Anti-Islam Stabbing In Germany
News4 mins ago
Is There Something Not Quite Right Here?
54 Answers
http://
Here we have a couple who have had their caravan stolen, and a travelling family who are in possession of the said stolen caravan, yet the police have no lawful rights to recover the couples property, why?
Here we have a couple who have had their caravan stolen, and a travelling family who are in possession of the said stolen caravan, yet the police have no lawful rights to recover the couples property, why?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Fred, it’s not only the Mail that’s reporting it.
http://
//"They've told us social services would have to be involved to get the family accommodation before they could seize it, otherwise they said it could breach their human rights.”//
In that case, Social Services should be brought in – and rather than worry about finding the family accommodation, do it the simple way and provide them with a caravan worth the £300 they claim to have paid for the stolen one. Sorted!
This really is disgraceful.
http://
//"They've told us social services would have to be involved to get the family accommodation before they could seize it, otherwise they said it could breach their human rights.”//
In that case, Social Services should be brought in – and rather than worry about finding the family accommodation, do it the simple way and provide them with a caravan worth the £300 they claim to have paid for the stolen one. Sorted!
This really is disgraceful.
It certainly wasn't 'Human rights' in the case of my mother's goods either, it was lazy complacent policing. They simply couldn't be bothered to do anything about it because it involved actually doing their jobs and not simply harrassing motorists or teenagers. I imagine the prospect of this lot turning up at a traveller's site filled them with so much terror I'm amazed they're not all off sick and requiring counselling :(
It makes me really, really angry.
It makes me really, really angry.
It's still nonsense in law though! As Sandy says, the same plaint could be made by a squatter. Anyway, are we to understand that the present occupant had no home at all and could only obtain one by buying a caravan at a gross undervalue from a man in a pub? He's lucky not to have been arrested and jailed! That would have solved his own housing problem for a while.
It doesn't actually say that anywhere Orderlimit. It says-
Last September police located and identified the caravan in Hook, Hampshire, after interviewing a suspect for an unrelated offence. But because officers did not have evidence that the current occupier knew the caravan was stolen when he allegedly purchased it, he could not be prosecuted and the force said it was unable to seize it.
Nothing to suggest they ever visited a Traveller's site, just that they became aware of the caravan whilst interviewing the man in quesiton for something else. He might have been towing it somewhere and had a brake light out for all we know, but I'll bet you anything the police didn't go to a Traveller's site. They are entirely useless.
Last September police located and identified the caravan in Hook, Hampshire, after interviewing a suspect for an unrelated offence. But because officers did not have evidence that the current occupier knew the caravan was stolen when he allegedly purchased it, he could not be prosecuted and the force said it was unable to seize it.
Nothing to suggest they ever visited a Traveller's site, just that they became aware of the caravan whilst interviewing the man in quesiton for something else. He might have been towing it somewhere and had a brake light out for all we know, but I'll bet you anything the police didn't go to a Traveller's site. They are entirely useless.
Why do you think the police wouldn't go on a Travellers site?.
From another source:
'A Hampshire police spokesman said: ''Officers attended the site of the caravan for an unrelated offence in September 2012, and while there, checks indicated the caravan was stolen. A 22-year-old man from Hook was arrested and interviewed on suspicion of theft,'
From another source:
'A Hampshire police spokesman said: ''Officers attended the site of the caravan for an unrelated offence in September 2012, and while there, checks indicated the caravan was stolen. A 22-year-old man from Hook was arrested and interviewed on suspicion of theft,'
The way the police are getting round doing nothing is that the occupiers 'bought it in good faith' which may be true. Doesnt mean the they shouldnt return what is stolen goods. It is still stolen.
I am not aware of any special case for caravans or for travellers excemption from this law.
If it was a car it would be handed back - even if you were driving it you would be walking home.
I am not aware of any special case for caravans or for travellers excemption from this law.
If it was a car it would be handed back - even if you were driving it you would be walking home.
But if, as alleged, the buyer bought a valuable caravan for £300 in a pub, that is more than enough to prosecute (as above R v Fuschillo; and in that case there was no loser identified, only the circumstances of a man being in possession of on ration sugar in a very large quantity). He claims he bought it in good faith, but they all say that. What would you think if some stranger offered you goods of good value, very cheap, in a pub? You'd think they weren't obtained lawfully, wouldn't you ?
Latest Posts
Crosswords5 mins ago
News8 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
ChatterBank10 mins ago
ChatterBank11 mins ago
