# TV licence:how strict they are with issuing fines?



## Bonnielass

Ive recently moved into my new home and havent gotten round to buying a tv licence yet!Ive gotten 2 letters from An Post telling me to get one. Moneys fairly tight at the moment and it will be the summer before i can realistically afford to get it. Does anyone know how strict they are with issuing fines i.e would i have another month or 2 to save for one without incurring a fine?


----------



## Diziet

*Re: TV licence*

You can pay monthly by direct debit, see http://www.rte.ie/about/licence.html.

If you can't afford the license fee, you definitely can't afford the fine! So you should pay now (you are on their database already) or get rid of the telly. Most of the programs are very missable anyway


----------



## DavyJones

*Re: TV licence*

Pretty sure you can pay over 12 monthly installments. I think it's such a waste of money, I get Irish channels through SKY and have to pay them. If the world was a fair and just place, SKY should pass on some money to the poor at RTE!


----------



## NicolaM

*Re: TV licence*

_ 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.[broken link removed]
_
I think they can be very strict, as above.
If you have had two letters, I suspect the TV Licence Inspector Man may be on the way..
Don't risk this one!
Regards
Nicola


----------



## mocky-Dower

*Re: TV licence*

Looks like the licence is a lot cheaper than the Fine, take a look here
[broken link removed]  you could check out the Installments !!

Not too sure what happens if you tell them you dont have a set, can they search the house etc, I doupt it but you never know.


----------



## ajapale

Moved from Homes and Gardens to Phones, DVDs, TVs, Audio/Visual

Try searching for TV License, its a perennial favourite topic!


----------



## jackswift

That really ANNOY'S me too when you have to pay for something twice.


----------



## bacchus

What are you paying twice?


----------



## jackswift

bacchus said:


> What are you paying twice?


 Sky tv and tv licence. You pay for rte1, 2, tv3 and tg4 through sky and then pay for the same with the tv licence.


----------



## Gautama

jackswift said:


> Sky tv and tv licence. You pay for rte1, 2, tv3 and tg4 through sky and then pay for the same with the tv licence.


 
I don't think this is actually the case.
I remembering hearing a few years ago that if a provider, such as Sky, NTL, etc, provides any television signals, they are also obliged to provide access to the terrestrial channels.

Therefore, you are paying Sky for Sky One, Sky News, etc and Sky are also the *conduit* for RTE1 and RTE2, though you are not paying Sky for these.


----------



## mathepac

DavyJones said:


> ...I think it's such a waste of money, I get Irish channels through SKY and have to pay them. If the world was a fair and just place, SKY should pass on some money to the poor at RTE!





jackswift said:


> Sky tv and tv licence. You pay for rte1, 2, tv3 and tg4 through sky and then pay for the same with the tv licence.



You don't pay a TV (or radio) licence to get specific channels - you pay the government a licence fee to have receiving equipment on your premises - i.e. a TV set or a radio receiver (aka "wireless") - for those of us who possess such a document, please read it.

The government decided, on our behalf, to use licence fee revenue to partially fund  certain TV & radio channels, but paying a licence fee does not entitle you to receive specific, or indeed any, channels.


----------



## rmelly

if money's so tight sell your television and you won't need one.


----------



## jackswift

mathepac said:


> You don't pay a TV (or radio) licence to get specific channels - you pay the government a licence fee to have receiving equipment on your premises - i.e. a TV set or a radio receiver (aka "wireless") - for those of us who possess such a document, please read it.
> 
> The government decided, on our behalf, to use licence fee revenue to partially fund certain TV & radio channels, but paying a licence fee does not entitle you to receive specific, or indeed any, channels.


 A radio licence no such thing.


----------



## Topsido

Yes, you can pay by direct debit which works out at €13 each month.


----------



## Whiskey

It's against the guidelines and principles of this website to suggest or recommend to anyone to break the law in any way.

I'm not a moderator, and I'm not "Brendan" (the website owner), but this principle of honesty is very enshrined in this website.

If you have a TV, you must have a licence, otherwise you are breaking the law. End of story. The advice would have to be, either throw your TV out the window, or buy a licence.

People like Pat Kenny get paid well over half a million a year (could even be closer to a million).
If you don't pay your licence fee, who is going to pay Pat Kenny, and Gerry Ryan, and Tubridy and other well paid RTE employees ?


----------



## Satanta

Whiskey said:


> The advice would have to be, either throw your TV out the window, or buy a licence.


While I do agree that AAM will never facilitate people with anything bordering on the illegal etc., in this case even if people would/did consider the other options (e.g. turn off all the lights, watch the TV under a blanket so they can't see in the windows and don't answer the door to anyone) the recommendations would be the same.

The ability to pay monthly means the cost should be at a managable level (~€13 p/m) while the fine is a very significant figure. I couldn't see any scenario where the risk involved would justify not paying the licence fee.


----------



## truthseeker

slightly off topic but someone might know the answer.

recently mr truthseeker and i have noticed we are watching less and less tv and instead watching dvds and clips on youtube - the pc could be used to watch dvds if we choose.

we jokingly said last night we should ditch the telly and just watch the stuff we want to see via youtube and dvds.

are you still required to have a tv licence in this case as you are not receiving channels but watching recorded videos? just curious.


----------



## purpeller

jackswift said:


> A radio licence no such thing.



The television license was originally introduced as a radio license under British law in 1904 and it changed to a tv license in the 60s.  Radio licenses were done away with in the 70s but the €160 we pay today does fund radio programming on RTE as well as tv.


----------



## ClubMan

truthseeker said:


> slightly off topic but someone might know the answer.
> 
> recently mr truthseeker and i have noticed we are watching less and less tv and instead watching dvds and clips on youtube - the pc could be used to watch dvds if we choose.
> 
> we jokingly said last night we should ditch the telly and just watch the stuff we want to see via youtube and dvds.
> 
> are you still required to have a tv licence in this case as you are not receiving channels but watching recorded videos? just curious.


Yes. If you have a _TV _capable of receiving _TV _broadcasts then you need a license. If you had a _TV _"monitor" with no tuner which you only used to watch videos/_DVDs _(and the player had no tuner) then you would not need a license.


----------



## mathepac

jaybird said:


> Not sure on this, open to correction, but I was told that what matters is the receiving equipment rather than the TV itself, IYSWIM? So if you don't have a sat dish or a cable hookup or and aeriel of any kind and therefore no capability for watching broadcasts, then you don't need a TV license.
> 
> On a similar note, if I don't have a TV and watch streamed programmes on my laptop eg 4OD etc, do I need a TV license?
> 
> Jay





ClubMan said:


> Yes. If you have a _TV _capable of receiving _TV _broadcasts then you need a license. If you had a _TV _"monitor" with no tuner which you only used to watch videos/_DVDs _(and the player had no tuner) then you would not need a license.


To quote from the Broadcasting (Television) Receiving Licence (italics and underlining are mine) :
"The above-named person is hereby authorised subject to the Wireless
 Telegraphy Acts, 1926 to 1986, the Broadcasting Authority Acts, 1960 to 2001, and the Broadcasting Regulations, 2005 _to keep and have possession of apparatus for wireless telegraphy for receiving sound and visual images in colour and monochrome broadcast by a broadcasting station"

_So reception is the key; the debate perhaps is what _apparatus_ means in terms of the relevant acts; 
a mobile phone?
a wireless broadband router?
a satellite dish?
a terrestrial aerial?
an internet-capable laptop or desktop?

What do ye think?


----------



## truthseeker

is watching videos on youtube (for example) classed as watching broadcasts from a broadcasting station?

then again, if you have an internet capable pc with which you can watch youtube videos - presumably it would only be a matter of surfing to a site that IS showing streamed broadcasts (like say channel 4's website) - therefore your internet capable pc is indeed a receiving device and subject to tv license laws.


----------



## jhegarty

mathepac said:


> a terrestrial aerial?





And if that's the case can you be done for having a coat hanger, which can be used as a tv aerial


----------



## Satanta

truthseeker said:


> then again, if you have an internet capable pc with which you can watch youtube videos - presumably it would only be a matter of surfing to a site that IS showing streamed broadcasts (like say channel 4's website) - therefore your internet capable pc is indeed a receiving device and subject to tv license laws.


You can actually go one further and pick up TV tuners for your PC, [broken link removed], so the lines between TV and PC are getting blurred more and more.


----------



## truthseeker

Satanta said:


> You can actually go one further and pick up TV tuners for your PC, [broken link removed], so the lines between TV and PC are getting blurred more and more.


Yes thats very true - and likely to continue as technology moves forward - so pc's will likely come 'tv ready' in time.


----------



## ClubMan

jhegarty said:


> And if that's the case can you be done for having a coat hanger, which can be used as a tv aerial


The wording of the legislation is slightly archaic and clumsy but most reasonable people will know what the intent is - basically if you have any sort of _TV _tuning gear that can receive _TV _broadcasts (terrestrial, cable, satellite) then you need a license. Having a _PC _and viewing _YouTube _clips does not require a license if the _PC _does not also include a _TV _tuner. And so on. No need to think up wacky situations that match the letter but not the spirit of the law in my opinion folks. Obviously nobody is expecting people to have a _TV _license for their coat hanger or iron in their blood stream etc...


----------



## Aoileen

To go back to the OP, yes they are strict issuing fines.  If its the first time its €634 and double that if its a repeat offence.  

The fine is for not having the licence.  You will have to pay it and still have to get a TV Licence. 

Write to An Post TV Licence Section in the GPO requesting a 3 month extension to allow you to get the money to purchase the licence.  Never heard of a situation yet where they refused the period of grace requested......................


----------



## Bonnielass

Topsido said:


> Yes, you can pay by direct debit which works out at €13 each month.


Great...think thats my best bet thanks a mill


----------



## Luckycharm

When I first moved into my house - TV License inspector called around (had no letters before hand) it was a new build with everything else had not thought about it.  He was very reasonable got them to post me a Direct Debit and pay about €13 a month.


----------



## jhegarty

Aoileen said:


> To go back to the OP, yes they are strict issuing fines.  If its the first time its €634 and double that if its a repeat offence.





There is a difference between what the fine is , and how strict they are at enforcing it....

Someone I know who was caught was given 30 days to get a license , and if they did that was the end of it... 


What level of fines are actually issued in court ?


----------



## Frank

How about we try the same as Beverly just don't pay them and then do a deal in court to pay half the bill. 

Once sorted get back into the party.

Poor bev skint.


----------



## sam h

> Someone I know who was caught was given 30 days to get a license , and if they did that was the end of it...


 
I interviewed a postman who did TV inspector when they were backlogged & I was surprised when he said on first call the standard practice was to give a warning to  get a licence within a certain time (can't remember if it was 30 days) and after that they issued fines (automatically as they would have the address & could check).  I was really surprised as why wouldn't everyone wait for the knock & then go and get the licence.


----------



## FredBloggs

I moved house a couple of years back and my new house was in a bad state of repair and needed extensive work done on it so before I moved in it was a building site - no windows, doors etc, partition walls removed, site fenced off.
In that time I got about five letters from the tv licence crowd each one more threatening than the last.  After the first one I'd phoned and explained that there was no tv on the premises as there was building work going on.  They were nice on the phgone but the letters kept coming - culminating in one which said an inspector had called and had noted the hpouse was connected for tv - which it wasn't.  In fact at that stage the house wwasn't even connected for electricity.  The letter said if I didn't get a licence I'd be fined.  I ignored the letter (addressed to "The occupier") and never heard from them again.  I reckon they've a standard set of letters they send out before they visit a premises and that in most cases the letters do the trick


----------



## Jethro

Aoileen said:


> To go back to the OP, yes they are strict issuing fines. If its the first time its €634 and double that if its a repeat offence.
> 
> The fine is for not having the licence. You will have to pay it and still have to get a TV Licence.


 
An Post say they took over 10,000 prosecutions in 2005. Prosecution is a last resort after offenders receive two reminders and a visit by an inspector to issue a final warning. Apparently 167 people have been jailed since 2003 for non-payment of the licence fee. _(They must love their telly to face jail for it!!)_

Broadcasting Bill due next month will make some changes. People caught without a TV licence will have three weeks to buy a licence AND pay a €53 fine, otherwise they will face prosecution. _(Presumably this three week period is after the two written warnings and the friendly visit? I'm not clear on this.)_

Stories about this in today's press, as Minister announces online payment facility.

Also confirms that licences are not yet required for mobile phones or pcs capable of receiving tv signals, but the Bill makes that possible in the future if/when they represent a threat to revenue levels.


----------



## djsim

Just to add something here.

My polish friend (I am irish by the way) was caught without one a couple of weeks ago. He let on that he knew nothing about it and was told to get one ASAP. A week later he got a letter saying that if has not one got within the next 28 days, he would have top appear before a court and fined. He got on the week later so all is well.


----------



## steph1

This topic was on the Last Word this evening.  Changes are being brought in with regard to fines which are going to be increased substantially.


----------



## TheJackal

Jethro said:


> Prosecution is a last resort after offenders receive two reminders and a visit by an inspector to issue a final warning


 
So basically there's never any point getting a license until they catch you & give you warnings to pay.

I wonder if this tactic works every year? Ie: Don't pay in 2008 unless you get a letter from them (which may not happen for months, if at all). Then in 2009 don't pay again until contacted, etc.

Your license is valid for 12 months from date of purchase I assume, so not paying until you get a second letter in the post would save you a bit of cash.

If they fined you immediately more people would pay on time!


----------



## briancbyrne

jaybird said:


> Not sure on this, open to correction, but I was told that what matters is the receiving equipment rather than the TV itself, IYSWIM? So if you don't have a sat dish or a cable hookup or and aeriel of any kind and therefore no capability for watching broadcasts, then you don't need a TV license.
> 
> On a similar note, if I don't have a TV and watch streamed programmes on my laptop eg 4OD etc, do I need a TV license?
> 
> Jay


 

heard on the news this morning that your exempt from needing a licence if you go down this route


----------



## MandaC

the Jackal, no you cant save cash because once you have a tv licence, if it ends in March, then you dont renew till May, its automatically back dated to March, so you cant gain a couple of months grace.

I think once they have you on the database, then you are stuck.  Thats why in new Estates they are so quick to come around.


----------



## rmelly

As MandaC says, once you're in their system you're stuck. You could try applying subsequently with different details for a non-renewal, but the site says they reserve the right to treat as a renewal if they see fit which would back date.

Upc, Sky etc. are obliged to notify them when they connect up a new customer.


----------



## FredBloggs

briancbyrne said:


> heard on the news this morning that your exempt from needing a licence if you go down this route


 
story in Irish Times today (p6) confirms this


----------



## ClubMan

jaybird said:


> Not sure on this, open to correction, but I was told that what matters is the receiving equipment rather than the TV itself, IYSWIM? So if you don't have a sat dish or a cable hookup or and aeriel of any kind and therefore no capability for watching broadcasts, then you don't need a TV license.
> 
> On a similar note, if I don't have a TV and watch streamed programmes on my laptop eg 4OD etc, do I need a TV license?
> 
> Jay





FredBloggs said:


> story in Irish Times today (p6) confirms this


I don't believe this and would not take the _IT's _view as authoritative. _TVs_ have a built in tuner and in most cases even without any external antenna you will pick up the local terrestrial broadcasts (e.g. _RTE1/2, TV3, TG4 _- I think _Channel 6 _might not be available on terrestrial and only on cable etc.?). In that case you are capable of receiving broadcasts so need a license.


----------



## FredBloggs

ClubMan said:


> I don't believe this and would not take the _IT's _view as authoritative. _TVs_ have a built in tuner and in most cases even without any external antenna you will pick up the local terrestrial broadcasts (e.g. _RTE1/2, TV3, TG4 _- I think _Channel 6 _might not be available on terrestrial and only on cable etc.?). In that case you are capable of receiving broadcasts so need a license.


 

Jay said "_if I don't have a TV and watch streamed programmes on my laptop _"


IT's story says TV licence not required in these circumstances. 
What you're talking about Clubman is TV's - which afaik are not laptops


----------



## ClubMan

No - s/he said:


jaybird said:


> Not sure on this, open to correction, but I was told that what matters is the receiving equipment rather than the TV itself, IYSWIM? So if you don't have a sat dish or a cable hookup or and aeriel of any kind and therefore no capability for watching broadcasts, then you don't need a TV license.


Note the mention of _"TV"_. If you have a _TV _(containing a tuner) and don't have cable, antenna, dish etc. then you still need a license even if you only use the _TV _for watching _DVDs _or whatever.


----------



## FredBloggs

jaybird said:


> On a similar note, if I don't have a TV and watch streamed programmes on my laptop eg 4OD etc, do I need a TV license?
> 
> Jay


 

This is the bit I was referring to which I see is different from the bit you were referring to.  
The ITs story is about laptops and mobile phones on which you pick up programmes.
I would definitely think you'd have to have a tv licence if you had a tv


----------



## luap_42

Just checked the Department of Communications website and Citizens Advice website for the specific details.

You only need a television licence for equipment capable of RECEIVING WIRELESS telgraphic sound and vision. There is NO radio licence in Ireland. 

Wireless reception means received without wires. 

Your internet connection is not wireless to your house (yet!). As of now you do NOT need a licence for any telegraphic sound and vision via the IP connection route (internet connection). 

Your mobile phone signal is wireless, but they have decided not to try to make mobile phone users pay for a licence (there would be total uproar if they tried and they know it, completely unmanageable). 

Satellite and TV receivers are designed to receive wireless telegraphic sound and vision and subject to licence.

This means you need a licence for a: 

*Television Receiver*, which can be either internal or external from: a TV or video recorder or computer. 

*Satellite Receiver*, which can be external to a TV, or either internal or external to a computer.

This covers all TV sets, cable boxes, video recorders, satellite boxes (all of these have internal receivers), any computers with internal TV or satellite tuners/receivers.


----------



## Towger

With that logic I could have a monitor (TV without a tuner) and plug it into a NTL box (which can only receive signals from a coaxial cable. AKA a wire) and then I wont need a TV Licence and da Plank's salary will have to drop by €160. Sounds good to me.


----------



## RikuoAmero

Here is the setup in my house: there are three tvs, one in the living room connected to ntl digital, one in my sister's bedroom connected to a seperate ntl digital and my own. There is a cable running from my sister's room to my own that gives me analog channels (the basics e.g. RTE1 &2, Sky One, News, BBC 1 &2, TG4, TV3). However, for the past I dunno two years, I haven't used that cable. Its not even connected to my tv. I use my tv for watching dvds and blu-ray, and playing my video game consoles (I have PS3, 360 and Wii, just to make people jealous). Now, my mum pays the licence, but what legal position would I be in should I be required to pay the licence? What if I moved to my own place. I am thinking of removing the tuner from my tv, leaving only the connections for my consoles. Would that get me out of paying for the licence?


----------



## luap_42

Towger said:


> With that logic I could have a monitor (TV without a tuner) and plug it into a NTL box (which can only receive signals from a coaxial cable. AKA a wire) and then I wont need a TV Licence and da Plank's salary will have to drop by €160. Sounds good to me.


 
Nope. Cable boxes are designated as receivers, see my previous post.


----------



## luap_42

RikuoAmero said:


> Here is the setup in my house: there are three tvs, one in the living room connected to ntl digital, one in my sister's bedroom connected to a seperate ntl digital and my own. There is a cable running from my sister's room to my own that gives me analog channels (the basics e.g. RTE1 &2, Sky One, News, BBC 1 &2, TG4, TV3). However, for the past I dunno two years, I haven't used that cable. Its not even connected to my tv. I use my tv for watching dvds and blu-ray, and playing my video game consoles (I have PS3, 360 and Wii, just to make people jealous). Now, my mum pays the licence, but what legal position would I be in should I be required to pay the licence? What if I moved to my own place. I am thinking of removing the tuner from my tv, leaving only the connections for my consoles. Would that get me out of paying for the licence?


 
One licence per household regardless of how many licencable devices.

No device capable of receiving a TV signal, then no licence required.

BTW, an aerial is classed as capable of receiving a TV signal even if no devices present to user it.


----------



## gar32

OK I will be asked to renew my licence soon and was reading that the law on TV licence is STATUTE  which is different the LAW. Does any one know the difference? I had no TV Just PC and monitor. I then got a LCD TV for use as my monitor. Even with a powered ariel I could not get RTE or any other station due to building I live in. So I have to pay for a licence yet can not get the signal. Apart from removing turner what can I do?  Regards Gar32


----------



## UptheDeise

Yes you will have to pay for a license as you have a TV that is quite capable of receiving a signal IMO.


----------



## gar32

UptheDeise said:


> Yes you will have to pay for a license as you have a TV that is quite capable of receiving a signal IMO.


 

Thanks for the enlightenment. Anyone help with difference with statue and law ????


----------



## luap_42

gar32 said:


> Thanks for the enlightenment. Anyone help with difference with statue and law ????


 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute


----------



## gar32

Ok the reason I am asking is I have read about a man who did not pay he's TV lience but keep writing to them asking for a bill at 1st. Then saying that this law was passed by the govenement on behave of him jet he has never voted. Not even reistered to vote. He is a man of the land and does not give them the right to repersent him. Therefore this statute (A *statute* is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs a country,) should not be pushed on him.

I believe he wrote 4 letters in total explaining in great detail he's resoning not to believe in this law. He still has not got a TV lience and has a TV.

Any idea's on this story?


----------



## Latrade

gar32 said:


> Ok the reason I am asking is I have read about a man who did not pay he's TV lience but keep writing to them asking for a bill at 1st. Then saying that this law was passed by the govenement on behave of him jet he has never voted. Not even reistered to vote. He is a man of the land and does not give them the right to repersent him. Therefore this statute (A *statute* is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs a country,) should not be pushed on him.
> 
> I believe he wrote 4 letters in total explaining in great detail he's resoning not to believe in this law. He still has not got a TV lience and has a TV.
> 
> Any idea's on this story?


 
I would say he really needs to brush up on a few things. First, it doesn't matter if you vote or who you vote for you are obliged to comply with the law of the land. Hey, I didn't vote for the guys who brought in laws on drink driving, does that mean I can run around half cut? 

Second, TV licences are covered but the Broadcasting Act. Primary law, i.e. a statute is law.


----------



## gar32

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7728yUJnVYM


----------



## bullworth

What if I dont have a television yet I am paying for NTL broadband through my cable connection ?

Plus what if I have paid for NTL tv channels a year in advance, my television breaks down within the first month and I dont buy another one then my tv licence expires and I dont want to buy another ? This whole TV licence thing seems kind of sinister the way they chase you to pay it.


----------

