Without Conviction for Obtaining Property By Deception
Our client was involved in a motor vehicle accident. This meant that she was unable to resume normal duties and was unable to work at all for a period of time. She required income assistance from the Transport Accident Commission (TAC). While receiving payments, she commenced working casually and failed to properly advise TAC. She was overpaid over $10,000 over a period of 10 months.
The client was eventually charged with Obtaining Property By Deception and Kristina Kothrakis represented her at the Ringwood Magistrates’ Court. Kristina was successful in obtaining a sentence without conviction for Obtaining Property By Deception.
Our client was incredibly concerned about receiving a criminal conviction because she works as a nurse and is also in aged care. She was concerned about the impact a conviction would have on her ability to maintain her registration as a nurse as well as on her future employment prospects. She had no prior convictions and we were able to obtain a number of character references, some of which were from her current place of employment, which attested to her normally being of good character.
Submissions were made as to the challenges she faced when she was injured and the financial pressure she was under at the time. Submissions were also made as to the potential effect of this event on her future.
The magistrate was ultimately persuaded to impose a fine without conviction for Obtaining Property By Deception. Our client was also ordered to pay TAC’s professional costs and to pay compensation. She was given 3 months to pay the fine and costs and was asked to enter into an agreement with TAC in regards to payment of the compensation.
Kristina strives to achieve the best possible result for all her clients. Skilled, decisive and assertive, Kristina demonstrates dedication, care and professionalism at all times.
Visit Kristina’s profile to read more about her background and experience.
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 27/07/2016