€950 fine for no TV licence.

theblackstuff

My niece got a summons to the District Court for not having a TV licence, case was heard last week with the outcome being she has to pay a fine of €950, within seven days.

We got he to get a TV licence and bring it with her to court and act all apologetic, but judge didn't take it on board and fined her.

I was shocked, reading around I thought she would get maybe a small fine or a warning, is the maximum fine still €1,000.

The same girl has a history of making up stories and looking for money off the family. My mum says she saw the notice and it seems to be all true.

a few questions...
Is this kind of fine common?
I thought you could pay fines by instalments in the post office but the local post office had no information about this?
Could this be more likely a second offence punishment, the first one she has kept quiet about?
she claimed she had free legal aid at the case, does this happen?

I have no experience with this stuff so sorry if the questions seem a bit simple, any information would be welcome.

drunkmonkey

Under Section 148 of the Broadcasting Act 2009, it is a prosecutable offence to be in possession of an unlicensed television set. Fines for a first offence can be up to €1,000 and €2,000 for subsequent offences.

Mr. Incognito

Its usually a day or two in jail in default of paying.

Personally I'd take the two days in jail.

You'd probably be released in a few hours

forumuser

What's the procedure before a summons is issued? Does the inspector call and give you 7 days to pay before proceeding to summons?

MarkAnthony

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Its usually a day or two in jail in default of paying.

Personally I'd take the two days in jail.

You'd probably be released in a few hours

I thought the ladies had a bit of space and therefore weren't just acting as a revolving door? Genuine question very possibly misinformed (as usual!)

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Midnight Sundance

If you did take the jail option, would you not have a criminal offence on your record and therefore affect future job prospects ??

Sam Kade

theblackstuff wrote: »

My niece got a summons to the District Court for not having a TV licence, case was heard last week with the outcome being she has to pay a fine of €950, within seven days.

We got he to get a TV licence and bring it with her to court and act all apologetic, but judge didn't take it on board and fined her.

I was shocked, reading around I thought she would get maybe a small fine or a warning, is the maximum fine still €1,000.

The same girl has a history of making up stories and looking for money off the family. My mum says she saw the notice and it seems to be all true.

a few questions...
Is this kind of fine common?
I thought you could pay fines by instalments in the post office but the local post office had no information about this?
Could this be more likely a second offence punishment, the first one she has kept quiet about?
she claimed she had free legal aid at the case, does this happen?

I have no experience with this stuff so sorry if the questions seem a bit simple, any information would be welcome.

I hope she isn't expecting some one to pay it for her. If she's good at making up stories it wouldn't be hard to print a notice for her mother to see.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

coylemj

theblackstuff wrote: »

she claimed she had free legal aid at the case, does this happen?

No it doesn't. You can't even get free legal aid for driving with no insurance which is a far more serious offence. If she was fined €50 short of the max., she must have had a record of a previous offence, especially when (if) she showed up and showed the judge a current licence.

It sounds to me like she never showed up in court, hence the hefty fine.

billy few mates

theblackstuff wrote: »

My niece got a summons to the District Court for not having a TV licence, case was heard last week with the outcome being she has to pay a fine of €950, within seven days.

We got he to get a TV licence and bring it with her to court and act all apologetic, but judge didn't take it on board and fined her.

I was shocked, reading around I thought she would get maybe a small fine or a warning, is the maximum fine still €1,000.

The same girl has a history of making up stories and looking for money off the family. My mum says she saw the notice and it seems to be all true.

a few questions...
Is this kind of fine common?
I thought you could pay fines by instalments in the post office but the local post office had no information about this?
Could this be more likely a second offence punishment, the first one she has kept quiet about?
she claimed she had free legal aid at the case, does this happen?

I have no experience with this stuff so sorry if the questions seem a bit simple, any information would be welcome.

As someone who begrudgingly pays their TV licence fee I would hope so too...

jimmycrackcorm

Fred Swanson wrote:

It would be a minimum of 3 months to a pay a fine of that magnitude and it would be payable in instalments.

It's a year and 48 days from the conviction date to pay by instalments. I'd take the jail option instead which wild probably be about two hours.

Elemonator

Midnight Sundance wrote: »

If you did take the jail option, would you not have a criminal offence on your record and therefore affect future job prospects ??

You'll have the record anyway. The jail time isn't recorded afaik.

EDIT: got beaten to it :pac:

wokingvoter

If you or her mam or anyone else pays it for her she'll never ever learn
For the future she can have her licence fee deducted monthly by direct debit €13.33
You'd have to go back to the district court clerk to organise for the fine to be broken up into instalments
She didn't get free legal aid(incidentally it's not free any more. There is a bill at the end but may be as little as €200 depending on your means)
HOWEVER in our district court, if you get there early enough and appeal to the clerk (very nice person) that you have no money for a solicitor, he has been known to ask a passing solicitor to speak for you.
Most judges round here prefer to deal with legal professionals
In my experience this is your nieces 2nd offence and she'll be sent to prison next time
That's what happened my husbands cousin when she was going through a wild patch
She was kept for a week

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Hold up. You can get a CRIMINAL record for not having a TV licence? Would this seriously affect travelling to the states...or anything else in your life?

Manach

Well the Government wishes to ensure that the TV tax is paid with few defaulters and hence the crafting of such a punishment.

X22Report

wokingvoter wrote: »

If you or her mam or anyone else pays it for her she'll never ever learn
For the future she can have her licence fee deducted monthly by direct debit €13.33
You'd have to go back to the district court clerk to organise for the fine to be broken up into instalments
She didn't get free legal aid(incidentally it's not free any more. There is a bill at the end but may be as little as €200 depending on your means)
HOWEVER in our district court, if you get there early enough and appeal to the clerk (very nice person) that you have no money for a solicitor, he has been known to ask a passing solicitor to speak for you.
Most judges round here prefer to deal with legal professionals
In my experience this is your nieces 2nd offence and she'll be sent to prison next time
That's what happened my husbands cousin when she was going through a wild patch
She was kept for a week

She was kept for a week

Where was she kept in a cave or something lol

wokingvoter

X22Report wrote: »

She was kept for a week

Where was she kept in a cave or something lol

Prison

cerastes

Astonishing, you get a criminal record for no tv licence, in the face of all the dangerous criminal activity going on in this country and thats what they will do to impose this sham of a tax.

Jimmy Garlic

The RTE tax is an extortion racket, end of story. I won't be paying it so that useless, talentless gimps like Ray Darcy can live a life of luxury. The spin to and from jail would be a day out and a story for her pals. And she won't be a grand out of pocket.

Esel

cerastes wrote: »

Astonishing, you get a criminal record for no tv licence, in the face of all the dangerous criminal activity going on in this country and thats what they will do to impose this sham of a tax.

Talk to Joe. No?

Skatedude

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Under Section 148 of the Broadcasting Act 2009, it is a prosecutable offence to be in possession of an unlicensed television set. Fines for a first offence can be up to €1,000 and €2,000 for subsequent offences.

It sucks, but you now need a tv licience if you even own a mobile phone as it's capable of relieving a broadcast

cerastes

That says prosocuteable offence, but nothing about a criminal record,
Anyone got anything that shows that?
A criminal record for not paying a tv licence, prosocuted, fine, its the law and a stupid sham of one, but a criminal record?? sounds archaic.
What next, in the stocks, transportation.

Esel

Skatedude wrote: »

It sucks, but you now need a tv licience if you even own a mobile phone as it's capable of relieving a broadcast

Relieving... Hnff hnff

(C) Beavis and Butt....

GM228

Midnight Sundance wrote: »

IIf you did take the jail option, would you not have a criminal offence on your record and therefore affect future job prospects ??

cerastes wrote: »

That says prosocuteable offence, but nothing about a criminal record

Any offence which you are found guilty of is entered into your criminal record and shown on your police certificate irrespective of if a fine or jail time is imposed.

At the end of the day all a criminal record is is a record of any offence you have committed irrespective of the severity of the offence.

The Hunky Monster wrote: »

Hold up. You can get a CRIMINAL record for not having a TV licence? Would this seriously affect travelling to the states...or anything else in your life?

Possibly, it could affect travel which requires a police certificate for example for a visa application or some jobs here which require vetting.

Unlike the UK we don't have any legislation to make any offences non recordable, in the UK the offence of having no TV licence is now a non recordable offence so it leaves no criminal record.

Some minor offences can be "filtered" out of a Garda vetting but I don't believe that applies to a police certificate. However with the forthcoming Spent Convictions Act certain minor offences through the District Court (some subject to only having one conviction) will be expunged from your record but only after 7 years, I'm not sure if a conviction for no TV licence will be covered under this though.

Little CuChulainn

Esel wrote: »

Talk to Joe. No?

It's awful Joe. People getting murdered outside schools and I saw a Garda out doing a speed trap. Should he not be catching the murderers Joe?

cerastes

Who said Gardai specifically, taking something personally?
I'm saying it makes the system a mockery, where offenders of dangerous and in many instances multiple offences are not dealt with and locked up, yet if you cant or havent paid a tv licence, you can will have a record and a space will be found.

wokingvoter

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

It's awful Joe. People getting murdered outside schools and I saw a Garda out doing a speed trap. Should he not be catching the murderers Joe?

What about the bankers Joe? and de gubbermint? Denis O'Brien Joe?

Little CuChulainn

cerastes wrote: »

Who said Gardai specifically, taking something personally?
I'm saying it makes the system a mockery, where offenders of dangerous and in many instances multiple offences are not dealt with and locked up, yet if you cant or havent paid a tv licence, you can will have a record and a space will be found.

A space will be found? You'd be lucky to spend the night in a prison for failing to pay a fine.

Phoebas

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Its usually a day or two in jail in default of paying.

Personally I'd take the two days in jail.

You'd probably be released in a few hours

You'd have contempt of court and a custodial sentence on your record.

Short term gain...

Phoebas

The Hunky Monster wrote: »

Hold up. You can get a CRIMINAL record for not having a TV licence? Would this seriously affect travelling to the states...or anything else in your life?

Probably would.

A conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) causes a person to be inadmissible to the United States under section 212(a)(2)(a)(i) of the INA (Immigration and Nationality Act)

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

cerastes

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

A space will be found? You'd be lucky to spend the night in a prison for failing to pay a fine.

Even if its for a few token hours, effort will be made to follow up on this sham, if only as much vitriol was put into chasing up those they routinely let off the hook and who are of no benefit to society. Anyway, the point was their insistance on creating a criminal record.

ohnonotgmail

Phoebas wrote: »

Probably would.

in what way could a conviction for not having a TV licence be considered a "crime of moral turpitude"?

hullaballoo

There is no definition of the term that isn't more watery than the term itself. So, arguably any crime is one of moral turpitude because committing a crime is in and of itself an act of moral turpitude.

On one reading, you and I might regard not having a TV licence as a relatively minor infraction but on another, it's defrauding the exchequer, which is something quite serious.

It's a deliberately circular term that the US use as a broad brush to enable them to refuse to grant visas to people because reasons rather than actually having a valid issue with the person in question.

Phoebas

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

in what way could a conviction for not having a TV licence be considered a "crime of moral turpitude"?

I guess it could fall into one or more of the these categories, depending on the subjective viewpoint of the immigration official:

• Tax evasion (willful)
• Fraud against revenue or other government functions
• Larceny (grand or petty)
• Making false representation
• An intent to defraud
• The actual act of committing fraud
• Knowingly Receiving stolen goods
• Theft (when it involves the intention of permanent taking)

ohnonotgmail

Phoebas wrote: »

I guess it could fall into one or more of the these categories, depending on the subjective viewpoint of the immigration official:

• Tax evasion (willful)
• Fraud against revenue or other government functions
• Larceny (grand or petty)
• Making false representation
• An intent to defraud
• The actual act of committing fraud
• Knowingly Receiving stolen goods
• Theft (when it involves the intention of permanent taking)

nope, not seeing how it fits into any of those categories. Where is the fraud? what has been stolen? what false representations do you think are involved? and its not a tax.

GM228

Phoebas wrote: »

I guess it could fall into one or more of the these categories, depending on the subjective viewpoint of the immigration official:

• Tax evasion (willful)
• Fraud against revenue or other government functions
• Larceny (grand or petty)
• Making false representation
• An intent to defraud
• The actual act of committing fraud
• [/b]Knowingly Receiving stolen goods[/b]
• Theft (when it involves the intention of permanent taking)

How could a conviction of not paying a TV licence even possibly fall into the categories of larceny, making false representation, receiving stolen goods or theft?

Even fraud dosn't fit and is a TV licence actually a tax?

Phoebas

GM228 wrote: »

How could a conviction of not paying a TV licence even possibly fall into the categories of larceny, making false representation, receiving stolen goods or theft?

Even fraud dosn't fit and is a TV licence actually a tax?

As I say, depending on the subjective viewpoint of an immigration official...

I'd say it could easily fall into theft (of a good or service) or making a false representation (by failing to make a true representation).

YMMV

ohnonotgmail

Phoebas wrote: »

As I say, depending on the subjective viewpoint of an immigration official...

I'd say it could easily fall into theft (of a good or service) or making a false representation (by failing to make a true representation).

YMMV

it is not payment for a good or service. it is a licence to possess equipment capable of receiving a tv signal.

and you still havent explained what you think this representation is.

10000maniacs

If you bankrupt the country with your Russian roulette property gambling, Nama gives you a high salaried job, but if you fail to pay to pleasure Tubbs Miriam and Darcy 's cockles, and fund the Crappo Symphony Orchestra you get fined €1000 and have a criminal record.

ohnonotgmail

10000maniacs wrote: »

If you bankrupt the country with your Russian roulette property gambling, Nama gives you a high salaried job, but if you fail to pay to pleasure Tubbs Miriam and Darcy 's cockles, and fund the Crappo Symphony Orchestra you get fined €1000 and have a criminal record.

i was with you until you said "crappo symphony orchestra"

bpmurray

If you end up in court for not paying your licence, you have to be a total moron. She received warning notices for months before they turned up and caught her - it's basically an idiot test: if you're stupid enough to not pay any attention to the warnings, you'll get fined a grand.

blindside88

10000maniacs wrote: »

If you bankrupt the country with your Russian roulette property gambling, Nama gives you a high salaried job, but if you fail to pay to pleasure Tubbs Miriam and Darcy 's cockles, and fund the Crappo Symphony Orchestra you get fined €1000 and have a criminal record.

I'd love to see one thread on boards about someone being fined/evicted without the "what aboutery" of the developers/government/bankers/Denis O'Brien. This about as much to do with Nama as it does with Jehovahs witnesses or crab people

Phoebas

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it is not payment for a good or service. it is a licence to possess equipment capable of receiving a tv signal.

and you still havent explained what you think this representation is.

That would be up to the subjective interpretation of the immigration officer. I would consider it moral turpitude. YMMV.

Moral turpitude has a very broad remit.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

messrs

I got summonsed to court last year for not having TV licence, had my licence bought by the time court appearance came - went up to judge, he asked if I now had licence, said yes & showed it to him, got €90 fine & from what I remember I had 7 working days to pay it - also most ppl in the court room that day were there for the same reason - anyone called before me (about 15-20 people) all got €90 fines - but a different judge - who knows

Phoebas

Fred Swanson wrote: »

And how would the US agents be aware of this? The US does not have access to Irish records.

Obviously if people want to make false declarations to the US immigration service that's up to them.

That couldn't possibly end badly.

coylemj

Phoebas wrote: »

Obviously if people want to make false declarations to the US immigration service that's up to them.

That couldn't possibly end badly.

You're going to ride that high horse into the ground if you carry on with that nonsense.

Icepick

coylemj wrote: »

You're going to ride that high horse into the ground if you carry on with that nonsense.

How dares he not lie!