An unpaid utility bill and a criminal utility-theft allegation present different questions. Penal Code section 498 addresses specified interference with utility service and certain knowing receipt of its benefit, coupled with the required payment-related intent. Counsel should identify the alleged act, the period involved and the evidence connecting the accused person to it. An account name alone does not answer those questions.

Keep any utility notice, investigator’s communication, citation or complaint. A request for payment, a service shutoff and a criminal court date are not interchangeable. Establish what document you received and whether a response or appearance is scheduled.

Match the allegation to the conduct section 498 describes

Subdivision (b) describes five forms of conduct: diverting service, interfering with accurate measurement, tampering with utility property, making an unauthorized connection or reconnection, and using or directly benefiting from service with the specified knowledge or reason to believe it was unauthorized or affected by the listed interference.

The section also reaches a person who authorizes, solicits, aids or abets the conduct with the required intent. Therefore, an allegation need not claim the accused personally touched a meter. Equally, a problem found at a building does not establish what every owner, tenant, worker or account holder knew or did.

The introductory intent requirement concerns obtaining service without paying the full lawful charge, enabling someone else to do so, or depriving the utility of part of that charge. Counsel should evaluate this requirement alongside the particular act alleged. A technical finding, an unusually high bill or a billing adjustment does not replace that analysis.

Examine control, authorization and the inspection timeline

Subdivision (c) permits an inference in specified circumstances involving a device or altered meter on premises controlled by the customer or person receiving the benefit. It does not say that any irregularity creates automatic guilt. The condition found, control of the premises and the relevant dates deserve careful review.

Useful records may include:

  • Existing utility statements, account-opening records and service notices.
  • Leases, move-in and move-out records, and documents showing who controlled the relevant area.
  • Utility work orders, written authorizations and prior inspection reports.
  • Original photographs, inspection notes and communications already in your possession.
  • The investigator’s contact information, case reference and actual charging papers.

Keep the source of each item clear. A utility employee’s estimate of when a condition began may differ from the date it was first observed. A tenant’s occupancy period may differ from the account’s billing period. Those distinctions can matter when counsel compares the claimed conduct with your access, knowledge and alleged benefit.

Do not touch, test, reconnect or dismantle equipment to investigate the accusation yourself. Preserve existing records and have counsel address access to relevant evidence. If equipment presents an immediate hazard, contact the utility or emergency services as appropriate; preserving evidence does not require leaving a dangerous condition unattended.

Check the charged classification and the claimed service value

Section 498 contains a misdemeanor provision and a more serious punishment provision addressing service value above $950 or specified prior convictions. The applicable charging and sentencing rules require case-specific review; the utility’s demand amount does not itself establish a felony or a prison sentence. Bring the actual count and any prior-case documents to counsel rather than relying on a dollar figure from a collection notice.

The firm’s theft-charge guide provides broader context for reviewing a property-related accusation and its evidence.

Ask how the claimed value was calculated, which period it covers and what records support it. Keep additional fees, repair charges and the asserted value of service identifiable in the documents. A payment or civil settlement should not be assumed to end a criminal investigation.

The Law Offices of David S. Chesley can discuss a California criminal utility-theft allegation and the records underlying it. Contact the firm or call (800) 755-5174 with the notice, scheduled court date and available account and occupancy records.