summons

Catsmokinpot

I got caught with a quarter of hash on new years eve, i gave the guard my address and my name without hesitation, i knew what i was doing and i knew the consequences of my actions. I know some of you will say stupid stoner etc. but i have a job, i went to college and i have been working since i left secondary school, I'm not a bum nor will i ever be one.

I will not run from the law, i will go straight up to them if i have to, i have never done anything legally wrong in my life (apart from this obviously) and never intend to.

I got a delivery notice saying that an post tried to deliver a letter to a name that sounds like mine but isn't, its been around six months since i was caught so I'm pretty sure its probably the summons. I'm not asking if i can i break the law, but if they have the wrong name on the summons, is there any loop-hole whereby i can get away with it, or do they just correct the summons?

feylya

An Post doesn't deliver summons. It's delivered by a Garda.

Catsmokinpot

feylya wrote:

An Post doesn't deliver summons. It's delivered by a Garda.

Is it? Are you sure? If thats true it puts my mind at ease for the moment.

feylya

I'm very very sure. A mate was summonsed last week and got a little business card kinda thing for the Gardai when they couldn't reach him.

Catsmokinpot

feylya wrote:

I'm very very sure. A mate was summonsed last week and got a little business card kinda thing for the Gardai when they couldn't reach him.

ah feylya you just made my day!

i can relax for the moment, if it does come the worst thing about this is when my parents find out they will be heartbroken

Hagar

Catsmokinpot wrote:

i have never done anything legally wrong in my life (apart from this obviously) and never intend to.

*cough* Must change username *cough*

KdjaCL

Hagar wrote:

*cough* Must change username *cough*

caughtsmokingpot ?





kdjac

DublinWriter

Catsmokinpot wrote:

I will not run from the law, i will go straight up to them if i have to, i have never done anything legally wrong in my life (apart from this obviously) and never intend to.

It's a possibility that you were given a caution at the time and the guard left it at that. Do you recall what was said to you?

But really do be careful in future. Having a conviction for possesion of the smallest amount will totally affect your job prospects in the future. If you apply for a position in any public/semi-state organisation then you'll get vetted by the Garda Central Records Office down in Thurles and any convictions will be flagged and your application will be rejected.

In the future more and more private organisations will start using the same vetting services.

Catsmokinpot

Hagar wrote:

*cough* Must change username *cough*

i've had this name pretty much since i started on the internets i still have it for nostalgia purposes

KdjaCL wrote:

caughtsmokingpot ?

DublinWriter wrote:

It's a possibility that you were given a caution at the time and the guard left it at that. Do you recall what was said to you?

But really do be careful in future. Having a conviction for possesion of the smallest amount will totally affect your job prospects in the future. If you apply for a position in any public/semi-state organisation then you'll get vetted by the Garda Central Records Office down in Thurles and any convictions will be flagged and your application will be rejected.

In the future more and more private organisations will start using the same vetting services.

he made me sign a notepad with something he had taken down on it, i was drunk at the time (it being new years eve and all) so i didn't argue with him at all, i just signed it.

Our man in Havana

Summones for some minor offences are delivered by registered post, mostly motoring offences but you never know if this now covers drugs offences.

drdre

KdjaCL wrote:

caughtsmokingpot ?





kdjac

Thats a good one:)

TheNog

feylya wrote:

An Post doesn't deliver summons. It's delivered by a Garda.

Partly true.

Summons are delivered by the gardai in most cases but can also sent be registered post too.

FunkyChicken

feylya wrote:

An Post doesn't deliver summons. It's delivered by a Garda.

No

The garda will deliver it if it's in their district but will use registered post for somewhere else. I got mine hand delivered but my two friends from nearby towns got theres by registered post.

Catsmokinpot

FunkyChicken wrote:

No

The garda will deliver it if it's in their district but will use registered post for somewhere else. I got mine hand delivered but my two friends from nearby towns got theres by registered post.

ok if thats the case then my original question stands. if they have the wrong name on the summons can i just say no-one by this name lives here and get it sent back, because technically no-one by that name does live here.

its not as if i lied to the guards i gave them my full name and adress, and i can't sign for something thats not in my name

Hobart

Catsmokinpot wrote:

ok if thats the case then my original question stands. if they have the wrong name on the summons can i just say no-one by this name lives here and get it sent back, because technically no-one by that name does live here.

its not as if i lied to the guards i gave them my full name and adress, and i can't sign for something thats not in my name

You can refuse any mail not specifically addressed to you. As to the long term affect on the summons/pending case (if there is one)? I doubt that it will have any effect.

I don't know the specifics of your issue, but if I was in a similar situation I would be wary of a number of things:

1) Any legal action taking place involving me, without me present.
2) The ramifications of a judge deciding on a case where it might appear that the defendant did not bother to show up.
3) The answer you might give to a judge when asked why you did not attend for the initial hearing.
4) If this "thing" appeared to go away in the short term, it will not go away forever. There are limits on when a person can appeal a decision by the court. Don't leave it so long that you feel that the issue has gone away only to be left with limited options.

Again this is not legal advice, but is the name so wrong on the letter that it could not be reasonably assumed that it is for you? Are you certain that it is not the postman who has spelt your name incorrectly whilst copying it from the letter addressed to you?

Catsmokinpot

Hobart wrote:

Are you certain that it is not the postman who has spelt your name incorrectly whilst copying it from the letter addressed to you?

thats what im going to check out on friday, i'm going down to the sorting office

but its a completely different first name and the last name is spelt incorrectly.

Our man in Havana

If the summons in the registered letter is refused the gardai will simply ask the judge for permission to serve the summons via ordinary post. All you will do is delay the case by a few weeks. To be convicted in absentia the gardai must show proper service of the summons.

Hobart

Bond-007 wrote:

To be convicted in absentia the gardai must show proper service of the summons.

I didn't understand that it was as clear cut as that. To get slightly off the point, must every summons be served properly in order to allow conviction in absentia, in the event of a defendant not attending a hearing?

Our man in Havana

The simple answer is yes. The judge will look for evidence of proper service before proceeding to try an accused in absentia. The accused must be aware of the time and date of the court. That is what the summons is for. If the accused does not get the summons, how is he/she supposed to know when the court is?

If the accused knows when the court is and chooses not to attend that is their problem and the judge will deal with them as he sees fit, conviction in absentia, bench warrant etc....

Hobart

Bond-007 wrote:

The simple answer is yes. The judge will look for evidence of proper service before proceeding to try an accused in absentia. The accused must be aware of the time and date of the court. That is what the summons is for. If the accused does not get the summons, how is he/she supposed to know when the court is?

If the accused knows when the court is and chooses not to attend that is their problem and the judge will deal with them as he sees fit, conviction in absentia, bench warrant etc....

I suppose I'm questioning the term "proper service of the summons".

I don't really understand why you would assume that an accused would know when a court date was on, if he/she was not served with a summons?

Just becuase a Guard has gone to reasonable efforts to serve a summons on an accused person, it does not follow that that accused has been served with said summons.

My understanding, and I'm open to correction on this, is that a Guard has to make reasonable efforts to serve the summons on the accused, but that in some cases, a sibling, parent or partner would suffice when serving the summons.

If my understanding is correct, a case could exist wherby the accused was unaware of a court date. Am I wrong?

Our man in Havana

Proper service would be where the garda hand delivered it to the accused or left the summons with his spouse, father, mother or employer or by confirmation that the registered letter was signed for.

Hobart

Bond-007 wrote:

Proper service would be where the garda hand delivered it to the accused or left the summons with his spouse, father, mother or employer or by confirmation that the registered letter was signed for.

I suppose that that is really my point. While a proper service of a summons could be made, there is a chance where the accused named on the summons might not be aware that the summons has been served. For example, if the accused absconded from his home address.

Having said that, and apologies again for dragging the thread slightly off-topic in seeking clarification, my understanding, OP, is that a summons can be corrected (for mis-spellings/incorrect first names) on the spot by the judge on the day your case is due for hearing, if both you and the DPP have no valid objections.

This is my opinion, and may not be true in every case, your best avenue for advice would be a solicitor or a CA bureau if you need clarification.

cheeky_guy

Just dont collect the letter from the post office. It's not in your name so its not your responsibility. Case will get forgotten about for a long time, and if they even bother to re summons you, it will be such a long time that your solicitor has a good chance of getting it thrown out

Our man in Havana

cheeky_guy wrote:

Just dont collect the letter from the post office. It's not in your name so its not your responsibility. Case will get forgotten about for a long time, and if they even bother to re summons you, it will be such a long time that your solicitor has a good chance of getting it thrown out

That's a very stupid way to look at it. It will not go away. There is no need to re summons at all.

Victor

cheeky_guy wrote:

Just dont collect the letter from the post office. It's not in your name so its not your responsibility. Case will get forgotten about for a long time, and if they even bother to re summons you, it will be such a long time that your solicitor has a good chance of getting it thrown out

What if the postman scribbled the name wrong on the slip, but the name on the envelope is correct?

Catsmokinpot

Bond-007 wrote:

That's a very stupid way to look at it. It will not go away. There is no need to re summons at all.

i couldn't sign for it, and if i don't get re-summonsed, legal proceedings will go ahead against someone who isn't me, so how can i get a criminal record?

when i rang the post office to check the name they had already returned it to sender.

Victor wrote:

What if the postman scribbled the name wrong on the slip, but the name on the envelope is correct?

you'd want to be fairly stupid to get my name mixed up with the one thats on the delivery notice


maybe i'm being too optimistic i don't know... i can only hope

Zzippy

DublinWriter wrote:

It's a possibility that you were given a caution at the time and the guard left it at that. Do you recall what was said to you?

But really do be careful in future. Having a conviction for possesion of the smallest amount will totally affect your job prospects in the future. If you apply for a position in any public/semi-state organisation then you'll get vetted by the Garda Central Records Office down in Thurles and any convictions will be flagged and your application will be rejected.

In the future more and more private organisations will start using the same vetting services.

Are you sure about this??? I work for a public body and I've never heard of anyone being vetted. I've sat on interview panels and recruited people and never heard of it.
AFAIK only people who work with children, or people who would be dealing with sensitive information, are vetted. It would be impractical to have to vet thousands of civil and public servants. I know of several colleagues who would have convictions and didn't have a problem being employed subsequently...

DublinWriter

Galwayguy99 wrote:

Are you sure about this??? I work for a public body and I've never heard of anyone being vetted. I've sat on interview panels and recruited people and never heard of it.

Yes, I'm 100% sure.

The Vetting stage is apart from the interview stage. Anyone you would have interviewed would have been pre-vetted before even getting to the interview stage.

Zzippy

DublinWriter wrote:

Yes, I'm 100% sure.

The Vetting stage is apart from the interview stage. Anyone you would have interviewed would have been pre-vetted before even getting to the interview stage.

Well I'm 100% sure that doesn't happen in our public body. I've gone through the applications and selected candidates for interview, sent out the letters, etc. These people were definitely not vetted. There is nothing in our mandate, terms of reference, service level agreement with the dept., or anything written anywhere, that says we have to have applicants vetted.

I would be very surprised if there weren't a lot of other public bodies that follow the same procedure. In fact, apart from schoolteachers, gardai, healthcare workers and social services, I'd be surprised if any vetting of public servants occurs.

Not saying you're wrong, maybe this is supposed to happen, but maybe someone higher up has forgotten to pass the message down to us lowly public servants...

DublinWriter

Galwayguy99 wrote:

Not saying you're wrong, maybe this is supposed to happen

It should. You're basically saying that your particular civil service organisation could unknowingly employ a convicted felon or mur-didilly-urderer?

Zzippy

DublinWriter wrote:

It should. You're basically saying that your particular civil service organisation could unknowingly employ a convicted felon or mur-didilly-urderer?

A convicted felon? Is that not an American term? AFAIK we don't have misdemeanours or felonies in this country.

On the original point, I suppose yes, we could, although I'd like to hear the explanation given at interview to the question "I see from your CV you have no employment experience between 1990 and 2007, do you mind telling us what you were doing during that time?" :rolleyes:

DublinWriter

Galwayguy99 wrote:

A convicted felon? Is that not an American term? AFAIK we don't have misdemeanours or felonies in this country.

The origin of 'felon' dates back to old medaeval English. I don't think America was even 'discovered' then.

Galwayguy99 wrote:

On the original point, I suppose yes, we could, although I'd like to hear the explanation given at interview to the question "I see from your CV you have no employment experience between 1990 and 2007, do you mind telling us what you were doing during that time?" :rolleyes:

You really think someone would be stupid enough to leave a gap that big in their CV?

445279.ie

Galwayguy99 wrote:

A convicted felon? Is that not an American term? AFAIK we don't have misdemeanours or felonies in this country.

They're called summary and indictable.

As a fellow civil servant I've also sat on interivew boards (for TCO's) and we have to ask the canditates if they object to a Garda vetting/clearance. They have to sign a form consenting to same.

mountainyman

My summons was dropped through the letterbox when I was on holiday. There was no one home to accept receipt and it did not come registered post.

Don't Gardai need proof of service?

MM

Our man in Havana

The sworn testimony of a garda is proof enough of proper service.

Rosita

Catsmokinpot wrote:

Is it? Are you sure? If thats true it puts my mind at ease for the moment.

I know someone (not me honestly!) who got a summons for not having a TV licence which was delivered by a Postman via registered post.

TheNog

Rosita wrote:

I know someone (not me honestly!) who got a summons for not having a TV licence which was delivered by a Postman via registered post.

Thats cos whatever Dept looks after TV licences is prosecuting.It has nothing to do with the Gardai.

Rosita

TheNog wrote:

Thats cos whatever Dept looks after TV licences is prosecuting.It has nothing to do with the Gardai.

That would make sense alright. I thought it might be something along those lines.

suzi-suz

i was stopped 5 years ago and today 24 November 2008 i got a summons to pay the fine ... i never received a letter informing me of the court date as i would have attended.



has time lapsed or is it still valid?

shoegirl

Sorry to hear about your misfortune, mate, unfortunately I believe there is a deliberate policy since last year of targetting end users of drugs, even those with small amounts. Unfortunately there is a whole generation out there with a very different outlook to what the under 40s have who see this in a whole different light to us.

Sounds like you weren't totally in a fit state when the Gaurds picked you up so things might have got misspelt etc. Still its unfortunately considered to be a serious offence so would suggest you take the summons seriously, visit a solicitor and he can find out exactly what information they have, plus what you are being charged with.

As for your parents, if you are still fairly young and live at home chances are they will find out at some point, might be a good idea to explain what happened. Your solicitor will probably look for the probation act which means you won't get a conviction, not this time anyway

gurramok

suzi-suz wrote: »

i was stopped 5 years ago and today 24 November 2008 i got a summons to pay the fine ... i never received a letter informing me of the court date as i would have attended.



has time lapsed or is it still valid?

Thats a strange one!

Thought it would of expired unless executed before 6 months limit?