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 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 laws

  • 19-07-2024 2:49pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6


    Hello,

    We have one TV in the house with no aerial connected, and only use fir Netflix and Prime. No RTE ever used on the TV.

    Had a letter from TV License saying one of them had called at the rented house, but the letter was addressed to the last occupants.

    If the TV is not connected to any working aerial, do you still have to pay?

    And do you have to give a name if they call and ask?

    Thanks

    Tagged:


Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,523 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Anything that can receive a TV signal, so technically yes, but if it is a Monitor, possibly not. First of all, write on the envelope, "no longer at this address, return to sender" and send it back. Is there an aerial or satellite on the outside of the house?



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 18,809 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kimbot


    As cram has said, if there is a tuner device in any unit then the lisence has to be gotten. If you have a monitor with no tuning device on board then you dont have to get one.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6 Corkyboy


    Hello,

    There is an old satellite dish on the house that is genuinely no longer used.

    Thanks



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,251 ✭✭✭tphase


    Take it down. That's enough to require a licence, even if you have no TV.

    However, as you do have a TV, you are required to have a licence



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,366 ✭✭✭batistuta9


    throw the letters in the bin & don't give them a name



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,106 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Get a licence or get rid of the TV.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 488 ✭✭robinwing


    How many are not paying for a TV licence at present ? must be many, many thousands. Tubridy affair sicked the country.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,048 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    Has there been a court interpretation of the law and how the word "capable" is to be interpreted?

    “ television set ” means any electronic apparatus capable of receiving and exhibiting television broadcasting services broadcast for general reception (whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on the use of anything else in conjunction with it) and any software or assembly comprising such apparatus and other apparatus;
    (my emphasis)

    A TV is not capable of receiving terrestrial broadcasts without an aerial, be that an external, internal or even a wire hanger. So if there is no suitable input present is a licence really required?
    In the absence of a broadcast input signal the TV can only act as a monitor.

    Has this question been settled in court?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,623 ✭✭✭JVince


    "never watch rte" - but probably switched it on for the all Ireland last week, maybe put it on for some soccer, or news.

    I very rarely watch TV, but still get a licence.

    But my mum watches a lot of RTE and it gives her great company, so I'm happy to pay as I understand it needs everyone to pay to provide the service for those who watch it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,009 ✭✭✭Allinall




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,714 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    You answered the question in you own pistpost.

    whether or not its use for that purpose is dependent on the use of anything else in conjunction with it



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,048 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    Huh!?
    I question the interpretation of "capable" in this piece of legislation.

    Do you have an answer for that?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,048 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,714 ✭✭✭✭Jim_Hodge


    Capable, having the ability to. A TV has the ability to receive a signal, dependent on the use of an aerial or dish etc. As you quoted yourself. It's incapable without the aerial but the clause above covers that very clearly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,048 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    I am not so sure that the clause does cover it, which is why I asked about it, and whether there has been some court decision on that specifically.

    The point is, that in the absense of a vital part of the device for "receiving and exhibiting television broadcasting service" the device is no longer capable of fulfilling that function.

    What if it had no display screen? What if it had no tuner? (a tuner can be removed)

    What if the TV set itself is non-functioning, say due to a power supply or other electronic problem?

    Do such devices need a licence?

    I recall seeing a large TV of the older type use as a fish tank, the fish visible through the glass front - that would be a very extreme case 😄

    That is why I asked about the interpretation of "capable" in that specific legislation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 490 ✭✭muloc


    Anyone know the steps An Post take when you don't pay your renewal?

    Am here over 10 years and have always paid licence. Didn't pay in early July when it was due and have gotten one overdue email reminder so far.

    Do they call to the house?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,164 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    If you invited the inspector in and were able to convince them that it had no tuner or no capability of being tuned, then yes, it might work.

    Otherwise the court case would be over and done very quickly in favour of the TV licensing system.

    Buy a big monitor and get rid of the TV.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,048 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    My query has nothing at all to do with the opinion of a "inspector".

    Apparently no one here can answer the question.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,164 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    The answer is you must convince the inspector as the inspector's evidence is what determines the judge's decision over whether you require a license. Otherwise, it's an open/shut court case (you can read a litany of recent cases reported on where the judge admonishes the defendants, cases only get thrown out if someone has since bought or is entitled to a free license).

    All you have listed is the set of excuses that each defendant goes through before being ordered to pay as the legislation is quite clear and there is no ambiguity on the results when going to court (if there was ambiguity, it would allow an appeal to work).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,366 ✭✭✭batistuta9


    @Jim_Hodge answered it, that clause in the text would cover it. citizens information even says you need one if the TV is broken. you'd be better off asking this in the legal forum though.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,048 ✭✭✭✭Johnboy1951


    You are right of course. That is the place for such a query.

    Thanks.



Advertisement