Just read on bbc news.
Police found a stolen £30000 caravan on a travellers site and refuse to evict family and return the caravan to it's rightful (uninsured!) owner.
22 year old man arrested and released after 'proving' he bought it in good faith from a man in the PUB!!!
Where's the law about receiving/handling stolen items? If it was me receiving car/TV/ tools/bicycle or any other item I would be prosecuted for handling/ receiving stolen goods. The law is a farce when it comes to these people!
Apparently the wider issue would be; that social services would have to re-house the evicted family, pay their council tax and all the other benefits that go with it.
It seems to me that the police have their hands tied and must look after the scum’s (sorry) families human rights.
Quote: Originally posted by magnolia on 09/8/2013
Who in their right mind has a 30k van and doesn't insure it
Kinda what I was thinking
------------- XVI yes?
As well is two words!
How does a sage know everything about everything? or does he? or does he just think he does?
Remember, if you buy something you bought it, not brought it.
Yes why not insure it. But
We are the ones who pay higher and higher prices for insurace to make it ok for someone to steal a van. Threats are costing us a fortune for insurance and wheel clamps etc.
the proper owner admitted that she made a mistake in not insuring it ,but we don't know the full circumstances and its not a LEGAL requirement .
what is at stake here though is bumbling mr plod setting a precedent in law that allows someone to take and use your property with no chance in law of recovery
Quote: Originally posted by the black fox on 09/8/2013
the proper owner admitted that she made a mistake in not insuring it ,but we don't know the full circumstances and its not a LEGAL requirement .
what is at stake here though is bumbling mr plod setting a precedent in law that allows someone to take and use your property with no chance in law of recovery
Totally agree, insuring a car is a legal requirement, but not a trailer, but would have been a good idea incase of theft or accident.
However like already mentioned, the issue is the police force not taking the caravan in the first place once it had been found.
If I purchased a car from a man in the pub, and I didn't know it was stollen, it would still e taken away from me, and I would be out of pocket.
Maybe the force involved should be compensating the victim with a replacement caravan as it is their mistake that means she will not get her van back now.
I bet if the van had been insured that the insurance company would have got it back virtually straight away, amazing what swing they have with the police.
Quote: Originally posted by magnolia on 09/8/2013Who in their right mind has a 30k van and doesn't insure it
It is not a 30K caravan and never was as it cost them £20,000 when bought new win 2007. Obviously worth a lot less when it was stolen. If you can afford to spend £10,000 doing up a new caravan, why can't you afford insurance?
BTW can any one think of how you can manage to spend £10,000 on a caravan? Also the caravan was located last year in September so why has it taken so long for it to be reported?
I always thought it was a condition of any HP agreement that it was your responsibility to insure the item. No wonder they have to continue paying as they may have broken the terms of the HP agreement. At the moment the caravan still belongs to the finance company.
I guess a way out is to stop paying, let the finance company repossess and then pay the difference and reclaim the caravan?
Quote: Originally posted by the black fox on 09/8/2013the proper owner admitted that she made a mistake in not insuring it ,but we don't know the full circumstances and its not a LEGAL requirement .
what is at stake here though is bumbling mr plod setting a precedent in law that allows someone to take and use your property with no chance in law of recovery
Sorry... What precedent is this then? The theft act specifically states
dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it
So.. If they didn't take it then you don't have theft
Handling....
knowing or believing them to be stolen goods he dishonestly receives the goods, or dishonestly undertakes or assists in their retention, removal, disposal or realisation
Proving what someone thought when they bought it may be difficult too.
Not that this is an excuse.. And we all 'know' the truth dont we.
Prove it though.. Whilst applying proportionate human rights legislation and local policies
Its not bumbling.. Its the official line. Which.. Like you I think is rubbish and anti-victim
Amazing family weekend with old steam engines, classic car displays, market stalls, and full catering and bar. And camping on site - Save £25 by booking in advance.