bazzateer
Posted a lot
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Imping along sans Vogue
Posts: 3,653
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 12:02:29 GMT
|
If the Police, the council and the DVLA have all given their 'blessing' for the removal of the vehicle, no court in the land is going to charge the new 'owner' with theft - I'm quite surprised you suggest otherwise. The police are the law(ish), the council 'own' the road and the DVLA are in charge of vehicle registrations. If you have permission from all three to remove the vehicle, then you can remove the vehicle. Yes, you could remove it but that won't mean you are now the owner. You could store it and contact the registered keeper for details of the owner and then charge storage fees. If no fees are paid or contact made you could then apply through the courts to have ownership transferred to you in lieu of money owed.
|
|
1968 Singer Chamois Sport 1972 Sunbeam Imp Sport 1976 Datsun 260Z 2+2 1998 Peugeot Boxer Pilote motorhome 2003 Rover 75 1.8 Club SE (daily) 2006 MG ZT 190+ (another daily) 2007 BMW 530d Touring M Sport (tow car)
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 12:23:38 GMT
|
Yes, you could remove it but that won't mean you are now the owner. You could store it and contact the registered keeper for details of the owner and then charge storage fees. If no fees are paid or contact made you could then apply through the courts to have ownership transferred to you in lieu of money owed. I've not contested the 'ownership' aspect of it - I did comment earlier " I also suspect (although don't know) that you would be able to stake some legal claim to it if you went through the correct channels...." Is the storage fees route a credible solution - i.e. do you know someone who has done it? Just curious as to what the 'correct channels' would be in such a situation. I still stand by it not technically being theft, at least not in the eyes of the law. There does seem to be a theme with the people I know of who have acquired a car this way - and that's that they move the car on as quickly as possible. I guess if the original owner turned up after it had been sold on a couple of times that's when it would get messy!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 13:34:00 GMT
|
Just because someone believes they have a right to something doesn't mean they do, if that could stand up in court no one would be able to be charged with theft. Judge "why did you take that car son" Thief "it looked like it had been used in a while so I believe I had a right to remove it" Judge "ok son, off you go" Conveniently missing the bit of the conversation where the 'thief' tells the Judge what he did between seeing the car and taking possession of it... ;-) There are numerous stories of people claiming abandoned cars (including instances where the council have allowed members of the public to take the car if it remained unclaimed) but no stories (that I've ever heard of at least) of anyone being charged with theft after they've gone through the correct procedure. Do you know of any? If the Police, the council and the DVLA have all given their 'blessing' for the removal of the vehicle, no court in the land is going to charge the new 'owner' with theft - I'm quite surprised you suggest otherwise. The police are the law(ish), the council 'own' the road and the DVLA are in charge of vehicle registrations. If you have permission from all three to remove the vehicle, then you can remove the vehicle. If the car is untaxed and uninsured on public land then it's not parked legally. Indeed, the council probably have a legal obligation to have it removed! There are two issues here - one is the legality - which, when it comes down to it, will be a black and white issue. And then there's the moral/ethical side of this argument which is ultimately what the contention is about. Would I attempt to claim a car I thought was abandoned? Yes, I probably would. Would I give the car back to the former owner if they came back to claim it? Yes I probably would. I've already given an example of the police trying to charge someone with theft because they took a car. In this instance they were covered because they had done so for the council. If he had of just taken the car while not doing so for the council they would of charged him, he had to produce proof to back up his claims that he was working in a 3rd party position for the council to stop them arresting him. The dvla don't give you permission to take the car, they just transfer the registered keeper from one person to another. This isn't a change of ownership, it's merly changing who is responsible for taxing the car ect. You seem to put a lot of faith in our justice system, have you ever been in front of a judge? Just because a rondom copper told you that you can move it doesn't mean that you can. A judge would have every right then to ask you what right you thought you had to remove it regardless of what a policeman told you. If a policeman told you it was ok to go and take a Mars bar out of a shop would that stop it from being theft? Or would that be a situation where you should use your own judgement? Because that will be what a court would be judging you on, not what some policeman said. As for taking someones car without their permission and then trying to charge them storage fees lol
|
|
Last Edit: Sept 11, 2015 14:02:25 GMT by roccoguy
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 14:12:28 GMT
|
I've already given an example of the police trying to charge someone with theft because they took a car. In this instance they were covered because they had done so for the council. If he had of just taken the car while not doing so for the council they would of charged him, he had to produce proof to back up his claims to stop them arresting him. So your relation didn't get charged with theft was because they had consent from the council? Why does getting consent from the council make it ok, and not illegal, in your example, but not in mine? All along I've said that in my hypothetical example the council are involved and consenting. In my example the police wouldn't even get as far as the front door, as they would have been contacted - as the first port of call - so they would be aware of the situation. My faith in the justice system is kind of irrelevant to the discussion - as is your Mars analogy. If it was a Mars that was on some back alley, and had been there for 9 months and I asked a policeman, and the council and Mr Mars if it was ok for me to have a nibble - then, yes, I do think it would be ok to take it. And I've no doubt the judge would agree. If I hypothetically went to court it wouldn't be a question of them questioning my judgement - I would have to prove that I "believed that I had lawful authority for the removal of the" car. Which, in this hypothetical example is what I do have - or at least that's my understanding of it. It's pretty clear that we're not going to agree, it's also a bit of a daft thing for us to argue about, as it's hugely unlikely that either of us are going to find ourselves in a position where we'll find such an abandoned car. (Like when me and the wife have a big row about what we would spend a lottery win on!) For what it's worth I can utterly see it from the ethical viewpoint, and I'm not arguing my side of things because I think people should help themselves to someone else's car!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 14:40:36 GMT
|
Because he was working for the council, it was his job to remove and dispose of the car. He wasn't just some traveller who thought someone else's property would be better off in their possession.
Also an earlier point you made about the owner of the car not being able to claim back their property, that happens fairly regularly with ringers. People who have bought a car and then found out it is stolen have had it taken off them and given back to the rightful owner (whether than be the owner or the insurance company if a claim has been paid out). I don't see how this would be any different?
It is silly arguing over something like this, but imo the less people thinking they have some sort of right to go around claiming other people's cars the better. I'd be pretty curse word if some traveller decided they had more of a right to one of my long term projects than I had.
|
|
Last Edit: Sept 11, 2015 14:41:46 GMT by roccoguy
|
|
bazzateer
Posted a lot
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Imping along sans Vogue
Posts: 3,653
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 14:42:08 GMT
|
Regarding storage fees. If a car has been legally removed (arranged by the Police or council etc) the removal company will store it and attempts made to trace the owner. If found the owner will be asked to pay suitable storage costs etc before the vehicle is returned to them. If they do not pay, or cannot be contacted, the removal company can apply to the courts to have the ownership granted to them so they can dispose of the car and recoup their costs.
|
|
1968 Singer Chamois Sport 1972 Sunbeam Imp Sport 1976 Datsun 260Z 2+2 1998 Peugeot Boxer Pilote motorhome 2003 Rover 75 1.8 Club SE (daily) 2006 MG ZT 190+ (another daily) 2007 BMW 530d Touring M Sport (tow car)
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 14:50:33 GMT
|
A removal company may be able to do that. Some random member of the public moving someones car and demanding a release fee is totally different.
|
|
Last Edit: Sept 11, 2015 14:51:33 GMT by roccoguy
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 14:58:46 GMT
|
It is silly arguing over something like this, but imo the less people thinking they have some sort of right to go around claiming other people's cars the better. I'd be pretty curse word if some traveller decided they had more of a right to one of my long term projects than I had. Completely agree - so while I reckon we could play tit-for-tat over this all day - I'll duck out of the discussion, and get on with the work that I really should have been doing rather than arguing with you! ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 15:42:09 GMT
|
It is silly arguing over something like this, but imo the less people thinking they have some sort of right to go around claiming other people's cars the better. I'd be pretty curse word if some traveller decided they had more of a right to one of my long term projects than I had. Completely agree - so while I reckon we could play tit-for-tat over this all day - I'll duck out of the discussion, and get on with the work that I really should have been doing rather than arguing with you! ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) I really should do the same, have fun with the work ![8-)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/cool.png)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 16:00:35 GMT
|
My dad picked up a few cars when the police/dvla used to go around sticking the aware stickers on for no tax ins mot etc general rule was if unclaimed and not collected for scrap on the 8th day if the car was still in the same place he would go to police station have to fill out some form he'd get a copy then he could go collect the car long as it was lifted and he had to notify dvla that he had claimed it due to the registered keeper not doing so within the 7 days possibly sending form from police to them?, he'd then take the car to one of the various places he used to store them. after they'd sat there for a few weeks and he'd got the paperwork back in his name he used to either do anywork they needed then mot tax and insure them and use himself or if they where to far gone they would end up eventually being broke up for parts. he never used to have to many problems doing this mainly dvla trying to charge back tax.
few times he gone to pick the car up and the contracted agent had been while he was sorting the paperwork out most of the time unless the car got claimed they just got taken straight to the scrapyard and crushed the same day this was all back in mid maybe late 90's
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 16:29:10 GMT
|
On a V5 it clearly states that its not proof of ownership , it proves who is responsable for taxing and registering the vehicle . If someone has a reciept for a car you have claimed its not yours , and should be considered theft .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 11, 2015 16:44:39 GMT
|
There's a load of cars 'abandoned' in the long term parking near me would it be ok go put them all on a transporter at least half I should be able to get log books for before the owners get back...it's theft plain and simple
|
|
|
|