No TV so No Licence but still getting final demand notices

Peter54

Registered User
Messages
169
I no longer have television in my home due to financial difficulties. I could not afford the TV Licence nor could I afford to keep a TV channel package.

I keep getting final demand letters about the licence.

Any idea please what the procedure is to 'prove' I don't have a TV when the licence person comes knocking?
 
I no longer have television in my home due to financial difficulties. I could not afford the TV Licence nor could I afford to keep a TV channel package.

I keep getting final demand letters about the licence.

Any idea please what the procedure is to 'prove' I don't have a TV when the licence person comes knocking?

You don't have to prove you don't have one, they have to prove you do. Write a letter stating you have no need of a license as you have no equipment, and any further demands for payment will be deemed as harassment and forwarded to the relevant authorities.
 
A family member (nun living alone) was forced into getting a TV licence after repeatedly called on by "some sort of a person". There was an old dish on the side of the house. No TV in the house. However bought TV licence as didnt know at the time what to do and then decided to buy a TV and needless to say it has become well used, in fact just got a saorview box installed.
 
I'm sure I read somewhere that with a second or final demand for the license comes a Statutory Declaration Form where you can effectively swear on oath that you don't have a tv.

But I can't find anything on it so could be completely wrong.
 
I got caught once because I still had an aerial installed on the chimney, (it was capable of receiving a signal they said)
 
so if i dont have soarview unit do i have to pay the licence next year? aerials will be obsolete from 21st october so where do i stand
 
If you have no TV you do not need a license. Do not allow yourself to be bullied into purchasing one if you have no Tv
 
You don't need a TV license for an aerial.


This point has not been properly tested in the courts.
An Post will always maintain you do but the law as it stands says otherwise.

Appealing to An Post is not going to yield a proper answer, the only way An Post are going to stop saying this is for them to lose in court on this point. So far people are reluctant to take them on.
 
The 2009 Broadcasting Act only mentions televisions. I was under the impression that it was any device capable of receiving a signal but having scanned the appropriate parts of the Act (sections 142-149) I can't see anything to back that up.
 
I was threatened with legal action a few years ago for having an aerial on the roof (there was no TV) and I was forced, through gritted teeth, to buy a license for the aerial after a long conversation with a very stroppy employee in An Post. I got absolutely nowhere with him, even after inviting him to send someone to the house anytime to check for televisions. He was absolutely adamant that under the 1926 Act (at the time) an aerial was required.
 
You should have let him take you to court. They would have soon backed down.
 
If aerials required a license then you would need one for any coat hangers in your house and possibly your fillings.
 
It looks like once An post decide to target you they will not rest until it's proved in court. Don't be afriad of goign to court. I have a sibling who went into the District Court, she just spoke honestly and the judge was very nice and threw out the case. (In that case it was the responsibility of the owner to have the licence, not the lodger). Everybody else who didn't show up (mostly everybody) got a fine.

If the rule is TV = licence then you are can not be fined as you have no TV.
 
I'm sure I read somewhere that with a second or final demand for the license comes a Statutory Declaration Form where you can effectively swear on oath that you don't have a tv.

But I can't find anything on it so could be completely wrong.

Why should a person be forced to sign a statutory declaration?
 
Back
Top