Woman who failed to pay TV licence fine taken to jail in five-hour taxi trip

lulu1 · 28-02-2015 11:11PM

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

Only in Donegal perhaps. The Gardaí are a law unto themselves up there.

What's your problem with Donegal.????

Tony EH · 28-02-2015 11:11PM

Heckler wrote: »

Can't find a link but read the other day about a guy who tried to rob a post office with an accomplice armed with a hammer and apparently a gun. They got away with nothing and were caught not long after. The elderly staff are traumatised and treat everyone coming in now with suspicion.

What does he get ? A 5 year suspended sentence. Because he has no previous convictions (never been caught. You don't go from law abiding citizen to armed robber overnight) and is from an apparently respectable family the judge reckons he's a prime candidate for reform.

Farce. Two womens lives ruined and this ****bag is walking around free as a bird.

It's absurd isn't it?

Just think for a second. Someone who doesn't pay an outmoded, archaic and unjust charge for her entertainment box (a charge that should be completely eliminated) arrested in the early hours of the morning like some drug dealer and has her reputation and future tainted by such a stupid thing.

And then you read about guys like the one you mentioned above! Or worse, you'll read about dirt bags with not just one suspended sentence, but a string of them and often for really serious crime too.

This is a clear indication that the "theft", or non-payment, of government money is considered are more serious "crime" than the theft of private, public, property or beating some innocent citizen to a pulp.

It's a truly incredible country we live in.

Bongalongherb · 28-02-2015 11:23PM

With politicians wages it seems that they are oblivious to this country 'they' live in ? and its situation as always while they dine in exclusive abodes in a world far far away from our reality. No-wonder they come up with insane ideas on a daily basis just like Labour thinking they are the best government in history. Planet pluto or further out they seem to be to the Irish citizen.

Tony EH · 28-02-2015 11:28PM

worded wrote: »

The shame is on the huge salaries at RTE.
160 euro is way too much.

1 Euro would too much.

Our TV output is funded from advertising and it should ONLY be funded by that.

But the license is to ALLOW Joe Public to own something!

Historically, licensing was used to distinguish the responsible users from irresponsible users and such an idea is good. If you cannot handle your car in a responsible manner, your license to use your car is taken away (or at least should be). Therefore you make an effort to use your car properly.

But a license to own something you watch programmed content on that you have no control over or responsibility for is a bloody idiotic concept and is simply there to gouge money out of people.

The TV license came about from the old wireless license. That idea was people who used radios could also, technically, transmit as well as receive. A British idea that us gombeens simply copied.

Today, the idea of having to pay for a TV is just totally chronic, especially when the thing is flooded with poxy adverts.

Tony EH · 28-02-2015 11:45PM

thickhead wrote: »

I have not broken the law once in my life.

Sure...

Never did an illegal U turn? Never took an illegal right turn? Never went through an amber light? Never jumped a red light? Never not picked up your dog's shite? Never looked at porn on the web (some of which is legal on other county's but illegal here)? Never watched something on YouTube? (chances are that was breaking some copyright law), Never watched a region 1 DVD on a Region free DVD player? Never been drunk in a pub? Never been part of a lock in?

...plus many, many more things that people do (including you) that are illegal.

BeerWolf · 28-02-2015 11:52PM

S. Goodspeed wrote: »

At least now she can watch Fair City and other top quality productions with peace of mind

I would go mental, that'd be torture...

Tony EH · 01-03-2015 12:03AM

drdidlittle wrote: »

The law states that if you own a tv you must have a tv licance.
Court fined her for not paying tv licance
She didn't fully pay court fine
Said woman is sentenced to jail term.

Correct system should be
Fail to pay licance.
Attend court.
Judge fines you for not paying licance and orders it to be taken over 4 week.
Judge calls next case.

No, the correct system SHOULD have been:

Oh, you're in the process of paying and you've already paid 200 Euro? Oh right, bye so and sorry for wasting your time madam.

Bongalongherb · 01-03-2015 12:04AM

BeerWolf wrote: »

I would go mental, that'd be torture...

If the secret service in Ireland or any other country plopped me down in front of that insane stuff they 'Would' break me in no-time. Torture beyond belief indeed.

Tony EH · 01-03-2015 12:04AM

Bongalongherb wrote: »

Don't forget that broadcasting charge is lurking behind the scenes after we are all converted to pay the water charge. If you don't have a tv who cares, if you own a little radio you have to pay the broadcasting charge even though the tv and radio don't broadcast/transmit a signal.

They will be bringing in a kettle charge soon, so if you own a kettle you will have to pay tax to use it to boil water. And they will know if you have a kettle in your home from them being able to measure the amount of steam in your kitchen. This country is psychotic in nature, it's run by head-cases with a basic agenda to terrorise and assimilate all Irish citizens.

Another new tax coming in soon will be in regards to heat dissipation. If your home is not fully insulated and is releasing heat to the ether, you will have to pay a tax from unimaginable heat-loss. Then the final tax forwarded will be the coughing tax... you will be taxed on coughing as we all cough now and again so that seems to be coming in soon.

And you'll still get **** on here trying to justify it.

:pac:

Bongalongherb · 01-03-2015 12:13AM

They're just brainwashed folk, poor souls.

foggy_lad · 01-03-2015 12:35AM

drdidlittle wrote: »

What ever happened to the bill that was to stop fines at source. Stop dole payment or straight from wages. Save jail expenses and will increase compliance as people will know that the money will have to be paid one way or another.

bogged down in constitutional issues over deducting from what is a basic minimum subsistence payment

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

There is a lot of guff here about the TV licence. Whatever you think of the TV licence that isn't really relevant to the ridiculous enforcement of fines, which is the issue here. Attachment of welfare etc seems the way to go. Also in the case of unpaid TV licence fines they should be allowed seize your tv and aerial/dish, which might do the trick.

Many of the people involved dont fully own the signal equipment or even the tv as many live in rented accommodation or goods are on HP.

conorh91 · 01-03-2015 12:53AM

foggy_lad wrote: »

bogged down in constitutional issues over deducting from what is a basic minimum subsistence payment

My understanding is that in cases of social welfare fraud or overpayment, the Department deduct payments to claimants.

Why then can it not deduct payments from claimants for the payment of fines imposed by the courts?

I find it hard to believe the courts would look unfavourably on that Bill.

foggy_lad · 01-03-2015 12:58AM

conorh91 wrote: »

My understanding is that in cases of social welfare fraud or overpayment, the Department deduct payments to claimants.

Why then can it not deduct payments from claimants for the payment of fines imposed by the courts?

I find it hard to believe the courts would look unfavourably on that Bill.

Because in such cases there has been an overpayment so the claimant has had more than the minimum subsistence payment and only that extra amount can be taken back but even then only if it does not cause undue financial hardship. usually a repayment plan is agreed if the amount is more than a weeks payment.

At the moment if fines were deducted the person would just go to the CWO and they will get what brings their income up to the minimum payment level, taken by the courts but given back by social welfare.

feargale · 01-03-2015 01:05AM

foggy_lad wrote: »

Because in such cases there has been an overpayment so the claimant has had more than the minimum subsistence payment and only that extra amount can be taken back but even then only if it does not cause undue financial hardship. usually a repayment plan is agreed if the amount is more than a weeks payment.

The logical conclusion to your position is that the court cannot impose a fine in first place. Some or most European countries deduct fines at source. If you say that the imposition of a fine takes one below subsistence level, you may say that mislaying one's purse does likewise - no entitlement for that. Deduct the bloody fine at source, by instalments if necessary, and stop this costly charade. The main reason it's not done thus here is that legislators have been too busy to address it, and there would be a little bit of extra administrative work involved. The case which gave rise to this thread is not the first such.
Incidentally, is it true that some charitable and social welfare organisations sometimes pay fines for peope? Something I heard - just asking.

foggy_lad · 01-03-2015 01:22AM

feargale wrote: »

The logical conclusion to your position is that the court cannot impose a fine in first place. Some or most European countries deduct fines at source. If you say that the imposition of a fine takes one below subsistence level, you may say that mislaying one's purse does likewise - no entitlement for that. Deduct the bloody fine at source, by instalments if necessary, and stop this costly charade. The main reason it's not done thus here is that legislators have been too busy to address it, and tgere woukd be a little bit ofvextra administrative work involved. The case which gave rise to this thread is not the first such.
Incidentally, is it true that some charitable and social welfare organisations sometimes pay fines for peope? Something I heard - just asking.

All I have heard and read somewhere about it was that the basic rate can't be touched by anyone deducting from it at source whether that be the court service or the social welfare.

one possible solution would be immediate incarceration(no 7/28/6months to pay) until fines are either paid or until the person signs forms to allow the fines be deducted at source at a reasonable weekly rate.

This has to be the individuals choice though, the court can't order deductions be made from any minimum welfare payment without the consent of the welfare claimant

conorh91 · 01-03-2015 01:28AM

foggy_lad wrote: »

Because in such cases there has been an overpayment so the claimant has had more than the minimum subsistence payment and only that extra amount can be taken back

As fergale has just said, if such a constitutional protection existed, the courts would not be entitled to impose fines on recipients to begin with. I don't know what the delay in the legislation is, but I haven't heard any suggestion of a constitutional problem, because there is nothing to indicate that welfare payments are given constitutional protection in this way.

After all, the Government increases or decreases welfare payments every year as it sees fit, without any visible constitutional restraint imposed on it.

Bongalongherb · 01-03-2015 01:38AM

It seems that we folk are the tumbleweeds bobbing around in our daily day to day stuff, and the government collective is just moving away and pushing us all off-side. They will be the tumbleweed soon on next election.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tiPOMd14eQ

Pipitypippip · 01-03-2015 02:07AM

thickhead wrote: »

Some people were raised to obey all laws.

Yeah irobots !!

donegaLroad · 01-03-2015 02:09AM

the cost of arresting her & taking her to Dublin by taxi would have paid the outstanding amount of her fine almost 10 times over... really stupid

Little CuChulainn · 01-03-2015 10:52AM

donegaLroad wrote: »

the cost of arresting her & taking her to Dublin by taxi would have paid the outstanding amount of her fine almost 10 times over... stupid c***s

You'd swear you just had some kind of revelation. Everybody knows this. It's still the only system in place. You can't ignore the existing law because it's financially convenient. It's up to the legislators to change the law.

SpaceTime · 01-03-2015 12:07PM

Just collect licence via cable and Sky bill where RTE is in the basic package and encrypt RTE on Saorview - most TVs support conditional access modules.

If people don't want it, they won't pay.

Desolation Of Smug · 01-03-2015 12:17PM

SpaceTime wrote: »

Just collect licence via cable and Sky bill where RTE is in the basic package and encrypt RTE on Saorview - most TVs support conditional access modules.

If people don't want it, they won't pay.

Or here's a mad one - scrap the licence and let RTE sink or swim on its own merits. It's a dinosaur anyway, and a cosy dinosaur too, for the ones inside its club.

Same as taxing your car - eliminate it and add 3 cent to the price of fuel. Huge cost savings, gets rid of staff, eliminates non-compliance and saves us having to read about shyte like this every week.

They won't do it though, because it makes sense, and that is almost anathema to them.

drdidlittle · 01-03-2015 01:30PM

Tony EH wrote: »

No, the correct system SHOULD have been:

Oh, you're in the process of paying and you've already paid 200 Euro? Oh right, bye so and sorry for wasting your time madam.

So if I owe you two hundred euro and I give you 100 you'll let me off with the other hundred? Great put me down for a thousand. Ill pay in 20 euro a week installments. Thanks

end of the road · 01-03-2015 03:27PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

You'd swear you just had some kind of revelation. Everybody knows this. It's still the only system in place. You can't ignore the existing law because it's financially convenient. It's up to the legislators to change the law.

of course you can ignore it. just turn a blind eye to it. plenty of little things have a blind eye turned to them because they aren't financially viable to enforce

end of the road · 01-03-2015 03:29PM

Desolation Of Smug wrote: »

Or here's a mad one - scrap the licence and let RTE sink or swim on its own merits. It's a dinosaur anyway, and a cosy dinosaur too, for the ones inside its club.

Same as taxing your car - eliminate it and add 3 cent to the price of fuel. Huge cost savings, gets rid of staff, eliminates non-compliance and saves us having to read about shyte like this every week.

They won't do it though, because it makes sense, and that is almost anathema to them.

i agree with your second point. rte can't be left to sink or swim though, they provide programs of minority interest which aren't catered to by other stations. it also provides some ballance in terms of news output, all be it not perfect just like the others.

end of the road · 01-03-2015 03:30PM

drdidlittle wrote: »

So if I owe you two hundred euro and I give you 100 you'll let me off with the other hundred? Great put me down for a thousand. Ill pay in 20 euro a week installments. Thanks

no, she payed off one bit, and would be paying the rest as soon as she could

drdidlittle · 01-03-2015 03:34PM

end of the road wrote: »

no, she payed off one bit, and would be paying the rest as soon as she could

I'll pay the rest when I can. System doesn't work that way for obvious reasons

donegaLroad · 01-03-2015 03:40PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

You'd swear you just had some kind of revelation. Everybody knows this. It's still the only system in place. You can't ignore the existing law because it's financially convenient. It's up to the legislators to change the law.

well sorry if has been said before.. Im not going to wade through 18 pages of this thread to find out. Why don't the legislators change the existing law then? Ireland is becoming a laughing stock.

end of the road · 01-03-2015 03:41PM

drdidlittle wrote: »

I'll pay the rest when I can. System doesn't work that way for obvious reasons

clearly it does as that is how she was doing it.

timetogo · 01-03-2015 03:47PM

donegaLroad wrote: »

well sorry if has been said before.. Im not going to wade through 18 pages of this thread to find out. Why don't the legislators change the existing law then? Ireland is becoming a laughing stock.

What kind of changes should they do?

I don't agree with the "it was cheaper to leave her Donegal than the amount owed in the fine". With that kind of logic everybody more than an hour or so from jail shouldn't pay any fine less than €200 because it's cheaper to leave them alone rather than jail them.

Woman who failed to pay TV licence fine taken to jail in five-hour taxi trip

Comments