The TV Licence rules are more complicated than you might expect – don’t get caught out.
People should ensure they are clued up on the regulations(Image: Alamy Stock Photo)
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.
Lee Stuart from Kirkby was served a notice in the post
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.
Join the Daily Record’s WhatsApp community here and get the latest news sent straight to your messages.