Latest news with #SJPN
Wales Online
2 days ago
- Wales Online
BBC TV licence rules and what you must not do after man taken to court
BBC TV licence rules and what you must not do after man taken to court The rules surrounding TV licensing can be confusing, but this is what you need to know about watching TV legally (Image: PA ) The ins and outs of TV licence laws can certainly be confusing. The BBC relies on the annual £174.50 charge to fund its television, radio, and online services, with payment options being a one-off sum or manageable direct debit instalments. Your watching habits are the deciding factor for whether a TV licence is necessary. Watching or recording live TV on any device, or accessing the content of BBC iPlayer, means you must pay the fee but if you're only using non-live catch-up or streaming services, you don't have to pay. The TV Licence's official website spells it out: "Your TV Licence lets you enjoy a huge range of TV. It covers you for. This includes watching, recording and downloading. On any device." As summed up by the Liverpool Echo, possessing a TV licence is essential for viewing or recording live broadcasts, regardless of the device used, as well as for catching up on any BBC iPlayer content, live or otherwise. For money-saving tips, sign up to our Money newsletter here If, on the other hand, your watchlist is limited to catch-up platforms like ITVX and All4, or streaming giants such as Netflix, Disney+, or Amazon Prime Video, then no licence is required, reports the Daily Record. Also exempt from the licence mandate are avid gamers and those who exclusively watch DVDs or Blu-rays. This clarification coincides with a report where a man was fortunate enough to have his TV licensing court case dismissed at Sefton Magistrates' Court. Article continues below Lee Stuart from Kirby initially purchased a TV licence when setting up his home but later chose to cancel it, as traditional television didn't appeal to him, opting instead for online streaming services exclusively. A TV Licensing spokesperson clarified: "If a property we believe should be licensed is unlicensed, letters are sent to that address advising of the requirement for a TV Licence if the occupant watches live TV or other licensable content. This stops for one year when the occupant declares they don't need a licence, when letters will resume to check if circumstances have changed." However, Lee was left confused in January this year when he received a Single Justice Procedure Notice (SJPN), accusing him of watching television without a valid licence. Lee held his ground in court, challenging the accusation: "I can see why people just accept it, but I knew I was innocent and I wasn't paying for a TV licence that I didn't need so I fought it." "I'll be totally honest, I was surprised by the outcome and I thought it might be good to share my experience." Lee's courtroom appearance ended with an acquittal due to insufficient evidence. Post-trial, a TV Licensing official commented: "This was reviewed by TV Licensing following the court hearing in April 2025 as is standard practice, and no failings were highlighted." The spokesperson noted that though both the officer and Mr Stuart gave what seemed like credible evidence in court, the magistrates were not persuaded beyond reasonable doubt of the case's certainty. Mr Stuart was initially heartened by the outcome but became disgruntled after receiving another nudge from TV Licensing regarding the need for a licence. Subsequently, he lodged a formal complaint and submitted a No Licence Needed (NLN) declaration. Article continues below He commented: "The form asks at the end, 'What outcome do you want from this?' and I just put 'All I want is to be left alone, but an apology wouldn't go amiss." TV Licensing has confirmed they have received Mr Stuart's NLN form.
Daily Record
4 days ago
- Business
- Daily Record
BBC TV licence rules explained after man taken to court
The TV Licence rules are more complicated than you might expect - don't get caught out. Navigating the ins and outs of TV licence regulations can often feel like a tricky task. The annual £174.50 charge contributes to the BBC's television, radio, and online services, which can be settled in one go or paid by direct debit. However, it's your viewing habits that determine the need of a TV licence. If you watch or record live TV across any gadget, or sneakily check out BBC iPlayer's offerings, then the fee is applicable. On the flip side, users of non-live catch-up or streaming platforms aren't liable for the licence. The TV Licence's official site clarifies: "Your TV Licence lets you enjoy a huge range of TV. It covers you for. This includes watching, recording and downloading. On any device." To simplify matters as detailed in the Liverpool Echo, a licence is crucial for anyone watching or recording live TV as it's broadcasted, regardless of the technology used, and also to view any content on BBC iPlayer, live or otherwise. On the other hand, should your usage be confined to just catch-up services such as ITVX, All4, along with streaming sites like Netflix, Disney+, or Amazon Prime Video, then a licence isn't needed. And if you're a keen gamer or only watch DVDs and Blu-rays, you're also in the clear from the licence requirement. It comes after the publication revealed that one lucky man had his TV licence-related court case tossed out at Sefton Magistrates' Court. Lee Stuart, from Kirby, initially acquired a TV licence when he set up home but then opted to cancel it as broadcast telly did not take his fancy, and he used only online streaming services. A TV Licensing spokesperson explained: "If a property we believe should be licensed is unlicensed, letters are sent to that address advising of the requirement for a TV Licence if the occupant watches live TV or other licensable content. This stops for one year when the occupant declares they don't need a licence, when letters will resume to check if circumstances have changed." However earlier this year in January, Lee was left baffled after receiving a Single Justice Procedure Notice (SJPN), an allegation suggesting he had watched TV without a valid licence. Lee defended himself before the bench, determined to face down the charge. His defiant stance paid off. "I can see why people just accept it, but I knew I was innocent and I wasn't paying for a TV licence that I didn't need so I fought it." He added: "I'll be totally honest, I was surprised by the outcome and I thought it might be good to share my experience." Lee's day in court concluded with the dismissal of charges owing to a lack of proof. A TV Licensing representative remarked post-verdict: "This was reviewed by TV Licensing following the court hearing in April 2025 as is standard practice, and no failings were highlighted." The spokesperson remarked that, despite both the officer and Mr Stuart presenting plausible testimony in court, the magistrates were unconvinced that the case could be established with certainty beyond reasonable doubt. Mr Stuart initially felt relieved by the decision, but his mood changed after being contacted again by TV Licensing with a reminder about needing a licence. In response, he has filed an official grievance and handed in a No Licence Needed (NLN) declaration. He stated: "The form asks at the end, 'What outcome do you want from this?' and I just put 'All I want is to be left alone, but an apology wouldn't go amiss." TV Licensing has acknowledged receipt of Mr Stuart's NLN submission.
Daily Mirror
4 days ago
- Daily Mirror
Man thought he'd beaten the TV licence system - then a letter turned up
Lee Stewart cancelled because he did not watch any live television but after a conversation with a TV Licence inspection officer Lee was shocked to find he was facing a hefty fine A man is celebrating after a court case about his TV licence was thrown out by magistrates. Lee Stewart decided to cancel his TV licence because he did not watch any live television. However after a conversation with a TV Licence inspection officer, where he explained that he did not watch live telly, Lee was shocked to find a letter saying he was in breach of licence requirements and was facing a hefty fine. A license is needed to watch or record live TV, including live programmes streamed fro sites like ITV Hub, All 4, YouTube, or Amazon Prime Video. You also need a license to watch BBC iPlayer. Mr Stuart was visited by a TV Licensing inspection officer in September last year. He said he saw the visit as an opportunity to explain his viewing habits in person. He said: 'I told him I didn't pay for a TV licence because I didn't think I needed one because I don't watch live TV." 'I don't even have an aerial installed in my TV, and I invited him to do his checks. He was a bit apprehensive, but he looked at everything and asked me what I used the TV for. "So I told him I just watch Netflix and Amazon Prime through the PlayStation, and he asked me if I used BBC iPlayer and I said, 'no'.' Mr Stuart said the officer confirmed he was not in breach of licensing requirements following the inspection, the Liverpool Echo reports. Mr Stuart, from Kirkby, described how the officer documented their conversation and read back the main points, including that no live TV was being watched and no BBC iPlayer account was used. He added: 'It was official, and I agreed with what he had said, so when I was presented with the big white signature box, I just signed it, and then he left. To be honest, I was really made up with myself, thinking I'd beaten the system and proved I didn't need a licence.' However, in January this year, Mr Stuart received a Single Justice Procedure Notice (SJPN), which covers those who are alleged to have watched TV without a licence. Lee explained: 'It said if I pleaded not guilty, the fine would be larger and I may have to pay court costs. So I'm not sure what's going on at this point. 'I looked through it all, and at the back was the inspector's statement. Straight away I clocked the question, 'May I come in to inspect the TV receiver?' and it said 'no' in the answer box, so that was wrong because I did. 'The next point was saying I admitted to watching the news last week. So I've refused him entry and then admitted on the step I watched live news last week? It didn't make any sense.' Mr Stuart chose to contest the notice and represented himself at Sefton Magistrates Court. He said: 'I can see why people just accept it, but I knew I was innocent and I wasn't paying for a TV licence that I didn't need so I fought it.' "I'll be totally honest, I was surprised by the outcome and I thought it might be good to share my experience.' The court dismissed the case due to insufficient evidence. A TV Licensing spokesperson said: 'This was reviewed by TV Licensing following the court hearing in April 2025 as is standard practice, and no failings were highlighted.' The spokesperson added that while both the officer and Mr Stuart gave credible in-person testimony, the magistrates could not find the case was proved beyond reasonable doubt. Mr Stuart, initially pleased with the outcome, later received a further letter from TV Licensing advising of the licence requirement. He has since submitted a formal complaint and a No Licence Needed (NLN) declaration. He added: 'The form asks at the end, 'What outcome do you want from this?' and I just put 'All I want is to be left alone, but an apology wouldn't go amiss'.' TV Licensing confirmed it has now received Mr Stuart's NLN declaration. A TV Licensing spokesperson said: 'If a property we believe should be licensed is unlicensed, letters are sent to that address advising of the requirement for a TV Licence if the occupant watches live TV or other licensable content. This stops for one year when the occupant declares they don't need a licence, when letters will resume to check if circumstances have changed.'
