight itinerary that showed him abroad he would have been stuck. Well not stuck as he’s no tv.

    But that’s the type of crap that goes on.

    Funny how they will say they called in Saturday as people can prove they were at work during the week.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    To be honest this thing about them having to find a name to address letters to is a complete waste of time. The licence should be collected based on the LPT register with an option for landlords to provide their tenant’s name as the person who is liable.

    They would still need inspectors to see if there is a TV, but no more useless letters addrsssed to “the occupiers” which are going straight to the rubbish bin: as soon as a licence expires they could send a letter to an actual person telling them they need a licence and providing a form to return if they want to declare they don’t have a TV. And then just do random inspections for adresses where people say they don’t shave a TV.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,565 ✭✭✭K.Flyer


    Out of curiosity, are you legally obliged to provide your name at the door to a TV licence inspector when they ask for it, or can you just say no and close the door?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    K.Flyer wrote: »
    Out of curiosity, are you legally obliged to provide your name at the door to a TV licence inspector when they ask for it, or can you just say no and close the door?

    No, you are not legally obliged to give your name to a TV Licence inspector.

    Most people do out of politeness and being caught out unexpectedly.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    anewme wrote: »
    No, you are not legally obliged to give your name to a TV Licence inspector.

    Most people do out of politeness and being caught out unexpectedly.

    I don’t know if it is always the case, but in my experience TV licence inspectors can be borderline dishonest in the way the introduce themselves in order to get people to give their name.

    I’ve had something like “I work for the post office and I am updating our register”. Technically not a lie but extremely misleading about the purpose of their visit.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    Bob24 wrote: »
    I don’t know if it is always the case, but in my experience TV licence inspectors can be borderline dishonest in the way the introduce themselves in order to get people to give their name.

    I’ve had something like “I work for the post office and I am updating our register”. Technically not a lie but extremely misleading about the purpose of their visit.

    I can 100% say that legally you don’t have to give your name to a TV Licence inspector.

    They get away with it as no one challenges them. The tv Licence inspector has very limited powers but like you say is fishing in getting information.

    Agree they can be sneaky and dishonest, all you have to say is, “sorry it’s my policy not to give information to people who call at the door.” Most people haven’t the balls to say this,so just give their name.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    muffler wrote: »
    You obviously don't know much about TV licences. Any antenna capable of receiving a signal would require a licence regardless of the presence of a TV
    Bob24 wrote: »
    This is incorrect. The antenna doesn’t require a licence. What matters is whether you have equipment with a tuner capable of receiving terrestrial, cable, or satellite TV broadcast.

    You're kind of both right/wrong.

    A person does not need a licence simply arising as a result of having an antenna capable of receiving a signal. You do not need a licence to watch television on your computer.

    However, if your computer is technically capable even in theory of receiving a signal from that antenna, then you do need a licence regardless of not having a TV.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    anewme wrote: »
    It’s not legal. No one challenges them.

    Source required. The legislation would suggest that the summons an be served on an "occupier".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    However, if your computer is technically capable even in theory of receiving a signal from that antenna, then you do need a licence regardless of not having a TV.

    As per the above post this is exactly what I said, not sure what you see as being wrong in my post?

    Also to reitterate, the antenna is completely irrelevant in deciding whether someone requires a licence. What matters is whether you are in possession of a device or combination of devices with a tuner designed to receive terrestrial/cable/satellite TV broadcast (regardless of that device being in working condition or connected to an antenna or satellite/cable box). So a TV set with a tuner but with no antenna in the house still requires a licence.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    Source required. The legislation would suggest that the summons an be served on an "occupier".

    Source is my years of working in debt collection and bad debts.

    Think about it realistically for a minute.

    How would you enforce and serve summons on “the occupier”.?

    what is the definition of “the occupiouer.
    So there is a court date booked and the charge is against “the occupier” ....what is that change exactly..? If there is 10 ppl living there, who is answerable as “theoccupier”

    Who do they issue the summons and fine to.?

    The Inspector has to call to the house, speak to a person who identifies themself as having a tv but no Licence. Then they can issue a summons.

    The summons is written that you (paddy) on x date were in possession of a tv(or equipment blah blah blah) without a valued license. A summons references a specific breach of the law on a specific date and time.

    That’s why the tv inspectors are so desperate to get a name. It makes the letters easier to send and most people pay up once their name is on the letter. You don’t have to have to be the the owner or tenant.

    But the reality is, a person have to speak to the inspector before a summons can issue.

    Tv licence inspector asked me the names fior my neighbors when they were away, as in”who is living here”? I was heading out as he was knocking. Told him no, he’d have to call back and see them himself.

    Sending makey up letters to “the occupier” whoever that is, who may, or may not have a tv is not going to stand up in a court of law.


Advertisement