Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Appealing €500 Travel fine?

Options
  • 25-03-2021 6:36pm
    #1
    arleitiss
    Registered Users Posts: 3,515 ✭✭✭


    I travelled abroad recently for dentist (yes I know, one of the most lame excuses these days) and got €500 fine on way out of Dublin.


    I am flying over to Ukraine every few months for various dental procedures (including ongoing teeth straightening with braces).


    I had no proof on way out - but I came back with a whole file of documents (receipts, letter of proof of attendance which is stamped and signed by clinic and print out from government revenue website confirming payment which was also stamped and signed by clinic).

    I got Fixed Payment Notice recently and emailed fixed charge processing office to which I got email saying they see no grounds for appeal.


    They suggested to either pay the fine or ignore it and wait for it to proceed to summons stage where I can outline my case before the presiding judge.



    Is it fair to assume that I can just ignore notice - then head to court and present these documents I have as proof and the fine will/might get discarded?


«134

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Homer
    Registered Users Posts: 4,268 ✭✭✭Homer


    You could have gone to a dentist in this country surely? Therefore, your trip was not essential. Thats the way I hope a judge would see it.


  • Options
    #3
    Aint Eazy Being Cheezy
    Registered Users Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭Aint Eazy Being Cheezy


    Is it fair to assume that I can just ignore notice - then head to court and present these documents I have as proof and the fine will/might get discarded?

    You can do this, no problem. No comment on what might happen though!


  • Options
    #4
    maestroamado
    Registered Users Posts: 4,426 ✭✭✭maestroamado


    arleitiss wrote: »
    I travelled abroad recently for dentist (yes I know, one of the most lame excuses these days) and got €500 fine on way out of Dublin.


    I am flying over to Ukraine every few months for various dental procedures (including ongoing teeth straightening with braces).


    I had no proof on way out - but I came back with a whole file of documents (receipts, letter of proof of attendance which is stamped and signed by clinic and print out from government revenue website confirming payment which was also stamped and signed by clinic).

    I got Fixed Payment Notice recently and emailed fixed charge processing office to which I got email saying they see no grounds for appeal.


    They suggested to either pay the fine or ignore it and wait for it to proceed to summons stage where I can outline my case before the presiding judge.



    Is it fair to assume that I can just ignore notice - then head to court and present these documents I have as proof and the fine will/might get discarded?

    I cannot advise but i am curious to know if you were given the option to go home or travel.
    I am also inclined to think that if it is ongoing treatment it is essential travel.
    Did you not have any document confirming your appointment on outward journey.
    Personally i think i would challenge but only if the treatment had started before Jan 15...


  • Options
    #5
    arleitiss
    Registered Users Posts: 3,515 ✭✭✭arleitiss


    Homer wrote: »
    You could have gone to a dentist in this country surely? Therefore, your trip was not essential. Thats the way I hope a judge would see it.

    I started my treatment there in late last year, before all the fines got introduced so I need to keep coming back therefore it is medical/essential.


  • Options
    #6
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Homer wrote: »
    You could have gone to a dentist in this country surely? Therefore, your trip was not essential. Thats the way I hope a judge would see it.

    The Judge I expect will follow the law, which dental treatment is viewed as an essential reason to travel. Drew Harris views dental as not an reason to travel. His job is to enforce the law, not interpret it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Renault 5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 171 ✭✭Renault 5


    arleitiss wrote: »
    I started my treatment there in late last year, before all the fines got introduced so I need to keep coming back therefore it is medical/essential.

    If you have all documents up to date then appeal it.


  • Options
    #8
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    arleitiss wrote: »
    I started my treatment there in late last year, before all the fines got introduced so I need to keep coming back therefore it is medical/essential.

    Personally I would go to court, as travel for dentistry is an essential reason to travel. Only you can decide however. A consultation with a solicitor may be worth your while rather than the opinions of randomers on Board's.


  • Options
    #9
    arleitiss
    Registered Users Posts: 3,515 ✭✭✭arleitiss


    Renault 5 wrote: »
    If you have all documents up to date then appeal it.

    Yeah I am just wondering how does appealing work.
    I never appealed fine, is it just a matter of getting court summons and going there and proving it?


  • Options
    #10
    Atlantic Dawn
    Registered Users Posts: 81,667 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    How long was the trip for?


  • Options
    #11
    Renault 5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 171 ✭✭Renault 5


    Well if pay the fine or ignore it and wait for it to proceed to summons stage.

    I would go with the second option.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    arleitiss
    Registered Users Posts: 3,515 ✭✭✭arleitiss


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    How long was the trip for?

    9 days, does that make any difference?


  • Options
    #13
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 596 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Go to court and it’ll be thrown out. How long the trip was for or all of that malarkey is utterly irrelevant.


  • Options
    #14
    sebdavis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 891 ✭✭✭sebdavis


    A dentish take make half a day, max a full day. You stayed 9 days so not really just going to a dentist so I doubt you have a leg to stand on


  • Options
    #15
    Renault 5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 171 ✭✭Renault 5


    sebdavis wrote: »
    A dentish take make half a day, max a full day. You stayed 9 days so not really just going to a dentist so I doubt you have a leg to stand on

    There is no mention on how long you can stay outside country.

    It’s based on facts.

    You could travel outside the country for medical appointments.

    Op had a medial appointment outside the state and has documentation to prove this.

    If it was me I would 100% go to court.
    Who can travel abroad?
    You should only travel abroad if it is essential to do so. The following are ”reasonable excuses” for travelling to a port or airport for the purposes of travelling abroad as set out in the Health Act 1947 (Section 31A – Temporary Restrictions) COVID-19) (No 10)(Amendment)(No 2) Regulations 2021:

    To go to college or school if you have to be there in person
    To go with a child or a vulnerable adult to school if they have to be there in person
    To work or travel related to your business
    To go to a medical or dental appointment, or to go to an appointment with someone you live with, or a vulnerable person
    To seek essential medical, health or dental services, or to accompany someone you live with, or a vulnerable person who needs essential treatment
    To care for a family member or for other vital family reasons
    To go to a funeral
    To meet a legal obligation (for example, to appear in court)
    To give access to a child to the other parent of the child, or to access a child that you have a right of access to
    To leave Ireland if you are not resident in Ireland
    .

    Case closed


  • Options
    #16
    C3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭C3PO


    In my experience judges tend to be sympathetic to people who appear in court to appeal fines as long as they have a well prepared case.


  • Options
    #17
    Spook_ie
    Registered Users Posts: 10,896 ✭✭✭✭Spook_ie


    Probably be grilling you more over whether you quarantined for the 2 weeks after returning


  • Options
    #18
    arleitiss
    Registered Users Posts: 3,515 ✭✭✭arleitiss


    Spook_ie wrote: »
    Probably be grilling you more over whether you quarantined for the 2 weeks after returning

    I have.

    It's the only reason I haven't gone to garda station to ask what to do and instead - emailed them (Although I suspect they would've suggested the same - email)


  • Options
    #19
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 14,344 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    arleitiss wrote: »
    I came back with a whole file of documents


    It'll be thrown out straight away. Loads of people heading off to the sunny countries to 'see their dentist', and will rightfully be nailed to the wall. You've actually seen a dentist, so you're laughing.


  • Options
    #20
    maestroamado
    Registered Users Posts: 4,426 ✭✭✭maestroamado


    arleitiss wrote: »
    I have.

    It's the only reason I haven't gone to garda station to ask what to do and instead - emailed them (Although I suspect they would've suggested the same - email)

    keep the sent email to Gardai...


  • Options
    #21
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,596 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Seeing as these cases are only starting to emerge, I don't think that even the legal experts will have much to go on to advise you as to whether to stick or twist. There are no real precedents. It's your gamble.

    Do you feel lucky?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Seeing as these cases are only starting to emerge, I don't think that even the legal experts will have much to go on to advise you as to whether to stick or twist. There are no real precedents. It's your gamble.

    Do you feel lucky?

    Why would they need to feel lucky? when dentistry is clearly outlined in law as an essential reason to travel.
    Got to love the Boards legal eagle team. Sorry lads if I never seek your consul.


  • Options
    #23
    ratracer
    Registered Users Posts: 3,225 ✭✭✭ratracer


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    It'll be thrown out straight away. Loads of people heading off to the sunny countries to 'see their dentist', and will rightfully be nailed to the wall. You've actually seen a dentist, so you're laughing.

    Laughing...... and with a beautiful smile :):)


  • Options
    #24
    PunkIPA
    Registered Users Posts: 87 ✭✭PunkIPA


    OP, I am a lawyer and my advice in the strongest possible terms is to please go to a solicitor - the law is clear that travelling for the purpose of attending a dental appointment is permissible.


  • Options
    #25
    kirving
    Registered Users Posts: 5,921 ✭✭✭kirving


    Homer wrote: »
    You could have gone to a dentist in this country surely? Therefore, your trip was not essential. Thats the way I hope a judge would see it.

    Me leaving my 5km to meet a dental surgeon I've been seeing since early 2019, is absolutely essential. If I was doing the same abroad, that would also be essential. You can't just hand treatment over easily.
    sebdavis wrote: »
    A dentish take make half a day, max a full day. You stayed 9 days so not really just going to a dentist so I doubt you have a leg to stand on

    I seriously doubt they've been travelling for the odd filling. I've had multiple dental surgeries in the past 2 years, and more follow up checks than I can count. After a big procedure, you need to be physically close in case something goes wrong.

    Much of the risk with traveling is not lack of skills or quality, it's that in order to make it cost effective for say medium level procedures, people fly back home too quickly.

    I've been lucky in that most of mine had been on my health insurance, but I can completely understand people going to Eastern Europe for big treatment.


  • Options
    #26
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,596 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Why would they need to feel lucky? when dentistry is clearly outlined in law as an essential reason to travel.
    Got to love the Boards legal eagle team. Sorry lads if I never seek your consul.
    Because you've no idea how a judge will respond. The judge might question the length of the trip, or whether it could have been done at a local dentist.

    We don't know how those cases are going to play out.

    BTW, you seem to be positioning yourself as having expert knowledge of how these cases will play out, when none of us really know.


  • Options
    #27
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Because you've no idea how a judge will respond. The judge might question the length of the trip, or whether it could have been done at a local dentist.

    We don't know how those cases are going to play out.

    BTW, you seem to be positioning yourself as having expert knowledge of how these cases will play out, when none of us really know.

    The judge is bound by the law, I'm quite happy to position myself based on the existing law not what some Boards expert hopes will happen.


  • Options
    #28
    twowheelsonly
    Registered Users Posts: 2,268 ✭✭✭twowheelsonly


    As per PunkIPA, seek legal advice.

    Personally I'd be trying to get it sorted before it went anywhere near a court.

    Chances are that a lot of these cases are going to turn up in court around the same time and all you need is a grumpy Judge fed up of listening to excuse after excuse to find yourself getting hammered. Court is a PITA anyway, in particular at the moment, and you could find the case being put back time and again so it could drag on for the next 12 months.


  • Options
    #29
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Because you've no idea how a judge will respond. The judge might question the length of the trip, or whether it could have been done at a local dentist.

    It is not for the judiciary to question alternatives, they simply deal with weather or not you broke the law.

    The law is not qualified by being an essential appointment, rather it is simply one of a attending a medical or dental appointment, how long you stay for that visit or if it is an essential or routine appointment is inconsequential once you show you were at the airport for the purposes of attending a medical or dental appointment.


  • Options
    #30
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,261 ✭✭✭markpb


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    Because you've no idea how a judge will respond. The judge might question the length of the trip, or whether it could have been done at a local dentist.

    Those things are easily explained. Switching from one dentist (or any healthcare consultant) to another in the middle of a series of planned surgeries would be a bad idea. Going to a foreign dentist can save a fortune and, if it started before restrictions were in place, is hardly the OPs fault. And lastly the 9 day stay is presumably for post-op review to ensure the surgical site is healing properly and any temporary fittings have been adjusted after the swelling has gone away.

    I can only hope the judge takes more than 30 seconds to reach a decision, unlike some of the posters here.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,596 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    The judge is bound by the law, I'm quite happy to position myself based on the existing law not what some Boards expert hopes will happen.

    If things were that simple, we wouldn't need lawyers. For the record, I'm the absolute opposite of a Boards expert. I'm pointing out that none of the Boards expert know how this will play out either way.

    A judge could take a view that a dental appointment followed by an eight day holiday isn't a reasonable excuse.

    We don't know how this will play out.


Advertisement