Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 35 replies
  • Subscribers 10 subscribers
  • Views 996 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Should non-payment of a mobile phone bill be a criminal offence?

Arran Cameron
It used to be known as abstraction of electricity on a landline telephone network but it might be better referred to as abstraction of EM waves or photons, depending on how you view the wave particle duality, on a mobile network.


A friend racked up a mobile phone bill of nearly £2000 as a result of exceeding his data allowance whilst abroad back in 2017. He changed his network provider then cancelled the direct debit resulting in this bill going unpaid to today. It's not actually illegal to do this as all the old network provider can do is demand the payment, as a civil matter, and ruin his credit rating. He claims that unlike an unpaid gas or electricity bill, an unpaid phone bill has not consumed any of the earth's precious natural resources apart from a bit of electricity that cost only a tiny fraction of the value of the bill.


A local bobby disagrees and says that theft is theft regardless of whether it's a tangible object or a non-tangible service, so the criminal should be brought to justice and jailed.


Does the IET have a position regarding the legal status of unpaid phone bills and whether or not refusal to pay should be a criminal offence?
  • 0

    Arran Cameron:

    Another aspect to the non-payment of a phone bill is the lost VAT revenue for the government. Could it be possible to prosecute the customer for tax evasion?




    Some years ago a builder converting some barns into house dug a big hole and buried all the rubbish.


    a neighbour reported him and he was taken to court for tax avoidance, as he had not paid the waste tax, rather than an environmental crime.


    Andy Betteridge.

  • 0

    Rob Eagle:

    The old Strowger equipment, that was lovely stuff.




    At primary school I shared a double desk with one of the twin girls who lived at the telephone exchange, because her mother was the chief operator. I lost contact with her and her sister after a new automatic exchange was built and this new-fangled modern equipment was installed making the old exchange and the girls mother redundant, resulting in no more going to birthday parties at the village telephone exchange with the kids from school.


    The new exchange was next to the scout hut and the engineers let us look around on a number of occasions when they saw us looking through the windows, I also helped my granddad who had the grass cutting contract for a number of local exchanges and again used to get inside them for a cup of tea .


    So many things that are not going to happen again, a fourteen year old drinking tea inside a telephone exchange whilst having a break from cutting the grass around it with a petrol engined mower, birthday parties at the telephone exchange ?


    Andy Betteridge

     

  • 0
    Anyway, why should not paying a mobile phone bill be a criminal offence any more than not paying an electricians bill for work completed?


    Andy B
  • 0

    Sparkingchip:

    Anyway, why should not paying a mobile phone bill be a criminal offence any more than not paying an electricians bill for work completed?




    I don't think it is (or isn't, whichever way around that works!). But I suspect that to get the police and CPS at all interested there would have to be clear likelihood of evidence of deliberate intention to avoid payment: e.g. in the electrician's case if the non-payee claimed that the work wasn't done right (so they weren't going to pay for it) it would probably just trawl through the civil courts for years making money for the legal teams. But I can imagine that if several suppliers / contractors could show that the same person had not paid them it might be possible to get a criminal prosecution started. Anyone here got examples of criminal cases brought against non-payers of small businesses or sole traders?


    Thanks,


    Andy

  • 0
    Andy,


    Not quite, but a couple of relevant situations that I had some historic involvement in.


    Two employees of different businesses colluded in a “sweetheart deal”.  One placed an order purporting to be a Director authorised to do so, induced by a promise of business in return which never materialised.  Despite the order being repudiated when it was discovered (it was for a subscription to a database), the debt was enforced and passed to a “no win no fee” lawyer. Neither dishonest party was prosecuted or the police involved, although the placer of the order was dismissed.


    Workers were paid for hours worked and a productivity bonus on the basis of falsified documents (similar to an expenses fiddle). A manager was potentially complicit in “turning a blind eye” , so another manager reported it to a much higher level in the organisation as a “whistle blower”. This left other managers in the chain of command between “under a cloud” which they understandably resented, when it became clear through the circumstances what had happened.  I can’t say much more because it set off a chain of events leading to a criminal conviction and parliamentary inquiry, completely unrelated to the original “fiddle”, which was dealt with through employer’s disciplinary procedures.   


    I engaged a self-employed builder to work on a domestic extension, when I ended his engagement on the basis of poor performance, he came round some days later, according to witnesses seemingly under the influence of something and smashed some windows in revenge. The Police were involved and he was prosecuted, but he only entered a guilty plea at the last possible minute. We never saw a penny of the compensation ordered  by the court.       


    In general, my observation is that the Police or DPP, would not wish to get involved, or in many circumstances a wronged party wish to involve them, even if there is evidence of dishonesty, when the issue can be resolved by other means, ie “it’s a civil matter”.  However, I have seen prosecutions for minor “fingers in the till”, “theft from work” and fraud offences, where an employer has wanted to pursue that course of action.   

  • 0

    Roy Bowdler:
    In general, my observation is that the Police or DPP, would not wish to get involved, or in many circumstances a wronged party wish to involve them, even if there is evidence of dishonesty, when the issue can be resolved by other means, ie “it’s a civil matter”.  However, I have seen prosecutions for minor “fingers in the till”, “theft from work” and fraud offences, where an employer has wanted to pursue that course of action.   




    Yes, that's been my experience too - I suspect a combination of overwork and the fact that proof of active dishonesty is required to get a conviction. I think we've been lucky that in the 25 plus years that my wife has been self employed she's only had one client who tried to evade payment, but even there we didn't even need an actual solicitor's letter, just a letter (drafted with a friend of ours who has legal experience) saying the usual "pay in the next week or I'll pass the matter to my solicitor". 


    I've certainly seen a case of an employee jailed for theft of IT equipment - but in that case they worked in procurement and ordered more laptops than they were supposed to, the extra laptops then "disappeared". I suspect dishonesty was pretty easy to prove there!


    On the other hand, in a previous employment I remember our company solicitor coming in to give the senior management team a briefing on what constituted theft from a company, and saying we should aim to start criminal proceedings against any member of staff who took a pen home from the office. When we said "don't be daft" (and probably "life's too short") he affected to look scared and to said "I'm going to check whether my car still has it's wheels on since you encourage your employees to steal". Hmmm...I'd say these things aren't as black and white as some lawyers (employed and bar-room!) would like them to be. Which is why good lawyers can charge as much as they do. If any Ricardo lawyers are reading this I will admit that I do use work pens for home purposes, I also use home pens for work purposes...


    Cheers,


    Andy

  • 0
    A local garage had a guy who worked in the body shop charged with theft when he went home with a piece of wet and dry abrasive paper that he had been using in the pocket of his work trousers, valued in pennies. 


    Andy B 


  • 0
    Hallo to ALL - I have now been retired from my previous Employment "The Job" for Twenty (20) Years - Previously in Electronics & Electrics after my Career finished - therefore I speak as I find "Internet Knowledge" The Theft Act 1968 Section(1) dealt with the "Definition(s)" of Theft there are Three (3) A Person DISHONESTLY APPROPRIATES PROPERTY belonging to an OTHER - to prove Theft you have to satisfy those Three (3) criteria - normally now we break down those criteria to explain them in "context" - I won`t bother unless required - Moving on "Abstracting Electricity Sec.13 Theft Act" now you enter the "Minefield" I will only say in the "Electronic World" you are standing in YOUR field under a "Super Grid" Transmission Line(s) & you notice that the waving of the "Old Fluorescent" - IT LIGHTS UP & so you couple up Twenty (20) & illuminate your Barn - Have you committed an Offence YES/NO the answer is YES even though there is NO PHYSICAL CONTACT - in brief YOU form the "MENS REA" the THOUGHT to do WRONG DOING then your Illumination Circuit ABSTRACTS the means to POWER it - YES the "Electro Magnetic Pulse/Wave" Now you can SEE how COMPLICATED this can ALL become - Therefore returning to the initial POST - I am of the Personal View this is first of all not THEFT ask yourself When did the MENS REA appear can you PROVE IT !! - Therefore if this is the case I can only see a "CIVIL DEBT" in other words "NO CRIME" so much for a "Disturbance of the Ether" !! - I will stick to interpreting BS 7671 much more relaxing !! **Here`s one to ponder !! - Tax Evasion or Tax Avoidance - which is Criminal - answer(s) in a "Plain Brown Envelope" !! - Hope this wasn`t to "tiring" !! DM
  • 0
    Did you take it, did you mean to take it and did you mean to permanently deprive the owner of their property was how it was explained to me when I did jury service rather a long time ago.


    Andy B.
  • 0
    Would any of you, with an interest in things legal, have a look at my post entitled "Straw Poll" and give me you opinion?


    Thanks,


    Rob

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines