legal advice please

[robitee]

our nephew used to live with us until recently, we found out he had pawned one of my girlfriends bracelets so we reported him to the police and kicked him out. He left his clothes and other possessions at our house and said he would pick it up the following week. 7 weeks later his stuff was still here and we had heard nothing, we made several attempts to ring him and his mum but had no calls returned so we put his stuff on the tip. He rang today saying he was coming for his stuff and when we told him it was on the tip he said what we had done was illegal and he was going to the CAB. Is what we have done illegal?

 

[Stivino]

Are you sure he didn't take it all with him when he left?

 

[Shutpa]

Your house insurance policy may give you access to free legal advice. Mine does and I have used the facility. For a tenner on your policy it's a fantastic buy.

 

[Space cat]

The CAB is also there to help honest people. They can give you a definitive answer. Give them a try.

 

[Softus]

Is what we have done illegal?

It amounts to theft (depriving him of his possessions), and/or criminal damage.

Given that you could have either delivered his stuff to him or notified him of a deadline, I don't see why you think that your action was reasonable.

Understandable, yes. Legal, no. However, it seems pretty unlikely that he'll sue you.

 

[Thermo]

he'll never sue you as hes too busy pawning stuff to make ends meet. the police will NEVER deal with it as theft, as there was no dishonesty involved nor will they deal with it as any other matter. They will simply tell him its a civil matter and to go away. Dont lose any sleep over it

 

[Softus]

the police will NEVER deal with it as theft, as there was no dishonesty involved

It doesn't have to be dishonest. If it's reported as a technical theft then the police have no choice about whether or not they "deal with it".

 

[Thermo]

well ill bow to your superior knowledge softus, but speaking as a copper of twelve years and also looking at the definition of theft under sections 1-7of the theft act 1968, i know i wouldnt be worried.

 

[joe-90]

but speaking as a copper of twelve years

No wonder they all look so young! They're just kids.

 

[Thermo]

they are these days, bloody hats dont seem to fit half of them. not like in my day!

 

[Softus]

well ill bow to your superior knowledge softus, but speaking as a copper of twelve years and also looking at the definition of theft under sections 1-7of the theft act 1968, i know i wouldnt be worried.

Leaving aside your rather limp sarcasm, I never expected you to be worried.

Lots of ignorant people don't get worried about things that are, nevertheless, factual.

Rather than just "looking" at the definition of theft in The Act, you'd be better of reading and understanding it. However, I'm sympathetic to the fact that police officers aren't required to understand the law, but merely implement orders given to them.

 

[Thermo]

well ill bow to the superiour knowledge of a plumber when it comes to the law.

and as for your comment about police officers thats a rather wide sweeping and derogatory comment that i assume is not based on fact.

 

[Softus]

If you put a copy of The Theft Act 1968 in front of your toes, you can kill two birds with one stone.

 

[Thermo]

Yawn

 

[Softus]

and as for your comment about police officers thats a rather wide sweeping and derogatory comment that i assume is not based on fact.

On the contrary - which police officers do you believe are required to understand the law, as opposed just to understanding how to detect and catch the people who break it?