Gardai not responding to request for info needed to commence a civil case, what next?

54and56 · 07-04-2021 9:21am #1

Long story short,

Bored juvenile vandalises my property causing €2,000 of damage.

Incident caught on CCTV and reported to Gardai who arrest juvenile.

Juvenile writes letter admitting guilt and apologising etc etc

Juvenile gets Youth Diversion Programme (I've no problem with this) but won't voluntarily pay for the damage done.

I want to commence a civil case against his parents/guardians to recover the cost of the damage.

Written request to the Guard handling the incident for the parents/guardians details replied to with a "I can't give out that info, please contact the station Superintendent."

Written request to the station Superintendent gets a reply "I can't issue that info as the youths identity is protected under Section 48 of the Children Act 2001. Please contact the Superintendent of the Garda Youth Diversion Office."

Written request with supporting documents (Pulse case info, previous letters requesting parents/guardians contact details so I can commence a civil case etc) attached sent by registered post to the Youth Diversion Superintendent months ago and no response.

As a citizen I'm entitled to commence a civil case seeking compensation (the incident Gardai confirmed in writing my right to do so and that he will be a witness) and it is my right to do so personally without the additional cost of employing a solicitor to act on my behalf but I'm being prevented from doing so by the Gardai not furnishing me with the details I need to identify the defendant(s) and serve the writ.

Anyone got any thoughts on the next course of action to ensure I get the parents/guardians contact details? Do I need to make a complaint to the Garda Ombudsman that I am not being treated as I should be whether that's under the victims charter (https://www.victimscharter.ie) or some other minimum service standard the Gardai are supposed to deliver to law abiding tax paying citizens like myself?

Am I just supposed to accept being out of pocket and suck it up?

I'm not looking to provoke a debate on the pro's and con's of the JLO/Youth Diversion Programme, it is what it is and I'm sure it does do some good but it seems inequitable that the perpetrator writes a brief letter apologising for his actions, gets 12 months supervision by a Juvenile Liaison Officer and I end up €2,000 out of pocket.

Would appreciate any practical steer this group can give me as this is all new to me and has been a very frustrating process so far.

Del2005 · 07-04-2021 9:38am

You can spend as long as you like at this but even if you manage to get the child's parents/guardians details and launch a case getting the judgement is the easy bit. Getting money out of people who don't want to pay in this country is nearly impossible, why do you think that massive firms with in house legal teams don't cash up debts?

54and56 · 07-04-2021 9:41am

Del2005 wrote: »

You can spend as long as you like at this but even if you manage to get the child's parents/guardians details and launch a case getting the judgement is the easy bit. Getting money out of people who don't want to pay in this country is nearly impossible, why do you think that massive firms with in house legal teams don't cash up debts?

I totally get that and am not commercially naive but I want some accountability.

Difficulty getting paid (post judgement) is part of the reason I don't want to engage a solicitor and want to do this myself. No point throwing good money after bad if in the end I don't get paid as I'd have to my solicitor one way or the other.

MadYaker · 07-04-2021 9:44am

Garda Ombudsman would be my next move. But to be honest if the Gardai don’t want to help you they don’t have to.

ohnonotgmail · 07-04-2021 10:09am

have you consulted a solicitor on this? I didn't think that parents were liable for torts committed by their children.

KaneToad · 07-04-2021 10:14am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

have you consulted a solicitor on this? I didn't think that parents were liable for torts committed by their children.

I think that's what the OP is trying to avoid. Given they don't fancy chances of financial redress they don't want to throw more money at the problem.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 10:20am

MadYaker wrote: »

Garda Ombudsman would be my next move. But to be honest if the Gardai don’t want to help you they don’t have to.

I don't understand that. Maybe I'm naive when it comes to the law and dealing with the Gardai but I've been the victim of vandalism and want to recover the cost of the damage done. The Guards have the info I need to commence a civil case.

If there is some legislation or established protocol on which the Youth Diversion Office are obliged to refuse my request the least I would expect is a reply stating they cannot provide the info I have requested for X reason, similar to the response I got from the local Superintendent. Given there is a 98 page "Victims Charter" that would just be the very minimum level of courtesy.

If I had a formal denial of my request by the Garda I could then take it further up the line to challenge the grounds of the denial as it seems completely perverse to have a policy or legislation where the confessed / convicted juvenile's responsible guardians are systematically shielded by the Gardai from victim's who want to recover the cost of the damage inflicted on them.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 10:31am

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

have you consulted a solicitor on this?

Hi ohnonotgmail, No, for two reasons:-

1. I don't have to, a citizen is entitled to bring a civil case without the aid of a solicitor.

2. I recognise the difference between getting a judgment and actually receiving recompence so I don't want to incur more costs which I may never recover.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I didn't think that parents were liable for torts committed by their children.

It's a long time since I studied common law so I know it's not black and white and legislation has changed over the years.

This article indicates parents are liable for the torts of their children -
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/measures-to-tackle-juvenile-crime-by-holding-parents-liable-not-being-used-1.943158

“The Children Act 2001 was widely praised as a piece of ground-breaking legislation when it was enacted and there was a particular welcome for new powers which were designed to prevent parents from abdicating responsibility for criminal or anti-social behaviour carried out by their children,” Ms O’Sullivan added.

Whether the parents / guardians are liable or the juveniles are liable I still need the contact details to commence a civil case.

Or is it possible that in Irish law no one is liable, regardless of the cost of damage caused, if a juvenile admits their guilt and partakes in the Youth Diversion Programme? That would be completely inequitable to the victim.

Ash.J.Williams · 07-04-2021 10:37am

54and56 wrote: »

Long story short,

Bored juvenile vandalises my property causing €2,000 of damage.

Incident caught on CCTV and reported to Gardai who arrest juvenile.

Juvenile writes letter admitting guilt and apologising etc etc

Juvenile gets Youth Diversion Programme (I've no problem with this) but won't voluntarily pay for the damage done.

I want to commence a civil case against his parents/guardians to recover the cost of the damage.

Written request to the Guard handling the incident for the parents/guardians details replied to with a "I can't give out that info, please contact the station Superintendent."

Written request to the station Superintendent gets a reply "I can't issue that info as the youths identity is protected under Section 48 of the Children Act 2001. Please contact the Superintendent of the Garda Youth Diversion Office."

Written request with supporting documents (Pulse case info, previous letters requesting parents/guardians contact details so I can commence a civil case etc) attached sent by registered post to the Youth Diversion Superintendent months ago and no response.

As a citizen I'm entitled to commence a civil case seeking compensation (the incident Gardai confirmed in writing my right to do so and that he will be a witness) and it is my right to do so personally without the additional cost of employing a solicitor to act on my behalf but I'm being prevented from doing so by the Gardai not furnishing me with the details I need to identify the defendant(s) and serve the writ.

Anyone got any thoughts on the next course of action to ensure I get the parents/guardians contact details? Do I need to make a complaint to the Garda Ombudsman that I am not being treated as I should be whether that's under the victims charter (https://www.victimscharter.ie) or some other minimum service standard the Gardai are supposed to deliver to law abiding tax paying citizens like myself?

Am I just supposed to accept being out of pocket and suck it up?

I'm not looking to provoke a debate on the pro's and con's of the JLO/Youth Diversion Programme, it is what it is and I'm sure it does do some good but it seems inequitable that the perpetrator writes a brief letter apologising for his actions, gets 12 months supervision by a Juvenile Liaison Officer and I end up €2,000 out of pocket.

Would appreciate any practical steer this group can give me as this is all new to me and has been a very frustrating process so far.

In the real world Garda A would have emailed the super and cc’d you who in turn would email the other super and cc you also and you’d have everything you need

Lenar3556 · 07-04-2021 10:40am

I think you are making an assumption here that the child’s parents have some vicarious or strict liability for the damage caused by the child. I’m open to correction, but I don’t believe that is the case.

The minor is probably the person you need to sue, and this process will likely be difficult to get off the ground and even then highly unlikely to yield much by way of results.

I would forget about it.

What about your buildings insurance? Does it cover it?

07-04-2021 10:41am

Information obtained in criminal investigations are not subject to disclosure outside of certain situations.

You can complain to gsoc but it's not going to help. Plus the Gardai in question have done their jobs.

I have to admit, I didn't think they child act stopped victims from knowing. I'll have to read it again sometime.

Personally op, if your knowledge is insufficient that you are asking online and relying on newspapers, a solicitor might be your best bet even though I understand your reluctance.

Hoboo · 07-04-2021 10:42am

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

In the real world Garda A would have emailed the super and cc’d you who in turn would email the other super and cc you also and you’d have everything you need

That happens in the private sector where there is accountability. Less common in the private sector, and definitely not in the gardai.

ohnonotgmail · 07-04-2021 10:43am

OP I dont think the gardai will give you the names of the parents. they were not a party to the criminal act. they were not the perpetrators. I presume you have the name and address of the young scrote that did the damage?

07-04-2021 10:45am

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

In the real world Garda A would have emailed the super and cc’d you who in turn would email the other super and cc you also and you’d have everything you need

Gardai have a chain of command so no, super wouldn't be emailed and he wouldn't be a cc on internal mail unless the garda is an idiot

54and56 · 07-04-2021 11:51am

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

In the real world Garda A would have emailed the super and cc’d you who in turn would email the other super and cc you also and you’d have everything you need

Nope, In my real world I have an email from Garda A (no one cc'd), a letter from the local Super who confirmed he can't release the info due to Section 48 of the Children Act 2001 but suggested I contact the Superintendent of the Garda Youth Diversion Office and I've confirmation that the letter and supporting documents I sent registered post to the Superintendent of the Garda Youth Diversion Office were safely received and signed for back in January but no response, not even the courtesy of an acknowledgment of receipt or a reply to the separate email I sent at the same time copying the documents etc in case the hard copies somehow got lost in the system.

Garda A has been super professional and supportive and offered to be a witness for me. The local Super replied in writing within 7 days of receipt of my letter to him clearly stating why he can't provide the info I'm looking for which is fine and a professional way to behave but the Superintendent of the Garda Youth Diversion Office has just blanked me, no communication whatsoever.

That I do have a problem with.

Marcusm · 07-04-2021 11:59am

54and56 wrote: »

Hi ohnonotgmail, No, for two reasons:-

1. I don't have to, a citizen is entitled to bring a civil case without the aid of a solicitor.

2. I recognise the difference between getting a judgment and actually receiving recompence so I don't want to incur more costs which I may never recover.

It's a long time since I studied common law so I know it's not black and white and legislation has changed over the years.

This article indicates parents are liable for the torts of their children -
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/measures-to-tackle-juvenile-crime-by-holding-parents-liable-not-being-used-1.943158

“The Children Act 2001 was widely praised as a piece of ground-breaking legislation when it was enacted and there was a particular welcome for new powers which were designed to prevent parents from abdicating responsibility for criminal or anti-social behaviour carried out by their children,” Ms O’Sullivan added.

Whether the parents / guardians are liable or the juveniles are liable I still need the contact details to commence a civil case.

Or is it possible that in Irish law no one is liable, regardless of the cost of damage caused, if a juvenile admits their guilt and partakes in the Youth Diversion Programme? That would be completely inequitable to the victim.

If the offender is a child, you can proceed against them but they likely have no assets. As regards the parents, the additional ability to obtain relief from them ubder the Children Act 2001 has a fairly high bar, section 113(2)

(2) The court may not order that the compensation be paid by a parent or guardian unless it is satisfied that a wilful failure of the parent or guardian to take care of or to control the child contributed to the child’s criminal behaviour.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 12:01pm

Lenar3556 wrote: »

I think you are making an assumption here that the child’s parents have some vicarious or strict liability for the damage caused by the child. I’m open to correction, but I don’t believe that is the case.

The minor is probably the person you need to sue, and this process will likely be difficult to get off the ground and even then highly unlikely to yield much by way of results.

I would forget about it.

I don't really mind whether it's the juvenile (who looks at least 15) or the guardians/parents who are responsible.

Maybe I'm old school but I don't let people walk all over me and I've always held my own children to account making them apologise to neighbours and pay for any damage they themselves may have accidentally caused e.g. breaking a neighbours window with a Sliotar comes to mind!!

I am absolutely determined to hold either the juvenile or his parents/guardians accountable and if successful (I have a video of the incident, a letter of apology and a Guard willing to be a witness) I will deal separately with collecting payment of the judgment even if that means agreeing to weekly payments of €5 for 7.5 years!!!

Lenar3556 wrote: »

What about your buildings insurance? Does it cover it?

Yes but I don't want to make a claim under it for the following reasons:-

1. It wasn't an accident, the perpetrator has admitted the act and should be the one paying. Why burden insurance companies so all out premiums can go up even further?

2. The policy has a €500 excess so I'd still be out of pocket, just by a different amount.

3. I don't want a claim on the policy.

4. I don't want my premiums to go up in future if as a result of the claim I'm deemed to be a higher risk.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 12:05pm

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Information obtained in criminal investigations are not subject to disclosure outside of certain situations.

You can complain to gsoc but it's not going to help. Plus the Gardai in question have done their jobs.

I have to admit, I didn't think they child act stopped victims from knowing. I'll have to read it again sometime.

Personally op, if your knowledge is insufficient that you are asking online and relying on newspapers, a solicitor might be your best bet even though I understand your reluctance.

Thanks Niner leprauchan,

I guess I'm trying to find out if my circumstances qualify or not as one of the "certain situations" you refer to.

Also, I'm not relying on newspapers or this thread, I'm just trying to gather information from public sources to see if I can proceed with this by myself or does the system make it practically impossible to do so in which case I will instruct my solicitor to act albeit reluctantly.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 12:07pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

OP I dont think the gardai will give you the names of the parents. they were not a party to the criminal act. they were not the perpetrators. I presume you have the name and address of the young scrote that did the damage?

Nope, the system protects them totally. Thus far they have been able to cause €2,000 worth of damage to my property without any substantial accountability other than a 2 line letter of apology and supervision for 12 months by a JLO officer. No conviction, no record and no paying for the damage.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 12:12pm

Marcusm wrote: »

If the offender is a child, you can proceed against them but they likely have no assets. As regards the parents, the additional ability to obtain relief from them ubder the Children Act 2001 has a fairly high bar, section 113(2)

(2) The court may not order that the compensation be paid by a parent or guardian unless it is satisfied that a wilful failure of the parent or guardian to take care of or to control the child contributed to the child’s criminal behaviour.

Thanks Marcusm, the offender was 15 at the time (Garda A mentioned he was lucky to get the benefit of Youth Diversion Programme as he was just short of 16) so likely doesn't have a lot of assets but that's a secondary issue for me. I want to hold him to account, get a judgement and then see what I can do to extract payment.

07-04-2021 12:58pm

54and56 wrote: »

Hi ohnonotgmail, No, for two reasons:-

1. I don't have to, a citizen is entitled to bring a civil case without the aid of a solicitor.

2. I recognise the difference between getting a judgment and actually receiving recompence so I don't want to incur more costs which I may never recover.

1. Entitled and feasible are two different things.
2. Are you aware of the potential for more costs being imposed upon you by the court?

Lenar3556 · 07-04-2021 1:05pm

54and56 wrote: »

I don't really mind whether it's the juvenile (who looks at least 15) or the guardians/parents who are responsible.

Maybe I'm old school but I don't let people walk all over me and I've always held my own children to account making them apologise to neighbours and pay for any damage they themselves may have accidentally caused e.g. breaking a neighbours window with a Sliotar comes to mind!!

I am absolutely determined to hold either the juvenile or his parents/guardians accountable and if successful (I have a video of the incident, a letter of apology and a Guard willing to be a witness) I will deal separately with collecting payment of the judgment even if that means agreeing to weekly payments of €5 for 7.5 years!!!

Yes but I don't want to make a claim under it for the following reasons:-

1. It wasn't an accident, the perpetrator has admitted the act and should be the one paying. Why burden insurance companies so all out premiums can go up even further?

2. The policy has a €500 excess so I'd still be out of pocket, just by a different amount.

3. I don't want a claim on the policy.

4. I don't want my premiums to go up in future if as a result of the claim I'm deemed to be a higher risk.

Best of luck with that.
There is an injustice, but sometimes that’s just life.

07-04-2021 1:18pm

54and56 wrote: »

Thanks Marcusm, the offender was 15 at the time (Garda A mentioned he was lucky to get the benefit of Youth Diversion Programme as he was just short of 16) so likely doesn't have a lot of assets but that's a secondary issue for me. I want to hold him to account, get a judgement and then see what I can do to extract payment.

Can you bring a civil case against a juvenile? Not sure how much you could really be awarded.
Btw, the jlo system is up to aged 18, not 16.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 1:24pm

ronoc wrote: »

1. Entitled and feasible are two different things.

Very true!!

ronoc wrote: »

2. Are you aware of the potential for more costs being imposed upon you by the court?

I'm aware that I could potentially end up with costs if I bring a frivolous case wasting the courts time or I don't prove my case and have to pick the up the costs of the defendant.

Are there other potential costs which could be imposed on me??

54and56 · 07-04-2021 1:30pm

bubblypop wrote: »

Can you bring a civil case against a juvenile? Not sure how much you could really be awarded.
Btw, the jlo system is up to aged 18, not 16.

If you couldn't bring a civil case against a juvenile (or his parents/guardians) there would be anarchy as juveniles could literally destroy any amount of property or cause all sorts of damage with impunity from financial accountability.

Ah, my bad. The lad looked like a young adult. I took the "lucky to qualify" statement by the Guard to mean he was just shy of 16 but I guess it could have meant he is just shy of 18.

So old enough to drive a car or have sex and be a parent but not old enough to be made pay for his wilful vandalism

07-04-2021 1:49pm

54and56 wrote: »

If you couldn't bring a civil case against a juvenile (or his parents/guardians) there would be anarchy as juveniles could literally destroy any amount of property or cause all sorts of damage with impunity from financial accountability.

Ah, my bad. The lad looked like a young adult. I took the "lucky to qualify" statement by the Guard to mean he was just shy of 16 but I guess it could have meant he is just shy of 18.

So old enough to drive a car or have sex and be a parent but not old enough to be made pay for his wilful vandalism

Yep. I would think that juveniles do cause any amount of damage without impunity.
Be glad it wasn't a pair of eleven year olds that caused thousands of euro of damage (I have seen it)

tdf7187 · 07-04-2021 1:55pm

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

In the real world Garda A would have emailed the super and cc’d you who in turn would email the other super and cc you also and you’d have everything you need

I think you'll find what you suggest would, in the really real world, render several individuals in breach of both data protection and child protection legislation. Not a very sensible suggestion to solve the OP's legitimate query.

hullaballoo · 07-04-2021 4:59pm

Over the course of our recorded legal history, going back thousands of years now, there's been no change to the position that imposing liability on a child in tort is near impossible and the parents/guardians have essentially no liability.

But maybe the OP will be the Erin Brockovich of child liability and make them pay. Once the OP is also prepared to deal with the problem of enforcing a judgment against someone who has no legal capacity to hold assets.

I'm following this.

blueythebear · 07-04-2021 5:10pm

OP is wasting his or her time here. There is no onus on the gardai to provide you with the information you are seeking.

You have a fundamental issue here which has your case doomed from the outset. You cannot obtain judgment against a minor (for what thats worth) and it will be next to impossible to prove that the parents have any liability for the actions of their child.

If you go at this, you could easily be made liable for the legal costs of each parent so you could lose out financially.

On a practical note, you are also escalating matters between you and this child, dragging their parents into it. Its likely to only end badly. Be thankful the child has been caught and dealt with by the gardai, even if it seems lenient.

GM228 · 07-04-2021 5:39pm

hullaballoo wrote: »

I'm following this.

I'll give you a spoiler on how it ends:-

Prepare for an anticlimax

54and56 · 07-04-2021 6:11pm

hullaballoo wrote: »

Over the course of our recorded legal history, going back thousands of years now, there's been no change to the position that imposing liability on a child in tort is near impossible and the parents/guardians have essentially no liability.

I can accept that might be the case.

hullaballoo wrote: »

Once the OP is also prepared to deal with the problem of enforcing a judgment against someone who has no legal capacity to hold assets.

By the time a civil case is complete the 15/16/17 year old minor will be at or close to adulthood. Would an award made against a minor (assuming I do an Erin Brockovich on it) carry forward into a liability to pay in adulthood?

hullaballoo wrote: »

I'm following this.

Good to know.

BingCrosbee · 07-04-2021 6:33pm

I know of a case in the midlands where a man reporting for a local newspaper at a funeral got a severe beating by a local gouger and nothing is going to be done about it. The local Sargeant saw it happening. This is Ireland 2021.

Ash.J.Williams · 07-04-2021 7:15pm

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Gardai have a chain of command so no, super wouldn't be emailed and he wouldn't be a cc on internal mail unless the garda is an idiot

Exactly that’s why the op is getting nowhere

54and56 · 07-04-2021 7:36pm

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

Exactly that’s why the op is getting nowhere

Ah, it's a long road that has no turn.

I'll keep chipping away until I find a way to hold the vandal accountable for the cost of the damage.

€2,000 in tax paid money takes a while to earn, I'm not inclined to just roll over and write it off because it's too hard or too frustrating to pursue.

GM228 · 07-04-2021 7:37pm

54and56 wrote: »

This article indicates parents are liable for the torts of their children -
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/measures-to-tackle-juvenile-crime-by-holding-parents-liable-not-being-used-1.943158

“The Children Act 2001 was widely praised as a piece of ground-breaking legislation when it was enacted and there was a particular welcome for new powers which were designed to prevent parents from abdicating responsibility for criminal or anti-social behaviour carried out by their children,” Ms O’Sullivan added.

Whether the parents / guardians are liable or the juveniles are liable I still need the contact details to commence a civil case.

Or is it possible that in Irish law no one is liable, regardless of the cost of damage caused, if a juvenile admits their guilt and partakes in the Youth Diversion Programme? That would be completely inequitable to the victim.

That article indicates parents can be liable subject to qualification (the willful failure of the parent or guardian to take care of or to control the child and it contributed to the child’s criminal behavior), not that they are liable, and it is just a restatement of a 112 year old law which has never been tested.

As has been stated parents are not ordinarily responsible for their childs actions save for S113 of the act and a few small common law exceptions.

Even if you wanted to test S113 it is not possible to do once the child has been admitted to the diversion programme.

54and56 wrote: »

I'll keep chipping away until I find a way to hold the vandal accountable for the cost of the damage.

The only way to do it is to either get the legislation changed (with a retrospective provision which is next to impossible) or somehow go against previous rulings of the highest court in the land.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 8:07pm

blueythebear wrote: »

OP is wasting his or her time here. There is no onus on the gardai to provide you with the information you are seeking.

Maybe not but the www.victimscharter.ie states the following which doesn't square with your assertion:-

blueythebear wrote: »

You have a fundamental issue here shich has your case doomed from the outset. You cannot obtain judgment against a minor (for what thats worth) and it will be next to impossible to prove that yhe parents have any liability for the actions of their child.

Maybe you're right but I'm happy to exhaust the process to a point where the state/justice system officially tells me it cannot hold either the juvenile vandal or his parents liable for the €2,000 in damage he inflicted and that I just have to suck it up. At least at that point I'll have exhausted the state justice process(s) and can then use that inequitable outcome to bang the drum and seek legislative reform.

blueythebear wrote: »

On a practical note, you are also escalating matters between you and this child, dragging their parents into it. Its likely to only escalate matters. Be thankful the child has been caught and dealt with by the gardai, even if it seems lenient.

I disagree. Holding someone to financial account for their actions doesn't escalate things, it brings closure for all parties.

GM228 · 07-04-2021 8:11pm

54and56 wrote: »

Maybe not but the www.victimscharter.ie states the following which doesn't square with your assertion:-

How does that not square with the posters assertion? It deals with "legal rights to information", there is no legal right to the information you seek, in fact if you were given that information the Guard would be breaking the law, it is a criminal offence to give you the information you want.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 8:13pm

GM228 wrote: »

That article indicates parents can be liable subject to qualification (the willful failure of the parent or guardian to take care of or to control the child and it contributed to the child’s criminal behavior), not that they are liable, and it is just a restatement of a 112 year old law which has never been tested.

As has been stated parents are not ordinarily responsible for their childs actions save for S113 of the act and a few small common law exceptions.

Even if you wanted to test S113 it is not possible to do once the child has been admitted to the diversion programme.

The only way to do it is to either get the legislation changed (with a retrospective provision which is next to impossible) or somehow go against previous rulings of the highest court in the land.

Thanks GM228, appreciate your insight.

I have one question.

Your reference to testing S113 not being possible once the child has been admitted to the diversion programme.

Does that conflate the criminal justice system (which I know I have no influence over or recourse to) to the civil law system? Are you saying once someone (whether a minor or not) is dealt with in the criminal justice system the victim of that persons criminal activity is prohibited from seeking recompense via the civil courts? If true wouldn't someone paralysed by a criminally convicted reckless driver be prohibited from seeking compensation in the civil courts?

54and56 · 07-04-2021 8:18pm

GM228 wrote: »

How does that not square with the posters assertion? It deals with "legal rights to information", there is no legal right to the information you seek, in fact it is a criminal offence to give you the information you want.

That's the essence of what I'm testing.

Presumably victims of drunk drivers etc are provided with details of the drunk driver by AGS so they can be sued for compensation etc.

In my case there's a juvenlie involved. I still have the right to bring a civil case but the identity of the juvenile and/or his parents is being shielded from me by AGS.

I get that juveniles need protection (often from themselves!!) but it shouldn't be at the total cost of my ability to pursue a civil case to recover the cost of the damage they have admitted inflicting. That seems totally inequitable.

If I'm not entitled to the contact details of the juvenile or his parents I just want the Youth Diversion Superintendent to confirm that in writing to me so I can try to pursue another avenue to issue the juvenile with a civil writ.

Despite signing for my registered letter requesting this info, with supporting docs etc, in January I still haven't had the courtesy of a response which definitely doesn't square with the commitments made by AGS in the victims charter.

GM228 · 07-04-2021 8:18pm

54and56 wrote: »

Thanks GM228, appreciate your insight.

I have one question.

Your reference to testing S113 not being possible once the child has been admitted to the diversion programme.

Does that conflate the criminal justice system (which I know I have no influence over or recourse to) to the civil law system? Are you saying once someone (whether a minor or not) is dealt with in the criminal justice system the victim of that persons criminal activity is prohibited from seeking recompense via the civil courts? If true wouldn't someone paralysed by a criminally convicted reckless driver be prohibited from seeking compensation in the civil courts?

I am talking specifically in relation to S113 which is applicable to a criminal offence only.

With regards to the civil side it has already been determined by the Supreme Court that a parent is not liable.

GM228 · 07-04-2021 8:22pm

54and56 wrote: »

That's the essence of what I'm testing.

If I'm not entitled to the contact details of the juvenile or his parents I just want the Youth Diversion Superintendent to confirm that in writing to me so I can try to pursue another avenue to issue the juvenile with a civil writ.

Despite signing for my registered letter requesting this info, with supporting docs etc, in January I still haven't had the courtesy of a response which definitely doesn't square with the commitments made by AGS in the victims charter.

It is not the role of the superintendent to provide you with legal advice though, and the Charter confers no rights either, it is simply a guide.

Also, under Common Law, you can't compel the Gardai in any investigative or administrative functions.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 8:28pm

GM228 wrote: »

It is not the role of the superintendent to provide you with legal information though, and the Charter confers no rights either, it is simply a guide.

I'm not looking for legal info, just contact details and the charter is guiding that I can expect AGS to ensure that my "rights to information, advice and
other appropriate assistance are met effectively and efficiently".

3 months and not even an acknowledgement of my request is neither effective or efficient.

GM228 wrote: »

Also, under Common Law, you can't compel the Gardai in any investigative or administrative functions.

Don't need to. The investigating Garda wrote to me offering to be a witness.

blueythebear · 07-04-2021 8:41pm

54and56 wrote: »

Maybe not but the www.victimscharter.ie states the following which doesn't square with your assertion:-

That does square with my assertion. You have no legal right to the identity of this child.

54and56 wrote: »

Maybe you're right but I'm happy to exhaust the process to a point where the state/justice system officially tells me it cannot hold either the juvenile vandal or his parents liable for the €2,000 in damage he inflicted and that I just have to suck it up. At least at that point I'll have exhausted the state justice process(s) and can then use that inequitable outcome to bang the drum and seek legislative reform.

I am right. And the manner in which you will be officially told will be with your case dismissed and an award of costs against you. You will have to pay money to the parents of the child. Im sure that will not sit well with you.

54and56 wrote: »

I disagree. Holding someone to financial account for their actions doesn't escalate things, it brings closure for all parties.

If you want closure you leave it where it is now. You are prolonging the issue which is the exact opposite of the closure you seek.

GM228 · 07-04-2021 8:44pm

54and56 wrote: »

I'm not looking for legal info, just contact details and the charter is guiding that I can expect AGS to ensure that my "rights to information, advice and other appropriate assistance are met effectively and efficiently".

3 months and not even an acknowledgement of my request is neither effective or efficient.

The statement in the charter is qualified, you forgot the important word before rights - "legal rights to information, advice and other appropriate assistance are met effectively and efficiently", there is no legal right for them to reply to you (the same way you have no legal right to the information you seek) or outline the reason for failure to disclose what you seek, a reply is a courtesy, nothing more.

54and56 wrote: »

Don't need to. The investigating Garda wrote to me offering to be a witness.

I was talking in terms of compelling them to go by the charter.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 8:51pm

GM228 wrote: »

The statement in the charter is qualified, you forgot the important word before information - "legal rights to information, advice and other appropriate assistance are met effectively and efficiently", there is no legal right for them to reply to you (the same way you have no legal right to the information you seek) or outline the reason for failure to disclose what you seek, a reply is a courtesy, nothing more.

Wow, explains a lot.

GM228 wrote: »

I was talking in terms of compelling them to go by the charter.

No worries, I never mentioned compelling them to be a witness.

Thankfully, despite it not being required under law, that Guard seems to understand what side of the victim / vandal their priority is.

GM228 · 07-04-2021 9:00pm

54and56 wrote: »

Wow, explains a lot.

It's a fact though.

54and56 wrote: »

No worries, I never mentioned compelling them to be a witness.

Neither did I, I am not talking about compelling them to be a witness, I'm talking about compelling them to follow anything in the charter.

54and56 wrote: »

Thankfully, despite it not being required under law, that Guard seems to understand what side of the victim / vandal their priority is.

So a failure to reply aligns a person on the side of the vandal?

There could be any number of reasons why you have not had a reply.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 9:14pm

blueythebear wrote: »

That does square with my assertion. You have no legal right to the identity of this child.

Well two things:-

1. I'm not looking for the juveniles identity, I've asked for his parents contact details.

2. If it does prove impossible to get his parents contact details from AGS I have my own very clear HD CCTV of the vandal so I do have the ability to identify him which I haven't overtly tried to do so far but it's a long road.

If I do uncover his identity I'll have what I need to research from public / open sources of info who he is, what his age is, his address etc and if necessary wait until he is past his 18th birthday (which will be well within the statute of limitations for a civil case) to issue my writ. I'm very patient and not in a hurry.

blueythebear wrote: »

I am right. And the manner in which you will be officially told will be with your case dismissed and an award of costs against you. You will have to pay money to the parents of the child. Im sure that will not sit well with you.

Nothing is ever that black and white. Time will tell and if I do end up having to pay c'est la vie. It'll sit better with me than rolling over and not holding this vandal to account.

blueythebear wrote: »

If you want closure you leave it where it is now. You are prolonging the issue which is the exact opposite of the closure you seek.

The problem with that suggestion is I have to pretend to myself that it's ok to let this vandal damage my property and not have to pay for the cost of the repairs.

That might work for some people, not for me.

If some 10 year olds were messing around and accidentally damaged my property I'd expect an apology and for the parents to offer to pay but even if they didn't I'd let it slide as there was no criminal intent.

This guy is 15/16/17, well past the age of criminal responsibility, and what he did (which he admitted to) was nothing other than pure vandalism.

As far as I'm concerned, you deliberately break it, you bought it and until that tab is paid I'll keep chipping away.

GM228 · 07-04-2021 9:20pm

54and56 wrote: »

Well two things:-

1. I'm not looking for the juveniles identity, I've asked for his parents contact details.

They can't give you the parents names either, it is an offence for them to do so!

Jim2007 · 07-04-2021 9:24pm

54and56 wrote: »

This guy is 15/16/17, well past the age of criminal responsibility, and what he did (which he admitted to) was nothing other than pure vandalism.

As far as I'm concerned, you deliberately break it, you bought it and until that tab is paid I'll keep chipping away.

You will not get any information about a minor or their family as it would clearly be a disclosure of their identity. The Garda have set exactly why they will not disclose such information to your, so it is false and misleading to state that they have not responded to you. They just did not give you the answer you wanted.

Now clearly you are way out of your depth on this. So it's up to you, consult a solicitor who will explain how to proceed are drop it.

blueythebear · 07-04-2021 9:27pm

54and56 wrote: »

Well two things:-

1. I'm not looking for the juveniles identity, I've asked for his parents contact details.

2. If it does prove impossible to get his parents contact details from AGS I have my own very clear HD CCTV of the vandal so I do have the ability to identify him which I haven't overtly tried to do so far but it's a long road.

If I do uncover his identity I'll have what I need to research from public / open sources of info who he is, what his age is, his address etc and if necessary wait until he is past his 18th birthday (which will be well within the statute of limitations for a civil case) to issue my writ. I'm very patient and not in a hurry.

Nothing is ever that black and white. Time will tell and if I do end up having to pay c'est la vie. It'll sit better with me than rolling over and not holding this vandal to account.

The problem with that suggestion is I have to pretend to myself that it's ok to let this vandal damage my property and not have to pay for the cost of the repairs.

That might work for some people, not for me.

If some 10 year olds were messing around and accidentally damaged my property I'd expect an apology and for the parents to offer to pay but even if they didn't I'd let it slide as there was no criminal intent.

This guy is 15/16/17, well past the age of criminal responsibility, and what he did (which he admitted to) was nothing other than pure vandalism.

As far as I'm concerned, you deliberately break it, you bought it and until that tab is paid I'll keep chipping away.

Unfortunately, your enthusiasm for retribution/justice does not displace your lack of knowledge here.

Several posters including myself have given you the lie of the land and you still want to proceed in spite of that. Thats your choice but i dont know how eĺse to tell you how ill advised your proposed course of action is.

54and56 · 07-04-2021 9:33pm

GM228 wrote: »

They can't give you the parents names either, it is an offence for them to do so!

Then all they need to do so is reply to my request confirming same, I'm not looking for them to do something they are legally prevented from doing.

As the victim in this case I don't think a 2 line reply in a 3 month timeframe from receipt of my registered letter is an unreasonable ask or expectation but then again I'm not used to engaging with AGS so maybe it is??

Gardai not responding to request for info needed to commence a civil case, what next?

Comments