A man who says he is homeless has been convicted of not paying for a TV Licence while volunteering as a live-in carer for a partially-sighted disabled woman.
The 48-year-old man says he offered to put his name forward to deal with official business while staying with his sick friend at her home in Barking, east London.
When a TV Licensing inspector came to the property in February, he disclosed that the home owner is disabled, partially-sighted, and bedbound.
In a letter to the court after facing prosecution, he revealed his own financial struggles, his efforts to care for his friend, and offered a suggestion that she could have been entitled to a free or discounted licence.
“I am the carer for the person who lives at the address”, he wrote.
“At the time she was in hospital because she is disabled with a rare autoimmune disease and has been for a while.
“She is housebound, partially sighted, and sleeps four days out of the week.”
He said she struggles to get up to answer the door or telephone on time, “so I put the TV licence in my name”.
“I am actually homeless and got no fixed address, so getting a fine for TV Licence seems strange”, he added.
“I was in the process of contacting TV Licence about a discount for her or not to pay anywhere because her disability are so bad, but time goes quick, I didn’t realise.
“She always had a licence, I made a payment then got muddled up with things, trying to get licence lowered.
“I am a volunteer carer and I’ve just started to get an enhancement to help with my low earnings.”
The man was prosecuted by TV Licensing in the Single Justice Procedure, in a hearing earlier this month which took place in private.
A magistrate decided to give the man a six-month conditional discharge, together with an order to pay £60 costs and a £26 victim surcharge. He also now has a criminal conviction.
The government says it is considering reforming the Single Justice Procedure after a string of scandals. It has been pondering changes since a consultation ended in early May.
The BBC responded to that consultation by objecting to the idea that prosecutors – like TV Licensing – should read mitigation letters before a case goes to court.
Other bodies have backed the idea, which would enable prosecutors to determine if a case remains in the public interest in light of information put forward in mitigation.
In this man’s case, TV Licensing did not see the mitigation he put forward to the court.
In the agency’s record of the doorstep interview, the man was asked how long he had lived at the address and he is recorded as replying “five years”.
The record shows he did not know details of the TV Licence expiry, and he told the agent upfront that he is the “carer” for his friend, who is “bed bound”, had “nine disabilities”, and “is partially sighted”.
The Single Justice Procedure continues to operate in courts across England and Wales each week without reforms, dealing with around 800,000 low-level criminal cases each year.
A TV Licensing spokesperson said: “TV Licensing’s primary aim is to support customers to help them get licensed.
“Prosecution is always a last resort, and we have a duty to enforce the law when there is evidence that someone has watched television without a licence. All prosecutions brought by TV Licensing are subject to evidential and public interest tests.”
