The IET is carrying out some important updates between 17-30 April and all of our websites will be view only. For more information, read this Announcement

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?

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?
Parents

  • 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

Reply

  • 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

Children
No Data