​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​Tessa Lee, Sports journalist reporting on global leagues since 2021.​

Former AFL player Nick Stevens jailed headlines have followed a County Court decision in Victoria, where the 46 year old was sentenced to nine months in prison for defrauding six families through an unlicensed pool installation business. The offences occurred in the Mildura region in 2017 and involved more than $167,000 paid by homeowners for swimming pools that were either improperly installed or left unfinished. The case matters because it highlights the serious consequences of deceptive building practices and the impact such conduct can have on families and local communities.

Stevens, who played 231 AFL games for Carlton and Port Adelaide before retiring in 2009, was found guilty in March of dishonestly obtaining financial advantage by deception. He was also convicted of using a false document during the course of the offending.

County Court Judge Fiona Todd sentenced Stevens after considering the financial and emotional harm suffered by the victims. During sentencing, she said he had exploited the trust and goodwill of the families who hired him to install pools at their homes.

Court Details and Sentence

Judge Todd told the court that several victims had sought reassurance about the legitimacy of the work and the required documentation. According to the judge, Stevens provided false assurances instead of the necessary permits, registrations, and insurance coverage.

The court heard that one family experienced a marriage breakdown linked to the financial stress caused by the project. Other victims were left facing significant financial hardship after paying substantial sums for work that was either incomplete or non compliant.

Stevens received a nine month prison sentence and will remain in custody until late December. Following his release, he will begin a two year community corrections order.

The corrections order includes judicial monitoring and a requirement to complete 120 hours of unpaid community work. He will also be prohibited from leaving Victoria without permission.

How the Fraud Occurred

In 2017, Stevens became a distributor for Leisure Pools Australia in Mildura. Before operating independently, he had installed pools under the supervision of a registered builder and within the legal framework required for such projects.

The court heard that Stevens later began operating on his own despite lacking the builder registration, permits, insurance, and oversight required under Victorian regulations. Between March and October 2017, six families paid him more than $167,000 for pool installations.

Problems emerged early in the process. The first victim's pool was inspected and found to be non compliant because it was not connected to a pump or water system and did not meet legal requirements.

As a result, Mildura Rural City Council issued a stop work order in May 2017. Despite that order, Stevens continued accepting payments from additional customers throughout June, August, September, and October.

Evidence presented in court showed that he never lodged permit applications for the pools involved. He also failed to secure building contracts, insurance coverage, or supervision from a registered builder for the projects.

Impact on Victims

The sentencing hearing detailed the significant consequences suffered by the affected families. Some homeowners were left with unfinished excavation work and large holes in their backyards instead of completed swimming pools.

Others received installations that did not meet legal standards and required costly remediation work. Families who had invested savings into the projects faced financial uncertainty and additional expenses to rectify the problems.

Judge Todd placed considerable weight on the impact of the offending when determining the sentence. She noted not only the financial losses but also the prolonged stress experienced by the victims over several years.

The case had been before the courts since 2021, extending the period during which victims sought accountability and resolution. The lengthy process added to the emotional burden experienced by those affected.

Previous Convictions and Prison Conditions

The court was also informed of Stevens's criminal history. He had previously served six months in prison in 2015 for domestic violence related offences.

During the current proceedings, the court heard that Stevens spent 78 days in pre sentence detention at Hopkins Correctional Centre in Ararat. Because of his public profile as a former AFL footballer, he was reportedly isolated for 23 hours a day for his own protection.

His legal representatives argued that a community corrections order without imprisonment would be more appropriate. They told the court that Stevens had not squandered the money through gambling and highlighted concerns about his vulnerability while incarcerated.

Prosecutors took a different position. Crown lawyers argued that Stevens had shown no genuine remorse since the legal proceedings commenced and that a custodial sentence was justified given the seriousness of the conduct.

Judge's Assessment

In delivering her sentence, Judge Todd said Stevens's level of responsibility increased as the offending continued. She noted that he persisted in taking payments even after regulatory concerns had been raised and a stop work order had been issued.

The judge considered several key factors, including the repeated nature of the deception, the total amount of money obtained, the lasting consequences for victims, and the period over which the offences occurred.

At the same time, she acknowledged the lengthy delay in bringing the matter to completion. She also described Stevens's prospects for rehabilitation as decent, suggesting there remains an opportunity for him to rebuild his life following the completion of his sentence and community order.

The case serves as a reminder of the importance of proper licensing, permits, and consumer protections within the construction and home improvement sectors. Authorities continue to encourage homeowners to verify registrations and compliance requirements before entering into building agreements.

For further information on Victorian building regulations and consumer protections, readers can refer to official resources.