Both utility bills and restaurant bills are demands to satisfy a debt after the service have been rendered. And in cases of rental properties, it’s refusal to pay even before the service (the legal right to reside in the property) is rendered, since most leases require paying on the first of the month. Why shouldn’t they all just be considered either all civil or all criminal. I don’t understand the inconsistency in legislation.
Country: United States of America
It could have to do with the transfer of property vs. services. When you don’t pay at a restaurant you’re stealing property (food). Rent is a service, the landlord doesn’t lose property if you don’t pay rent.
Utility bills and rent and such are also contract disputes, there’s no contract involved with a restaurant.
Or its down to intent. If it could be proven that you had no intention to pay a bill, that’s probably criminal fraud. Conversely, if you’re at a restaurant, refuse to pay and argue that service was inadequete, that’d be a civil issue.
Just spitballing here.