Why we're here:
This blog is to highlight the unjust persecution of legitimate non-TV users at the hands of TV Licensing. These people do not require a licence and are entitled to live without the unnecessary stress and inconvenience caused by TV Licensing's correspondence and employees.

If you use equipment to receive live broadcast TV programmes, or to watch or download on-demand programmes via the BBC iPlayer, then the law requires you to have a licence and we encourage you to buy one.

If you've just arrived here from a search engine, then you might find our Quick Guide helpful.

Saturday, 27 October 2012

Standing Up to TV Licensing Harassment

Reading the news earlier today our eye was drawn to the story of Richard Herman, who successfully forced a telemarketing firm to pay for the time he wasted talking to them.

STOP PRESS: The strategy described in this article has now been used to successfully sue TV Licensing. Read more about that legal success in our future post, or continue to read the essential background information in this article.

Richard had been pestered by companies saying they could help him claim accident compensation or reclaim money spent on mis-sold payment protection insurance. 

Infuriated at having to endure lengthy conversations with ignorant people in far flung call centres, Richard told PPI Claimline that we would charge them a fee for taking any of their subsequent phone calls. He informed them that he would charge £10 per minute the next time they called.

Only a few days later they were back on the phone badgering him into reclaiming money he hadn't actually spent on a PPI policy that didn't even exist. The call lasted 19.5 minutes, so Richard duly sent them an invoice for £195, which they refused to pay. 

Not to be beaten Richard decided he would force PPI Claimline's hand by opening a case at the Small Claims Court. Wishing to avoid adverse publicity the company paid up before the case was heard, also reimbursing Richard's £25 court fee.

Richard's case sounded familiar to us. He was being pestered by an organisation he had no legal business with and who refused to stop harassing him however much he pleaded. That description is equally applicable to TV Licensing.

Following Richard's lead we suggest the option that legitimate non-TV viewers adopt the same tactics with TV Licensing's aggressive, menacing and legally unjustified correspondence. It is similar to the "setting out your stall" tactic, which we previously described in our free ebook. It could be achieved in the following steps:

1. Write to TV Licensing and lay down the law:
In your letter explain that you have no legal need for a TV licence, as you do not use equipment to watch or record TV programme services. As a result of your compliance with the law, TV Licensing has no evidence against your property and is completely unjustified in sending its intimidatory routine correspondence, which you are under no legal obligation to respond to. You consider that TV Licensing's continued unjustified correspondence constitutes harassment.

Should TV Licensing choose to continue its correspondence with you, even though it has no legal justification to do so, you will charge it a fee for the time and inconvenience of having to process its correspondence. TV Licensing is not obliged to continue its correspondence with you, but if it willingly chooses to do so it is accepting liability to pay the relevant processing fee. TV Licensing is free to send one letter acknowledging receipt of these terms, which will be accepted without charging a processing fee.

An example "TV Licensing Terms" letter is available to download from our Resources page.

2. Wait for TV Licensing to get back in touch then bill them:
As sure as eggs are eggs TV Licensing will be back in touch, at least to acknowledge your earlier letter. Experience tells us that TV Licensing, just like its BBC puppet masters, thinks it can ride roughshod over the law, so it will probably continue its harassment regardless. If that does happen send TV Licensing an invoice for your processing fee, exactly as you said you would.

An example "TV Licensing Invoice" letter is available to download from our Resources page.

3. Wait for TV Licensing's refusal to pay:
An organisation as arrogant as TV Licensing will not consider your invoice to have any standing, so it will undoubtedly refuse to pay. You can expect it to say something like "TV Licensing won't accept an invoice for time and costs. This is because you haven't rendered services on our instruction and no agreement exists between us". TV Licensing is wrong about that. By continuing its legally unjustified correspondence, despite having received your clear terms earlier, it has entered into a contract.

When TV Licensing does refuse to pay you should send it a letter warning that you will proceed to recover the processing fee owed via the Small Claims Court. This letter before action is essential. If you fail to send TV Licensing this final reminder then your case will fail on a technicality, which must be avoided at all costs.

An example "TV Licensing Letter Before Action" is available to download from our Resources page.

4. Submit the case to the Small Claims Court:
It's still unlikely, but TV Licensing may decide to pay up at this stage. If TV Licensing still refuses to pay, submit your claim to the Small Claims Court exactly as you said you would. It'll cost you a small fee (around £25) to do that, but you don't have anything to lose and you can gleefully imagine TV Licensing's annoyance at your continued effrontery. Even if you are unsuccessful the Small Claims Court will not award costs against you.

Submit a money claim to the Small Claims Court here.

Please be sure to check TV Licensing's address and enter it carefully on the claim form.

In all likelihood TV Licensing's arrogance will even extend to its handling of your claim, which they will probably ignore and you will win by default. Even if you don't win, you take some consolation from the fact that you will have inconvenienced and annoyed TV Licensing, just as it has done to you over the years. We consider £25 a small amount for wiping the smirk from TV Licensing's face.

Good luck and be sure to let us know how it goes!

Edit (29/10/14): We have made a few minor amendments to this post to reflect recent developments. This strategy has now been successfully used to sue TV Licensing. Please see this post for more information.

41 comments:

admin said...

Apologies John Galt but your comment was deleted by mistake when I tried to approve it.

Anyhow, I hope I remember what you said correctly:

John Galt said: "Do you really want to put your name on these... I thought the whole point of WOIRA was to remain nameless"

Ordinarily you're correct, that people submitting WOIRA to TVL should not volunteer their name.

The approach we suggest (just as an option) in the post above assumes previous contact with TV Licensing, so they would already have a name.

Some people will be quite happy to give TV Licensing their name, as it is necessary to open the legal avenues we mention.

Watchkeeper said...

It may be worth pointing out that the powers Parliament has given the BBC to enforce the licensing system are contained in Section 366, "Powers to enforce TV Licensing", of the Communications Act 2003. In brief, it is to collect evidence of licence evasion [presumably by the famed "frighteningly efficient" TV detectors], present that evidence to a magistrate, obtain a warrant and search the premises. No other powers are mandated. The system of intimidatory letters, visits by "officers" and so on is purely an invention of the BBC, and if not unlawful is certainly ultra vires. Therefore it is likely a strong case can be made that these letters and visits are unnecessary, so billing Capita for time and materials expended in dealing with them is entirely appropriate. Capita cannot claim it is engaged in law enforcement because a) the law lays down how the licensing system is to be enforced and Capita is doing something else, and b) Capita is on record as saying "we’ve moved FROM licence enforcement TO a more proactive, sales focused approach, including a successful sales operation" (emphasis mine).

John Galt said...

@Watchkeeper:
Capita cannot claim it is engaged in law enforcement because a) the law lays down how the licensing system is to be enforced and Capita is doing something else

I agree with what you are saying, but while the current regime is irritating, it is also easily defeated, by various strategies according to personal preference (no contact, WOIRA, solicitor appointment letter, etc.).

These strategies have developed over many years and forcing Creepy Uncle Beeb (no longer Auntie in this post-Jimmy Savile era) might remove these strategies for the legally, license free.

admin said...

Just so readers are aware, I am seeking a lawyer's opinion on the potential effectiveness of this technique.

I will let everyone know the outcome.

Anonymous said...

Hi,

Similar thoughts crossed my mind when hearing of this story. I do believe though Richard Herman asked for what he thought of as a fee that was enough to be of a penalty yet not high enough as to get thrown out of court. So I think the key is to ask for just the right amount to have any success. But what is the right value to assign this penalty? Well one idea was to charge something similar that banks charge for say a letter being issued for an unauthorised overdraft/going over drawn. What is that now.. about 50 quid? So 50 quid per letter to TVL to tell them to stop harassing you?

Anonymous said...

I recently wrote to TV Licensing notifying them of my intention to charge them administration charges.
My charges were to be £40 per letter and £75 per visit.
I think they have actually taken a little more notice of my letter now than they have done in the past.
The reply reads as follows-

"6 November 2012
Thank you for letter of 31 October, which has been recorded under your complaint
reference Please use this number if you wish to contact us again.
I'm sorry you're unhappy you've received a letter from us.
I've looked into this for you and I've updated our records. You won't receive any more letters from us for almost two years, apart from one further letter confirming this.
TV Licensing don't permanently stop writing to any address as circumstances change over time, and the occupier may change. We'll get in touch after this time to confirm if you still live at the address and that your circumstances haven't changed.
We've a responsibility to make sure that everyone in the UK who needs a TV Licence has one and we visit some of these addresses to check that one isn't required. It's unfortunately necessary for TV Licensing to visit homes to confirm there's no television being used as, when we made contact on these visits, nearly a fifth of people were found to require a licence (based on 2010/11 figures). If we visit your address and confirm that you don't need a licence we can stop contact for another two years from the date of the visit.

TV Licensing won't accept an invoice for time and costs. This is because you haven't rendered services on our instruction and no agreement exists between us. To form a contract there must be an acceptance of terms and we can't accept these. Although we're grateful for any information we're given, customers are under no legal obligation to reply.
There's a chance that another enquiry letter has been prepared for posting. If this arrives, please ignore it.
Thank you for the time you've taken in helping us update our records. Yours sincerely
Jason Seddon Customer Relations "

Tv licensing seem to be under the impression that I am going to issue an invoice for services rendered.

I think I need to clarify to them that I am not offering a service that requires Tv licensing to enter a contract. I am in fact dictating my terms and condition if they wish me to continue opening, reading and storing their letters.
If they continue to send me letters, they are in fact accepting my terms and conditions and subsequently will receive and invoice for administrative fees.

If anyone can offer some good lines to say I would be very grateful.

I find it interesting that they comment that no contract of services has been agreed upon on their part, yet for 9 years, approximately every 45 days they have continued to sent me an invoice for services I have never used or entered an agreement with.

Included in all these letters, 41 copies which I have kept as proof of harassment, are all the usual threats of court action, threats of visits and statement taking and even 2 letters advising me to keep them as some kind of evidence ??? to show to the courts.

admin said...

They won't accept an invoice from you, yet they expect people to pay for a licence who aren't watching TV.

One rule for them, another for everyone else.

But it looks like the BBC is entering a level playing field now.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for setting up this site to fight back against the hooligans at TV Licensing.

I own a number of properties on a small farm in Wales, none of which require a TV Licence. I have been bombarded with junk from the BBC addressed to each of them. I have also received a visit from "enforcement officers". I was not here at the time but according to people on the farm they were looking into windows. I find it intolerable that an organisation that is in effect a marketing division of the BBC can get away with such behaviour.

The final straw has come with a letter advising of court action against me. Fortunately, my solicitors say it is yet another bogus attempt to force me to buy a license when I don't need one.

In desperation I am about to write to TV Licensing claiming harassment and attempting to stop them with your suggestion of charging a fee for their letters.

Any advice gratefully received.

BanTheBBC said...

Regarding the compensation for harassment, the BBC will doubtless claim one of the exemptions under subsection 3 of Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

see:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/section/1

Anonymous said...

Hi, Thanks for useful blog, I haven't use a TV for live viewing for years, and since moving have had the notice sent 3 times, going from normal, bold and now red ink.

I was about to reply to them with a letter stating that i do not use TV and that the aggressive approach amounts to harassment, and the threats of court appearances are IMO collusion with a privately ran cartel on "Justice management" in the UK.

BUT, scanning the reverse of the notices, I found a link in bold "http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/noTV" which when looked up, provides the user with a mostly anonymous method of submitting your address as being exempt for whatever reason.

They ask for your name and Tel no, which are optional, but all you have to provide is an email and the address of the residence. There are about 5 reasons you can respond to ranging from I have no TV to, I only watch catch up services, etc.

I just submitted the form, and planning to wait and see how and if they respond. Fingers crossed this stops the annoying letters and threats.

I will still be writing to them and complaining about the harassment, and also my MP and trading standards about their appalling conduct.

Since the TV license and their Enforcement groups are such bogus and questionable "authorities" I shall be hesitant and weary of even this minimal contact and inclusion to their procedures.

Anonymous said...

hi all - I did not renew my license several months ago as I have stopped watching tv - we had a visit from a goon who did not identify until he had confirmed I lived there by another person living in our house - when they realised they had been tricked they closed the door abruptly and no conversation about tv took place - a week or two later they issue me with a licence thanking me for agreeing to buy one - I ignored it now they are sending debt collectors - this seems to be criminal mis selling - I have written saying I do not want or need a licence and barring accsess for them or their debt collectors - I also said I wanted an explanation and will consider reporting to trading standards and office of fair trading - anyone had this tactic on them? advice welcome please

Special Correspondent said...

My wife and I rarely watched TV at our flat and returned the licence when our perfectly sound analogue set was rendered useless by the digital switchover. There was also a defunct analogue machine at my late mother's house (she died three and a half years ago), and it seems TVL just cannot believe that (a) she is dead and (b) there is no TV. Despite numerous letters of complaint to the harassment officers of TVL, the letters keep coming.

Yes, you can just bin these letters, but it is a matter of principle that you should not be charged for a service you don't need, that you are innocent until proven guilty and that the vulnerable are protected from abuse, threats and harassment. That is why I believe it is our duty to fight back against this officially sanctioned extortion racket.

After the last batch of abusive mail, I withdrew TVL's implied right of access, which they acknowledged - they even sent a cheque for £25 by way of apology. Now the harassment has started again. This time I shall bill them at my usual rate (a modest £25/hour) - I may not get the money but it reinforces the point that time has a value and time spent on dealing with TVL has an opportunity cost. I shall certainly make a Freedom of Information request, as this is a tactic that works quite well with recalcitrant organisations (including a former employer!)

Incidentally, I always send mail of this kind by Recorded Delivery (in extreme cases, by Special Delivery). I mention this in the letter itself and warn the recipient not to claim they have not received the letter. I give a firm date (usually three calendar weeks) by which they must reply before I escalate the complaint.

However, I do feel the only way we will be able to stop this aggression and harassment for good is to bring a test case against TVL in the courts - and I suspect it's the kind of case that might well go all the way to the European court. It will be hugely expensive, so will need a collective approach and some kind of appeal to fund. I suspect it would be the kind of case a lawyer would love to take on, not just for the money but also for the challenge.

It could also be argued that TVL's letters are libellous, as they strongly imply criminality on the part of the recipient. This might be another approach worth considering. There may even be a human rights angle.

So, rather than just complaining, we probably need to unite and organise.

admin said...

Thanks for your comment Special Correspondent.

Pleased to have you on board. If you haven't already done so, please download and share our free ebook to help spread the word.

The BBC do not like how well our publicity machine works, so we must promote our message at every turn.

James Barker-Grimshaw said...

I am currently sending TVL the final letter in demand for payment, since I sent the previous invoice letter I have received another aggressive letter from them, bringing the amount they owe from £40 to £60 shall I include this in the final demand (14 days) letter or should I only be asking for the original amount of £40.


Many Thanks

James Barker-Grimshaw

admin said...

I would include it in the final demand.

If they ignore your requests please do be sure to go to make a claim via the court. They'll probably not bother responding, so you might win in default.

You're the first person who has actually contacted us to say you are trying this strategy, so we'll be very interested to see how it goes.

Please keep us updated.

Bernadette said...

Hello
I have been receiving countless letters from TV Licence people despite not having a television and having told an officer of their who called to my flat that I don't have a television. They cannot conceive that somebody doesn't have a television.

The final straw for me was a letter threatening court action which came today. i rang them but there is no answer as to why they continue to send out automated letters to people who do not have a TV as well as people who do.

i do have a laptop and I have checked online and watch You Tube sometimes but as far as I can discover I don't need a TV Licence for that.

i consider this letter with its threat of court and their refusal to hear me- beyond belief and I wonder what action I can take to end what i do consider harassment.




admin said...

Thanks for your comment Bernadette.

Sadly your case is very typical. TV Licensing do continue to threaten those people who have previously told them they have no TV. You are correct that you do not need a TV licence just to own a laptop, but you would if you watched any TV programmes online.

The letters are an annoyance, but try to remember that they are all hot air and no legal substance. You can safely ignore them every time they arrive. People who do not need a TV licence, like you, are under no legal obligation at all to communicate or co-operate with TV Licensing.

TV Licensing Watch said...

Bernadette, any sensible person would agree with you, these monthly threat letters from Capita BBC TV Licensing are irritating beyond belief.

However, when writing of Capita BBC TV Licensing and the BBC we are not writing about sensible people.

If you can, Bernadette, take comfort in the fact that you were but one of about 2 million people who receive these stupid threat letters each and every month.

It's maddening but zero contact is the best way to deal with them. Contacting them just incites them more because they realise the address is "live".

Anonymous said...

Hello, I have received a court summon stating that I have watched TV without licence. When the agent came in our TV was not plugged in and also there was no aerial plugged in. But in the statement he has mentioned that the TV was On standby which is not true, he has also said that the aerial and power were plugged in. Where they have asked programmes seen/heard, he has written Bargain hunt. Which till today we don´t know what kind of programme it is. My question is when he says that the TV was on standby, how did he see or hear the Bargain hunt programme going on? My daughter went inside the kitchen and brought the broken device which he said is an aerial. He then made us to switch on the TV and plug in the aerial and then he tested it with the remote. We are new into this country and we didn't know what was going on and I made a biggest mistake by signing the document without reading it. All I thought was that he entered details for my direct debit for the TV licence which I bought the same day and at that very moment. He has mentioned that he entered my house at 12.51 and left at 12.58.

James Barker-Grimshaw said...

Just submitted a claim to TVL via the MCOL website for £100 (5 letters) they have been given 14 days to respond...

James Barker-Grimshaw

admin said...

Thanks for the update James. We'd be very interested to hear if you have any success.

chris said...

"Just so readers are aware, I am seeking a lawyer's opinion on the potential effectiveness of this technique. I will let everyone know the outcome."

Did anything come of this?

admin said...

No, I don't think I heard back from them.

James Barker-Grimshaw said...

currently at this stage:

Your claim was issued on 03/10/2013
TV Licensing issued an acknowledgment of service on 09/10/2013
TV Licensing issued a defence on 28/10/2013

Their defence was very long winded but basicly, they dont agree that they have entered into a contract with me and dont believe that I have had any letters from them recently (I think this is because they have messed parts of the address up but the house name is correct and the post lady knows where it is) They have me on file twice under 2 slightly different addresses and they have stopped sending to one and not the other!

My question is at this stage should I send them photocopys of their letters (as they have requested) or should I produce them in court?

Thanks

James Barker-Grimshaw

admin said...

Thanks for the update James. You're in unchartered territory as far as we're concerned - no-one has ever reported back to us about taking the actions you have.

As TV Licensing have sent you the letters, I don't see why you should bother sending them copies. Presumably they have copies already. That said, you don't want to give the court the impression that you are being uncooperative towards TV Licensing.

Don't get me wrong - I realise TV Licensing are about as uncooperative as it gets, but you need to maintain the advantage.

It's your call. In your shoes I don't think I'd send them copies of letters they must already have.

admin said...

Actually James, having re-read our template letters on this page, I don't think TV Licensing can wriggle out of this one.

I think the first letter above told TV Licensing very clearly that if they persisted in sending letters, even though they had no reason to do so, then they'd be effectively harassing you and liable to pay a fee. They have chosen to accept those terms by continuing to write.

I'm sure they'll have some smart-arse lawyer watching this very closely, but please do try to push it as hard as you can.

Please keep us in the loop and the best of luck. We're all behind you on this one.

Conrad King said...

Hi, I hope someone here can help me. I care for my mother who has severe mental health problems. I just had her frightened to death by a letter sent to her. She is terrified and currently not eating. She doesn't watch TV. We have 5 TV sets that are used for DVDs, video games or internet TV. We stopped the licence due to not using it for over a year.

I told her it was a mistake from BBC. I phoned them and repeated we don't watch any TV stations.

I'm very scared that this will continue. I'm scared they will come to this house. If they do they could cause I extreme reaction that could have life long effects. My mother is suicidal. It doesn't take much to push her mental health over the edge. Harassment like I see here would be too much for her to handle.

Do we pay out of fear? Is this how it works now?

admin said...

Thanks for your message Conrad. I am sorry to hear that you are having such a hard time from TV Licensing. If it's any consolation they intimidate a lot of vulnerable people that do not need a TV licence, just like your mother. I don't think the BBC is bothered at all how it gets people to pay the fee. They really are morally corrupt in every sense.

First of all, be assured that if no-one is watching TV programme services (programmes on any TV channel) in your mother's property, she does not legally need a TV licence. Getting TV Licensing to believe that is exceptionally difficult.

We usually recommend avoiding all contact with TV Licensing, as they tend to ignore anyone who claims not to need a TV licence anyway. In your case it may be best to contact TV Licensing, explain the situation clearly and ask them to stop sending letters. There is a small chance they might be sympathetic to your cause.

Your mother does not have to let TV Licensing into her property. She does not need to prove her legal TV-free existence to them.

Please download or free ebook, which contains a lot more information about TV licence law and TV Licensing's powers (not many).

The very best of luck to you.

Anonymous said...

I stopped my DD for tv, and the emailed me, saying you do not need a licence if you are not watching live tv....but ring this number so we can arrange a visit, just to make sure./..I wont be doing that..

frank kilmore said...

If you have a vehicle you dont use, and you dont want to tax it, you fill in a SORN notice for the DVLA...statutory off road notification...they do not come to see if its true, your word is enough, likewise it should be the case for the TV license..

Conrad King said...

Hi, thanks for your reply. I've not had any contact with them yet.

I'll take a look at the eBook. If anything happens I'll let you know I may need advice.

Thanks again (really)

cyclekarl said...

These Nazis just won't leave me alone.I haven't had a television for 6 years but they can't believe anyone can go without.They tried to force their way into my property but I told them they need a court order then swore at them,but they keep sending me pestering letters.I have a large monitor that I use with a mac mini and 3 games consoles,I watch DVD's and play games and that's it.

Anonymous said...

I wrote letters to TVL at Bristol notifying (1) my wife's death (I enclosed a copy of the death certificate) and at the same time (2) my own change of address.
At renewal, TVL sent an email to my late wife (this was five months after her death).
I recently received a most offensive threatening letter from TVL Darlington. Their agent has visited my old address, leaving a similarly offensive threatening notice. I have a current fully paid-up licence!
No reply yet to my two letters to TVL Darlington.
Does anyone know the relationship between TVL Bristol and TVL Darlington?

admin said...

As we understand it, TV Licensing Bristol is now mainly administrative; Darwen deal with payments and enforcement; Darlington deal with "customer" service.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the information. Obviously the whole set- up needs re-organising. I notified my wife's death and all relevant information to Bristol. Having received threatening letters from Darlington, I wrote two letters to Darlington last week. Today I received a letter with a lukewarm apology from Bristol. How on earth are members of the public expected to deal with such an uncoordinated organisation. I was told that a further letter might already be in the pipeline "which I am unable to stop" - the clearest indication of a computer programme out of control.



Anonymous said...

The saga continues. Today it's an email from Customer Services at Darlington. When you set out the correspondence in a chronology, it's like a game of ping-pong, or the Mad Hatter's Tea Party. Until a few weeks ago I did not even know that TV Licensing was an arm of the BBC. They have not attempted to deal with my correspondence and concerns seriously. No offer of any kind to make amends or for time and postage which I should never have needed to incur.

Anonymous said...

I stopped my DD in march, I ignored all letters....In June I had a visit from a "tv license" rep, and said I dont want to talk to you (mate)..he went away..I did not go out for a while...I then sent a generic denial of access letter...I opened the reply and it said, they could get a search warrant and if found to need a license I would have to pay for the search warrant costs as well..I ignored this and in July had a letter saying they would contact me in two years to see if things had changed...Conclusion-do not enter into conversation with the caller, close the door..

Anonymous said...

PS I also removed my digital aerial, and the cable to the sat dish was coiled up next to it...

admin said...

There are no real costs associated with Crapita applying for a search warrant (exceptionally rare as that is). The have to spend all of 5 minutes preparing the Deposition, which may/may not bear any similarity to the actual circumstances, and the Court Presenter lays the information at the same time as normal TV Licensing cases are dealt with.

Anonymous said...

James Barker-Grimshaw,
How is your claim against the TVL getting along?
Do let us know because if you are successful we might be able to bankrupt the organisation.
Good luck.

Anonymous said...

A friend who was long term unemployed left Cornwall to get training and a job. I keep an eye on his little 1920s prefab bungalow and I forward genuine mail (not junk mail) In the last year there has been a lot of nonsense from the TV Licence morons but I have always written "NO TV AT THIS ADDRESS, RETURN TO SENDER" on the unopened envelope then posted it back without a stamp. No one is living at the bungalow now and because the man was paranoid about bills and the possibility of being accused of stealing electricity, he had the electricity disconnected.

The licencing Gestapo have now threatened "The Legal Occupier" with court action but the thing is that the property hasn't been occupied for a least two years! (sometimes he comes back to paint it but it doesn't need painting every year!) Basically the building is virtually a storage shed but Council Tax still has to be paid because the building isn't empty.

I'm tired of all these demands and would like them stopped in a similar way to how SORN demands have been stopped.

These licence people are leeches and one classic case was when they sent threats to a hut at a cemetery. Allegedly the hut was very small and was merely used to store grave-digging tools!