Tv License Mistake

C

crabie

Guest
I recently received a court summons in relation to getting caught without a tv license at the beginning of last October, with the court date this week.

This summons contained three pages, form 2 (summons to defendant to answer complaint), form 88 (Notice by complainant of intention to tender written statement at summary trial) and a copy of the interview with the TV licenser.

However the copy of the interview is not mine, but for someone with the same surname and a similar forename. Is it possible this summons is a mistake as I have paid my TV license a couple of days after the licenser called round?

I have also heard that they can only prosecute within 6 months of being caught, if this is the case would the wrong copy of the interview hold the process up a few weeks to take the time over 6 months?

Would really appreciate some help, tried the Citizens advice bereau who weren't much help ( in the end they suggested I googled it). Not sure if im just clutching at straws here
 
jhegarty said:
Sounds like a mix-up to me.

Did you try contacting them ?
Click to expand...

I agree. I was away 2 years ago when mine was due. An Inspector had called 3 times so I paid it when I returned and heard nothing more. By the time I paid it it was a good month overdue.
 
No haven't contacted them yet, the first two pages are definitely for me, with my name and address on them so its just the evidence page thats wrong.

So probably not a mix up with the admin which would probably just hold things up but still end up with me getting the fine. I wasn't so sure though, thats why I wanted some advice.

Any thoughts on the six months to prosecute? because if this was correct and the mix up held things up for another two weeks they could no longer prosecute. The citizens advice bureau didn't know anything about this,
 
However the copy of the interview is not mine, but for someone with the same surname and a similar forename. Is it possible this summons is a mistake as I have paid my TV license a couple of days after the licenser called round?
Click to expand...

Am I correct in saying that the TV License Inspector called to your house and spoke to you and then bought a TV license a couple of days AFTER they called to your house?

And the name on the summons part of the documentation (but not the other documents) is a surname that is very similar to yours, but maybe spelled slightly different e.g. Kelly instead of Kelley? OR there is an obvious typo in it?

If the above is true, it is quite obvious that the summons is for you.

Beware that a lot of Judges take a very poor view of people trying to get off on "technicalities" such as mis spelling of a name or address when it is obviously for them. In your particular case, it would be vitually impossible for you to argue it isnt for you since the summons is to your address and the name is close to yours and you did in fact recieve a visit from the inspectors and were caught without a license and the evidence attached to the summons is definately you.

Best advice is to turn up in court, apologise for not having a license, show you currently have one and take whatever slap on the wrists they give you.
 
I always thought that if the inspector calls to you, you were always given a period of grace to buy the TV licence.

I remember moving house some years back, and the TV licence inspector must have called during the day when I was out. He/she left a little postcard type thing at the door saying that they had called, that they could see a TV through the front living room window and that their records showed there was no TV licence purchased for this address. The note said I should purchase a licence immediately as they had kept a note of my address - their system then checks up all addressed they've called to and if there is still no TV licence registered for that address, then a summons will issue. I can't remember how many days it gave me to buy the TV licence, but I bought one within one or two days and I never heard anything more.

If I were you I would ring the TV Licence Section and explain that the Inspector called on such and such a date, you then went and bought the TV licence several days later - their records should show that you did this reasonably soon after the visit. I would imagine the summons shouldn't have issued - it's a waste of the inspectors time to have to go to court for TV licence summonses. The whole purpose of them calling is to ensure that householders go out soon after and buy the licence.
 
Once a summons has issued, it cannot be withdrawn by the TV license section - the matter is in the hands of the Judge. Whether a mistake has or hasnt been made, if you are summonsed to court, you must attend. If a mistake has been made, both parties still need to attend court on the specified date to say this to the Judge.
 
A summons can be withdrawn up to 7 days before the court. Once the original summons and endorsement of service is returned the matter cannot be removed from the list. Before this period, the summons can be withdrawn at any time without the courts knowledge.

I am involved in the issuing of summonses and it is very common for matters to be withdrawn before the court date. So long as the original summons is in the hands of the prosecutor the matter can be dropped at anytime.

The procedure for issuing a summons by a state body, a council etc is as follows:

1. The summons is prepared by the prosecutor (in this case by An Post).
2. The summons is sent to the District Court office.
3. The District Court clerk then signs the summons, inserts a court date and stamps the summons.
4. The summons is then returned to the prosecutor for service on the offender.
5. The prosecutor then serves a copy the summons by registered post.
6. Approximately 1 week before the court, the prosecutor completes the endorsement of service in the presence of a peace commissioner. This is a declaration that the summons has been served correctly.
7. The prosecutor then returns the summons to the District Court clerk who then puts the case on the court list.

The prosecutor is free to drop the matter at any stage before step 7.
 
Sorry to partially hijack this thread but some comments above have made me think about whether the address, the owner of the TV or the TV itself is licenced. In other words does the TV licence relate to a specific address only?

I recently moved into temporary rented accommodation for a few months (and took my licenced TV and my TV licence with me) while my house (address on the licence) is renovated. My house will be uninhabited for the period of the refit.

A couple of weeks after moving into the rented property a letter arrived in the post from the TV records office addressed to 'Occupant' stating that the address I'm staying at does not have a TV licence registered there. Further down the letter it states that it is an offence to be 'detected in possession of an unlicenced television set' (interesting that the offence is detected in possession and not possession per se). The letter also states that it is the occupant who has possession and use of a TV set who is responsible for ensuring that it is licenced.
I feel I'm covered but the wording of the letter makes me wonder. Comments gratefully received.
 
TV licenses are property specific, though a license can be transferred from one building to another if you move home i.e. a license with your unihabited home address on it will not suffice for the rented accommodation, but can be transferred to the rented accommodation if you contact An Post.
 

Thanks CSIRL, makes sense I suppose.
It does seem a bit bureaucratic for a temporary situation, though. Transfer the licence now to the new address and then transfer back again in a couple of months.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register