Police getting SLAMMED; Fair Cop or a bit silly?

Here's the thread:
x.com/gmptraffic/status/18001...
Free £50 when you switch energy suppliers:
share.octopus.energy/happy-hu...
Exclusive content: www.blackbeltbarrister.com
)
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein.

[@attaat]

It's amazing what the police will do for a company but NOT for a member of the public...

[@Normanskie]

S/he who pays the piper calls the tune.

[@Number6_]

​@@Normanskieit is the council tax payer that pays this piper and I want to see some action for public i.e. my money.

[@absabs3811]

You should put "police will do for a BIG company"

[@Bathrezz1]

People who own the company, run the business, they are also a member of the public.

[@greabo9544]

You didn't watch the video did you.

[@doOf3r]

Not interested in crimes when they affect Joe Public but always come running for the Corporations.

[@thoughtfulalbatros9683]

Yeah I thought that when BBB said “you’d want them to go get your car” Yeah… coz that’d be actual theft not “sort of theft” - which this case is Police wouldn’t care about my stolen car but do go after civil matters for companies - odd

[@Jamie_D]

exactly

[@gwyneth7812]

@@thoughtfulalbatros9683 Yes, this morning i had a copper knocking at the door asking for my son to move his van so the broadband company could dig up the road.

[@barryjones8008]

Clearly their "common law duty to investigate" does not include the general public.

[@gavpatterson1943]

Most leasing companies are not corporations

[@LondonGas]

This makes me angry. Van Tool theft from vans, where the thieves peel back doors or drill into the locks causing damage to tradespeople's vans, was estimated to have cost £98 Million in 2023 alone, a theft every 12 minutes in the UK. Yet the Police do nothing. They don't even attend most of the time to an actual crime, that falls under criminal law, not civil. I know gas installers that have been done over 6 times, lost thousands each time. We're forced to unload our vans each night, but still doesn't stop them, they target us at our customers houses, while we're on the job, at hotel car parks, at merchants car parks. Best we can hope for from the cops is a crime reference number given over the phone for insurance purposes. So to hear they're now debt collectors for car leasing companies... Jesus fucking Christ!

[@elminster8149]

They're too busy going after people for wrongspeak.

[@rob0749]

100% mate. Terrible. Then they post on social media boasting about civil interference

[@pajownik]

@@elminster8149 Wrongspeak is old news. The latest trend is wrongthink. Easier to make up offence, harder to prove innocence.

[@Jamie_D]

It's been like it most of my life, they happy to use their time helping companies, so have no time to help the people they should be helping.

[@LondonGas]

@@pajownik "Thought Police". Orwell's 1984 is actually here.

[@Sthilboy56]

Pity the police don’t try and investigate when your car gets stolen

[@SiCrewe]

Just "low hanging fruit", innit? It's easy to sit in a layby and monitor passing cars with ANPR. Not so easy to prowl around, looking for a gang of shady looking characters, find out where they're based, gain entry, verify that there's stolen property inside and then prove that the shady characters are involved with the stolen property. Last time I had a car stolen, it was in a farmyard. Cops showed up to "investigate" but didn't want to get out of their car because the ground was muddy. Crime number issued (along with a leaflet about dealing with the trauma of becoming a victim of crime). Another investigation wrapped up, just like an episode of Inspector Morse.

[@PCDelorian]

@@SiCrewe Nothing to do with warrant requirements and reasonable grounds at all. Sitting looking at ANPR would surely help find stolen cars as well, no?

[@nickcoppard5335]

Perhaps the police stole it ?

[@SiCrewe]

@PCDelorian ANPR isn't much use when a car is being parted out on ebay.

[@MatthewRSimpson]

Of course they investigate it. It is placed on PNC and every police force in the country will be notified if it hits an ANPR camera in their area. Lots of police and control room operators are looking to see if it flags up on ANPR too.

[@jamiem4121]

One of the worst things you can hear from a police officer: "That's a civil matter."

[@noelward8047]

Only when it suits them.

[@johng.1703]

only when a person is the complainant, when it's a corporation, then it's not a civil matter and they will go above and beyond their powers to do what the corporation wants. funny thing is, corporations don't pay for the police, people do.

[@liammhodonohue]

​@@johng.1703I'm sure an individual copper or department are receiving some kind of incentive for this kind of service. That, or buttering up the leasing firm with a view to get a cushy retirement job.

[@timbert4672]

@@johng.1703 I have actually seen police officers put debt recovery people in their place on occasion, I suppose it depends on the situation. But I believe they have absolutely NO business reposessing a vehicle for someone simply because the creditor lost contact with them.

[@jons9721]

It's only civil matter before a civil court makes a ruling on it. Once there is a court order the police are NOT neutral on that order they are on the side of the courts and interfering with the court or its officials is a criminal offence. In fact once the court makes an order its not even a 'dispute'

[@noelward8047]

Oh dear. If my wholly owned personal vehicle was stolen all I would get is a crime number for my insurance claim. The police would not even leave their desk. If the vehicle belonged to a corporation they would stop looking for hurty words on line and get straight to solving the crime. Trying to explain away how the police act is frankly embarrssing ! Two-Tier policing in plain sight.

[@edwinrs]

And if your vehicle was stolen it would be added to tbe police computer, if it activated ANPR or as result of a manual check it would then be stopped. What's the difference, where's the twintiwr policing? If it is a lease vehicle that has not been returned then there's the possibility that tbe j surance may also not be valid

[@simonbath8503]

@@edwinrsthere is a difference between investigating and passively waiting for a computer to check a plate that would have been swapped. Most car theft Lo’s that are solved are with damaged vehicles abandoned and the vin checked. Even in cases of trackers where people have a live location they don’t bother.

[@FC-PeakVersatility]

Two different departments, hurty words and vehicle recovery, the latter will not slow the former 🤷

[@robd9863]

The police made my wife hand over the keys to her car at the side of the road and gave them to a previous owner. We'd bought the car in good faith some weeks beforehand and turned out the dealer had bounced a cheque when he bought it. Those owners saw my Mrs driving it, followed her whilst calling the police and she got pulled over and told to 'give it back'. She was left at the side of the road (complete with baby and car seat) and I went to pick them up. On checking the legals the copper shouldn't have done what he did, but threatened to arrest my Mrs if she didn't hand over the keys. He could have impounded it, apparently, pending a judge to look into the matter, but he shouldn't have made that decision at the side of the road. He just said, "Claim on your insurance", who of course didn't want to know. I complained to the HQ, but they just seemed more concerned to convince us to not make a fuss and just put it down to experience. I have never held the police in high regard since.

[@Mariomatters1984]

When did this happen? It does sound like a civil matter to me. What would he have arrested your wife for? It's not theft as there's no dishonest act on your part. Did you ever get your money back?

[@robd9863]

@@Mariomatters1984 Hi, It was a few years ago and I guess it would be a civil matter. I spoke to a friend in the London Met who said the copper had no right to determine that the property/car should be handed over, there and then, at the roadside. I arrived whilst everyone (police included) were still at the scene. Wife was pretty shaken, obviously, but our main concern was for our baby. Absolutely there was no dishonesty on our part. We are just regular law-abiding citizens, not used to dealing with the Police. We had bought the car in good faith and insured it (with RAC). To answer your question, no, never got the money back, I went to the HQ and met with some senior manager, who took a statement from me, but we never heard from them again.

[@TheTwistedGamer]

@@Mariomatters1984 The dealer stole the car and the vehicle has been obtained as part of a commision of a crime (Theft / fraud). The police can then sieze the car under section 19 of pace. The part where @robd9863 said "He could have impounded it, apparently, pending a judge to look into the matter, but he shouldn't have made that decision at the side of the road" is somewhat correct. Section 19, subsection 3b gives the officer the right to sieze the vehicle without a warrant. Otherwise, he'd need a warrant issued by a judge. The woman / partner in this case could be arrested for obstructing an investigation, posession of stolen goods, etc. 0 liklihood it gets to court, but the arrest would be lawful - she's in possesion of a stolen car, nomatter how you look at it. What robd has said regarding it being wrong and the copper shouldn't have done what he done is mostly wrong. The bit i don't understand is the vehicle should've been siezed to a police lockup while the situation was investigated, and for that yes i think it was wrong. But if the real owners had enough proof, evidence and documents there and then, then i could probably understand why he made the decision he made and there is no law requiring an investigation. It's a simple theft and the belongings were returned to the rightful owners. TL:DR: Police weren't wrong in returning a stolen vehicle obtained through the comission of a crime to the rightful owners.

[@rob0749]

I'm not sure many, like myself, are overly concerned about the jurisdiction of this case, but rather that this happened in light of the thousands of other crimes not investigated/solved.

[@johng.1703]

so the police seized the vehicle as evidence of a crime? and the police have custody of the vehicle? because if the police do not have custody of the vehicle, what happened to the evidence? aka the vehicle? the vehicle should be retained until a court can decide and make a ruling on the matter. if the police seize the vehicle and hand it over to the other side in the civil dispute then they are not acting as law enforcement, they are acting as a private recovery service and if this is being paid for by the tax payer, there is something very fraudulent happening. if the Police are being paid to recover it, they are not police officers when acting on those private instructions, so at the time they would be impersonating police officers.

[@Si74l0rd]

If it can be demonstrated that a crime has occurred, or that the person driving the vehicle was in the commission of a crime, then perhaps. As no crime has been committed, it's a bit preemptive. Unless the driver was about to drive it into a shipping container. I don't see them having jurisdiction personally. And I'm curious what the police get out of it. They didn't even bother attending when some scrotes nicked our motor. Thankfully we recovered it intact around the corner (thanks dodgy immobilizer! Apparently not just dodgy for us lol). With clear handprints on the bonnet, we kept it under cover to retain the prints but were informed a couple of days later, that unless there was a fag butt or a discarded can with DNA on inside it, that they weren't going to bother investigating. Despite knowing exactly who it was. Granted, we got the car back, but attempted theft used to be prosecuted too. This case is less attempted theft than that was. No crime has been committed yet in this case. Surely to confiscate the car, the driver would have to be charged with a crime? Suspicion may be enough to raise a case investigatively, but if no crime has occurred is the car evidence or not? If I lent a mate ten grand to buy a car, and he didn't pay me back, I'd be referred to money claim online by the police. They wouldn't go and take the car so I could sell it on and recover some of my money.

[@Number6_]

If they don't have the resources for antisocial behaviour and petty crime, then it is certainly a waste of time to be doing this. It smacks of favouritism by police.

[@andrewgilbertson5356]

I think if an individual said their car was not being paid for the police would not be interested. However, when a company is involved they jump to it. There have even been cases when someone has told the police the location of a stolen car and no action is taken by the police.

[@Normanskie]

I wouldn't say they just jump to it, more likely to ask HOW HIGH SIR.

[@reb0118]

How many individuals lease their car out? Most private sales would be cash up front (I suppose in the days of cheques that these could bounce - but then again that's common law fraud).

[@thewaywardgrape3838]

I've made 4 different complaints about a drug driver - literally doing drugs whilst driving - yet nothing gets done. Do I have to report it to the finance provider or dealership to get something done???

[@eadweard.]

It doesn't matter who you report it to.

[@anony-mousex]

Dont be such a Karen and focus on bettering your own life - I bet you are also a VERY jealous person

[@ashley_neal]

I'm with you on that Dan, I don't think it's a bad thing the Police getting involved with matters like this, whereas I got pulled over on Saturday for literally having a bright green Focus ST 😂

[@tomhollins5303]

Thats shocking, but probably not criminal. (Should be though.)

[@shm5547]

To be fair to the police, a bright green Focus ST being driven carefully is extremely suspicious!

[@R-bobo]

Further charges may have been put against you if you had stepped on the cracks in the pavement or had an offensive wife. 😅

[@timbert4672]

Police have no business getting involved in civil matters like that, if the police wont obey the law I don't see why I should.

[@TheStickbow]

So if the police have these powers why do they not go onto gypsy encampments which have been set up illegally by breaking into club grounds, when the stolen vehicles are in plain sight and the owner has reported the theft to the police, why do they not go in and seize the car back??

[@dave-javu]

its interesting that the police have a common law duty to investigate crimes, gather evidence! yet it is alleged by Crime Bodge, that Derbyshire police didnt act or investigate over 30,000 reported crimes! i know personally of a friends elderly mother who was ripped off by her 21 year old neighbour to the tune of 11 grand, but when my friend reported it to Leicester police they did nothing about it! it was a clear case of theft and fraud, as the 21 year old lad was doing gardening work, asking for payment, she was trusting him with her bank card and pin number to go and pay himself and he was taking the maximum out of her bank each time. they had a stick on case, video evidence of him at the cash point making the withdrawals yet did nothing! but if a corporations or bailiffs need help they are all over it like a rash... double standards!

[@KevinPaxomnium]

Can she prove it was theft? What a stupid thing to do. I despise the police, thugs in uniform is all too many are today but here, I’m not really surprised that they took it no further.

[@dave-javu]

@@KevinPaxomnium the lad admitted what he had done in front of his own mum, the elderly woman, her son(my mate) and wife!..the worst thing is that the elderly woman has now been signed off by Drs as non compos mentis! so not only was she 80 years old, she wasnt in full control of her faculties....

[@KevinPaxomnium]

@@dave-javu I think you’re missing the issue though…. You are responsible for your card and PIN number. None of this is going to stand up in court!!! Like it or not, she’s responsible. You cannot be giving your card and PIN number out.

[@dave-javu]

@@KevinPaxomnium he still took advantage and robbed her! all she did was misplace her trust! its theft at very least!

[@KevinPaxomnium]

@@dave-javu not saying he didn’t but you don’t give your card and pin out, simple as that. That’s called responsibility, something of course that’s seriously lacking today, along with honesty but what? You saying it wasn’t a stupid thing to do? Truth is, I don’t think it would stand up in court. Like giving him the car and keys to do the shopping only to find he’d driven it all over the place, maybe getting a parking fine or something. Things in life you cannot do.

[@tonyjones7372]

The Police should stick to what they are good at, dancing at Pride marches and arresting people for writing hurty words on the internet, anything more than that is 'above their pay-grade'.

[@waltersobchak1719]

So, if somebody buys or leases something from you, and they don’t pay you for it, you won’t bother notifying the police about your stolen property🤷‍♂️

[@tonyjones7372]

@@waltersobchak1719 no, I would just write it off to lessons learnt. But.....if somebody called me a poofter on line, I would expect his door broken down at 5am, and his feet not to touch the ground by being whisked away to serve 10 years hard labour on bread and water.

[@davidburton2732]

@@waltersobchak1719 No, they'll just squeal that "the police are doing nothing about it - again"😅

[@63sgjunior]

You neglected to mention taking bribes. 😂

[@Bedhead1967]

@@waltersobchak1719 - And the police would tell us it's a civil matter.

[@ph7125]

Police only had leasing company's word thats what was happening. there may have been a dispute about the car or payments. Not the police's place to get involved. I think they need to be concentrating on proper theft and other crimes rather than acting like debt collectors.

[@lrdisco2005]

Very valid point. Without evidence it would be hearsay, for you and me, large companies never tell lies or distort the truth. I always thought to prove theft it had to be deliberate with no intention of returning property.

[@BiggyD80s]

Crap point really as neither of you know the full facts. BBB has clearly put out there that there maybe more to it. At the end of the day it isn't any of your business is it😂

[@lrdisco2005]

@@BiggyD80s You are so right, why didn't I have your masterful insight.

[@geoffroberts201]

The police seem to use the “It’s a civil matter” excuse when it suits them.

[@francismckenna7338]

Civil matters should not be dealt with by Police end of

[@ProsandCons26]

Think the point here is, it is not a civil matter

[@waltersobchak1719]

But it isn’t a civil matter, somebody has taken out a lease on an expensive car and then just stopped paying for it. Sounds like suspected fraud to me🤷‍♂️

[@waltersobchak1719]

@allenjenkins-xd5ui You have obviously never heard of people being arrested on suspicion of having committed a crime. In your world nobody would ever be arrested unless the police have evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they are guilty. The world doesn’t work like that. If someone makes an allegation the police have a duty to investigate. While mistakes happen, most of the time they would not arrest somebody without reasonable suspicion that they had committed a crime. Actually proving it comes later. Imagine, for example, that somebody agreed to buy your car in instalments, but then just stopped paying you and became uncontactable, and you reported it to the police. Would you want them to conduct a lengthy investigation which could take ages, or would you want them to get off their backsides, stick it on PNC as Stolen and arrest anybody they find driving the car?

[@waltersobchak1719]

@allenjenkins-xd5ui “How do the police know if a breach of contract has taken place?”. They don’t, and they wouldn’t care if one had. They are responding to an allegation that the vehicle has either been stolen or obtained fraudulently.

[@MrScottishborn]

@@waltersobchak1719 In the circumstances you describe I can guarantee you would be told, ‘it’s a civil matter, nothing to do with us Gov’. As for their duty to investigate every allegation, that’s the stuff of pantomimes, if you don’t believe walk into the station and report a minor offence, the case will be closed before you’ve given your name and address.

[@grahamgduggan]

I think it's more the point of that with all the crime ie, knife crime, shopping lifting, robberies, muggings, gangs ect ect. The general feel is that, why are there going after the easy targets while all the other crimes are rapidly rising by the second.

[@Barbarapape]

Good luck with trying to get the police interested if you car is stolen. All they will give you is a crime number for you to claim from your insurance. In this case i would like to know how the leasing company were able to get the police to stop and recover the vehicle.

[@waltersobchak1719]

As a guess I would suspect that it had been reported as stolen, a stolen marker was placed on PNC, and then it probably activated an ANPR camera as it went past, and the nearest patrol cars were alerted to its presence.

[@Barbarapape]

@@waltersobchak1719 You may be right, but i still suspect that the police would not respond in the same manner if it was a privately owned vehicle,

[@waltersobchak1719]

@@Barbarapape They would if it had actually been reported as stolen. As to where any subsequent investigation might go, after the initial seizure of the car, which knows?

[@alansharman3644]

@@waltersobchak1719 But surely reporting a stolen vehicle as a criminal offence is illegal if the civil case of an unpaid bill is more appropriate. Companies have got to start using small claims courts like the rest of us. Maybe the police would have more time to do their jobs properly.

[@waltersobchak1719]

@@alansharman3644 But it is not a small claim though, is it? It is a car which could easily cost well in excess of £60,000 and is highly likely to find its way into a shipping container bound for another country where it will be impossible to get it back from. Also, if the purchaser has not made any payment and then become completely uncontactable, especially in an age when everybody has EMail and at least a mobile phone, if I was working for the leasing company I would assume this was a fraud and deliberate theft. This is not simply a case of an unpaid bill.

[@juliaw7533]

ESTABLISHMENT SLAVERY AND POLICY ENFORCERS. WE CAN DO BETTER OURSELVES.

[@DM-it2ch]

The fact that the complainant is a lease company is niether here nor there. If someone steals something from anyone else, it's a police matter. And failing to pay for something without returning the goods is theft.

[@elminster8149]

If you keep a hire car and don't pay for it, the hire company will report it stolen.

[@waltersobchak1719]

Quite rightly too!

[@johng.1703]

yep, they do, but this isn't a hire car. this is a purchase of a vehicle and a contract to pay the lender monies. so this would be a contract dispute, not a theft of a vehicle.

[@elminster8149]

@@johng.1703 10 out of 10 on the observation there mate. It is however the same principle.

[@johng.1703]

@@elminster8149 no it's not, ownership of a vehicle doesn't change with a hire of a vehicle, the hire company retains ownership. when you purchase a vehicle and use a lender to pay for it, you purchase the vehicle, you are the owner. the lender would normally put a lean on the title of the vehicle to say that they have an interest in the vehicle, but you are the owner. these are very very different concepts.

[@waltersobchak1719]

@@johng.1703 But if it is a lease vehicle the leasing company is the owner until it is paid for, if it is suspected that the lease was taken out fraudulently (e.g. with intent to not make any payments for it) then it is a criminal matter until proven otherwise.

[@chrisash46]

Its got nothing to do with the police. If the person is insured and taxed, the lease company should go through the proper channels, of debt collection.

[@DMC888]

They must be saving a small fortune using the police to repossess vehicles. They factor bad debt and recovery into the lease payments, so it’s a big win for them. A big loss to the council tax payer.

[@waltersobchak1719]

Sounds like Taking a vehicle Without the Owner’s Consent. If the registered keeper has stopped making the required payments on it, and they have suddenly become completely uncontactable, the owner (i.e. the leasing company) wouldn’t give permission for it to be driven. Therefore the police did the right thing.

[@icambridge]

But it wasn't taken without their consent. It was given with their consent and they wanted it back.

[@waltersobchak1719]

@@icambridge As soon as they stopped paying for it their implied right to drive it would be gone. I bet if you looked at that company”s terms and conditions there will be something that says exactly that.

[@noelward8047]

Do you really think that if you car disappeared from your drive the police would go looking for it !?!

[@waltersobchak1719]

@@noelward8047 Of course they wouldn’t unless they had specific information to suggest where it had gone. They should record it as stolen and place a Stolen marker against it on PNC though.

[@waltersobchak1719]

@@Jonnybravo6742 Exactly👍. People seem to think the Registered Keeper (as recorded on the V5 Registration Document) and the Owner of the vehicle are the same thing. Sometimes they are, but with so many cars being leased these days, the leasing company is usually the Owner until, as you state, it has been fully paid for.

[@stesrad]

I thought the police were struggling to deal with crime ?....bviously not if they have time for this ! If the driver was being arrested for a crime that is a different matter. How many times do we see police rushing to corporate business to assist and violate a citizens rights but when a citizen needs assistance at the home the level of assistance diminishes rapidly. If they haven't got time to visit the home of a victim then they haven't got time to assist corporate business in retrieving it's property.

[@stuartstein7495]

I just watched "Part 3 - Trevor and Traceys fight against Lloyds Bank, police failure - 3 June 2024" prior to this.

[@jimg2850]

If the Police did not arrest the driver then it seems reasonable to assume that this was just a debt recovery!

[@letmeoffthisplanet6208]

I had my motorbike nicked years ago,it was missing for a few years before a copper found it dumped on the side of the road.They done a VIN check,found it was nicked and sent a message to say they found it...I got a locaton which i found strange as it wasn't at a cop shop but a church on the other side of the country.A few hours drive and hey presto said bike was gone......If it was for a corporation like the police are and like the judicicial system is that bike would still be mine but no the system is rotten to the core and it's fraudulant time is coming crashing down as people are waking upto the con tricks of supposed policing,courts etc.

[@parasinthephilippines]

They can't recover mobile phones that have the find my phone facility. The home secretary stated on LBC Nick Ferrari 10/6/2024 police need a magistrates warrant to enter a property. Even if its known stolen phone is in property.

[@waltersobchak1719]

They can enter without a warrant to arrest someone for a serious offence, but theft of a phone probably wouldn’t be classed as serious. This is not the fault of the police - they can only act within the law. Blame for this farcical situation lies with the law makers in Westminster.

[@123TheCloop]

@@waltersobchak1719 no they cannot enter a home and arrest someone for a serious offence, they can only do this IF they have reasonable grounds to do so, but that would only apply to close family members OR if someone saw someone. but even then if its a potential sighting, thats not enough grounds and would still need a warrant to gain access to the property

[@waltersobchak1719]

@@123TheCloop So, what you are saying is that YES, they can enter a home to arrest someone for a serious (indictable) offence, without a warrant, as long as they have reasonable grounds for believing the person they seek is within the premises. Whatever those reasonable grounds might be may be something the police officers concerned might have to justify later. Clearly, they cannot just enter any premises as part of a fishing trip.

[@andyley329]

Haha, try ringing them & telling them your car has been stolen & you know where it is because of its tracker.... "they will look into it..... here your crime number "

[@normalwisdom4048]

*Section 19 doesn’t apply in this case, defaulting on a credit agreement, IS NOT A CRIMINAL OFFENCE, it’s CLEARLY a CIVIL dispute*

[@engineeredlifeform]

Except there's a contract, and breaching the contract makes it TWOC which is an offense.

[@felipe367]

@@engineeredlifeformsurely a breach of contract would still be a civil matter ?

[@engineeredlifeform]

@@felipe367 Not when taking a car without consent, is a criminal act. The contract is the consent, any.deviation from it withdraws consent, and makes it a criminal endeavour.

[@felipe367]

@@engineeredlifeform breach of contract as far as I can tell still isn’t worthy of police involvement. Legal system sure

[@engineeredlifeform]

@@felipe367 well, as the Police always seem to get involved with cases where leases expire and treat it as TWOC, you'd be quite wrong.

[@johnbell8553]

As long as he had insurance who cares, they dont show this much concern when your car is stolen

[@johnbowkett80]

Recovering a vehicle ...... Instead of concetrating on knife /violent crime . Not fit for purpose . 😠🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

[@colin5944]

Roads policing unit what do you think their job is .... 🤦‍♂️ Anti police tool

[@johnbowkett80]

@@colin5944 Sucker of police tools eh !!!! 🤣🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

[@stevenrobinson5864]

The problem here is they are taking the leasing company at their word, I believe there is a reason the normally say its a civil matter and that is likely because there may be a valid reason he is withholding payment but judge jury and executioner has decided to remove the vehicle from his possession.

[@DMC888]

I don’t know what’s more shocking, the fact that they’ve done this, or the fact that they put in on Twitter for all to see.

[@animated_ads]

We have had two of our vans and 100,000 worth of vehicles stolen by a renter. They claimed it was a civil matter. Still on the road 2 years later... not a penny paid and have tried to sell it.

[@KentRoads]

if your stuff gets stolen "go through insurance"

[@4TheRecord]

Police are too busy to deal with actual crime, always telling you it will take a week or two before they can take your statement. But if there's a man outside a business filming or a company like this calls the police to report payments are behind the police will rush to do something. For this reason I have no respect for the police, they are not fit for purpose and frankly I wouldn't miss them if they no longer existed.

[@KevinPaxomnium]

No. Most are sufficiently decent and responsible and the police so useless, I don’t think we’d miss them most of the time.

[@hectorsnet]

They only exercise these powers for certain people. They do not help the public in this way and whilst I agree in principle with you, in practice it's not how it works. It works this way - if you are Joe public, then everything outside of agenda policing is a civil matter.. but if you are a large company or a government organisation then they might investigate. This has been the case for years

[@lesliefield-fw9by]

They have time to do this but they still haven't turned up to interview the party's after a child was bitten after two weeks absolutely criminal

[@weefreedavielittle]

If but if if and more ifs and buts ... its is not a police matter until a crime has been committed . It is a civil matter.

[@Tommy-he7dx]

If they reported the car as stolen, then fair enough, but that isn't what has happened, They said there has been a failure of payment, not even we won a court case. What happens if it turns out that the leasing company were in error, are the Police exempt form prosecution Even though they deemed the person "Guilty" as they removed the car and returned it back to the leasing agency. What if the leasing agency were being malicious and actively lied to the police, what did the police do to make sure this wasn't the situation......this is a potential can of worms. If the Police kept hold of the car until the courts resolved the contract dispute that would be a better situation, but to return it without checking out the contracts is stoopid at best.

[@Mariomatters1984]

The problem is there is never an investigation after the seizure. They just recover.

[@BionicRusty]

Exactly as I thought. Thank you for covering this one so quick. How some people can not see this is mind boggling to me. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@rogerblackwood8815]

The only reason the police are able to get involved in this case is because the "ASSET" is a registered motor vehicle. Any other high value item where the payments were late etc, the police would not be able to intervene. Which suggests to me that they should not have intervened here? Without a court proceeding how do the police know why the lessor is refusing payment? Maybe they have a grievance about the item being faulty etc? The rights and wrongs in such a case would need to be judged in court and until such time the police have no jurisdiction over the vehicle!

[@josephshortt3171]

What about corruption in the tribunal can I go to the court of human rights. They are acting unlawfully I ask because I've been denied access to justice and have no legal knowledge. The basics are fraudulent procurement of a fraudulent contractor by CCC the court have been informed but have continued to ignore the law and refuse to take any action until the hearing obviously I can't win as they refuse to strike him out and refuse to amend the claim ????

[@johnmcguigan4456]

My experience of UK policing is at best woeful, a family member recently had his bicycle stolen and as it was a premium brand he had a security tag installed in the frame, we located it to a domestic garage about half a mile away and told the local police, they thought it would be appropriate for the owner to go to retrieve it, clearly this is absolutely ludicrous when you have no knowledge of the perpetrators, after a lengthy period of investigation by ourselves we went to retrieve it which was dismantled in the same garage, after a speech about how innocent the individual was we eventually gathered the parts and left, as far as I know the police haven’t reacted to any of our evidence, so the moral of the story is that unless they have a corporate interest your on your own.

[@SiCrewe]

Surely, if the police are going to get involved in repossession on the basis that it might be considered a "stolen vehicle" then surely the same thing should apply to ANY item, which should, similarly, be considered "stolen property"?

[@philipdart1611]

Police use quote " That's a Civil matter" when they do not want to investigate because of a possible confect of interest.

[@davet9900]

Thankyou for your video. The issue, as always these days, with the police is hypocrisy. People don't need to hear the a long list of police obligations or duties, they want to experience them being done sincerely, for everyone, not just for customers that pay them back-handers

[@Gary0557]

Police don't usually get involved in consumer debt. It's not criminal.

[@cheds1]

Oh yes they do

[@Gary0557]

@@cheds1 default in consumer debt is dealt with in civil courts in the UK. It's not a criminal offence to be in default to credit cards, or store cards or banks.

[@Clodhopping]

So do they lend a hand to businesses when they're not monitoring social media for misuse of pronouns...? 🤔

[@Gary0557]

@@Clodhopping Grow up mate.

[@robertpollock2037]

The vehicle is owned by the leasing company so technically it is theft. Defaulting on hire purchase would be debt.

[@leeds85]

Problem for me is that there's too many other stories of police not coming out for other offences. For example the man who broke into my friends house at 2am, made it a couple of feet away from a child's bedroom before running off when he heard my friend getting up. Police response to his 999 call, "So, nothing has been taken, there's nothing for you to do".

[@alansharman3644]

My question is do the police keep the vehicle as evidence until they have investigated and or have charged for, or dropped the case of dubious law obscurity that says that you are guilty of "possibly being a criminal" for committing a civil offence of not paying your bills. Or do they give it straight back to the company. if it goes back to the company before the investigation is completed then surly they are acting as agents for the company ie bailiffs and not as the civil servants and police officers we pay them to be. If they act for the companies they should be paid for by the companies, after all they do very little of what we pay them for as it is. They are not the companies front line to use as their agents against us. They are supposed to be OUR front line against the breakers of criminal laws not civil law.The lines are getting too blurred these days and if we don't call it when we see it we loose more and more of our rights.

[@andrew_koala2974]

1. All Commerce is Law 2. All Law is commerce 3. A Lease is a contract - and all contracts require performance among the requirements of the contractual lease obligation and the performance thereof will be that the Lessee compensate The Leasor a monetary value for the property described in the Leasing arrangement / Contract 4. When a breach of contract occurs - and the Leasee cannot be contacted after a given number of attempts - it can be presumed that the Leasee has unlawully appropriated the property and converted the property for his own use without authority or qualified permissiom of the owner / lessor. 5. There are distinct definitions of what is theft / Stealing in ' Legal English ' that differs in definition to Common Street English. This fact should be kept in mind for those who are not familiar with Legal English ( Language if the Law ) commonly referred to as Legalese 6. In such a case there are also Legal considerations of Insurance - Including Third party insurance - which may no longer be valid - as a breach of contract has occurred -- Thus in such a case - the vehicle is being used uninsured. This alone would warrant POLICE to become involved in locating the vehicle The owner / lessor of the vehicle is likely to be responsible for paying compensation to any injured party - injured or killed as a result of any incident involving the vehicle - Compensation that amount to millions. 7. This matter in discussion here exceeds the common perception that POLICE are acting as mere debt collectors. There are other factors at play here that are more serious than failure to make a lease payment.

[@user-pb1tb1ux3c]

Yes it is absolutely wrong for the police to get involved for a company, unless of course they do it for each and every citizen that suffers a crime against them, even when given direct evidence of the stolen item’s location the police will fail to act, two tier policing yet again

[@jessh5310]

When I reported my concerns about many vehicles being taken into a area never to be seen again there was no police interest. Corporate police looking after their bosses.

[@themabozza]

You know far more about the law than I do and sounds like this may be correct in certain circumstances. In this case, there may be extenuating circumstances which allowed the police to act, which have not yet been disclosed. However, if there were none, I cannot understand how that police can operate in a civil matter, like private police. It's why vehicles are repossessed by 3rd party recovery companies and police are only involved to prevent disorder or assault. It will also depend on the contract, as HP and leasing are different in terms of ownership. So many variables, too little information to assess on this case alone but in general, it's not something that looks good for police.

[@shelfridges]

There is a very common link between unpaid hires and other criminality. Most leasing companies work with the police to share information on suspicious hirers, or hirers already known to the authorities. I've worked in this sector for 25 years and dealt with thousands of missing vehicles, but the police are only involved when all other avenues have been exhausted. We present a full information pack to the police with enough clout to prove the "intent to permanently deprive", along with a full dossier on the hirer. In the majority of cases the driver/hirer is involved in much more than just not paying their rental charges.

[@simonleeofficial]

As is the case for every other crime. The fact you have special access to their services, above those who actually pay for them is precisely the problem here.

[@shelfridges]

@@simonleeofficial it's called "working together and building relationships" It gets good results. You should try it some time.

[@user-fi8yg2gq2d]

Surely it’s theft, and therefore it becomes a police matter?

[@robg521]

In a clear case of stolen property then of course you want the police to stop and recover the property, the trouble with this sort of thing is it gets murky over exactly what has gone on between the 2 parties, the driver of the vehicle and the company claiming ownership could be in a long running dispute, so the police can then get used to by pass a civil court case.

[@DM-ki1bs]

If I sold a car privately and was stupid enough to let the buyer pay a week later. Would the police get involved if the buyer didn't pay ? I don't think so.

[@iangraham871]

It has effectively been reported as stolen by the lease company, and will be on the PNC in that regard. It presumably pinged the ANPR in the GMP vehicle, so they were duty-bound to stop and seize it.

[@gonzo_the_great1675]

Wonder if the driver's insurance would still be valid if they nolonger has permission from the owner (lease company) to drive?? So they might be driving without insurance?

[@billwinward9324]

I think the leasing company was lucky that its vehicle came to the notice of a patrol car which is how it was seized. If it had been a stolen private vehicle the police encountered the result would have been the same. Some years ago I witnessed the abandonment of a dog. The police were contacted and I supplied full vehicle details. Within a matter of minutes the ‘culprit’ had been apprehended, not because the police were out searching for the car, the patrol officers happened to be on the same stretch of road as the miscreant when the alert came through. No two tier policing evident here.

[@joshritchie6033]

The problem is police will respond to this if a company needs to recover from an individual. If a company owes an individual money or property they will not get involved. Typically also not if an individual Vs and individual. Too much support for large companies and enforcing their rights

[@williammclean3870]

Generally as mentioned this would have been deemed a civil matter, whereby someone has not paid their lease agreement or other type of payment. This would have been a costly and time consuming task resulting in lost revenue to the company. Although this is sometimes a mistake, for instance if a vehicle is leased and the recipient requires it for another couple of days or weeks, this would sometimes incorrectly end up being classed as a theft, even though there was no intention to permanently deprive the owner of it. What has happened in the past was that some unscrupulous vehicle lease companies would report the matter as a theft, thereby ensuring that the police with all its resources would find the aforementioned vehicle. The taxpayer would end up paying for the recovery, sometimes the brief storage costs as well and the company would refuse to prosecute the driver.

[@Tommi-C]

They would have had to report it as stolen. This clause would have to have been in the contract you signed for the car lease.

[@markrobinson9654]

They gave a common law duty to turn up when your house gets robbed but they don't

[@chriscurtis276]

From the picture, it looks like a traffic vehicle. If the lease is overdue, it is likely the insurance has expired and so they probably seized it under s165 Road Traffic Act for being uninsured

[@Si74l0rd]

If it was a hire car then I don't have a problem with the police being involved. But a lease system or a loan that pays for a vehicle, are nothing to do with criminal law, it's not fraud, it's missed payments. As such I do have a problem with the police being involved, if all is as the post states it is. Wasn't too long ago that the police were assisting bailiffs knocking on people's doors, but now they know they're not exempt from repercussions in doing so if entry is illegally gained, you don't really see it anymore. Mostly because the bailiffs were lying to the police and telling them they had a court order, rather than an application for a court order, which doesn't grant them any right of entry. Had the police not attended then the bailiffs would have gone away empty handed, so the police weren't acting in a neutral capacity, and prejudiced the situation. I don't see this case as being different. If the police can't come and confiscate the sofa you missed a payment on, why do they have the power to confiscate a car which is also a contract dispute, and therefore a civil matter? If they can't force entry to an abode to assist in recovery, what makes a car so special? If I got a million pound loan and bought a painting with the money, then I could stop paying and stick it in a container to be shipped abroad. It's no different. You could say the same about any high value item on a lend lease scheme. Even your grotty DFS sofa could be shipped abroad if you so desired, but no legal power is used by the police in any other contract dispute. Recovery agents are the appropriate employee for this job. Not the people we pay council tax to fund in fighting crime. They don't look into theft from an individual most of the time, why do lease companies get special treatment? If they're being paid a commission or getting backhanders for the recovery, then they can get the fuck out of my pocket for their funding! If they want to give corporations preferential treatment over the citizens who actually fund them, then those corporations should pay, in our stead.

[@rjb10101]

Would the insurance have been cancelled by the lease company..? thus grounds for stopping and impounding the vehicle.

[@MrScottishborn]

The lease/finance company has absolutely no,power to cancel your insurance. It’s a personal contract between you and the insurance company.

[@simonleeofficial]

'the' is not the appropriate word, a person can have many insurance policies, e.g. DOC with another car.

[@robinsallotment]

i sold a £50,000 camper van was paid £30,000 bank transfure person took the van saying will return with the ballence didnt return informed the local police in borehamwood and their responce was as some of the money had beeN paid its not thieft or obtaining a vehical by decite they cant do any thing to get the vehical back sugested i contact a solisitor to start legal procedings to get the remaing moneys police waste of time as far as i am concerened they are only after the esay cases

[@slydawgg]

At some point though,it turns into theft.Nothing to do with financial laws. If the company want the vehicle back, you have to return it….if the company don’t want the vehicle back and they want the money then it’s a financial situation.

[@DJDJ-fl2nv]

Daniel the problem we have, many police forces across the UK quite simply get involved in what they say or determine as not criminal, they then refused to get involved ‘selectively’ on what they classed as civil disputes... yet when it suits them, they act in a totally questionable way, and take action...it seems to me when we look at everything from the house repossessions, council tax debacle, through to the Post Office scandal etc...incorporating many civil disputes that the police are being used for nefarious reasons...it cannot be right that there are such questions in law, yet the police forces take it upon themselves how they interpret law in a highly selectively manner, or how they apply the law....We’re getting to a point that the distrust in the law and it’s enforcement, it is becoming epidemic, I would suggest that the police revert to their original task as set out within the Peel principles, as ‘policing by consent’, as they are after all...merely citizens in uniform, there to protect the public,hence their swore oath , rather than a corporations enforcement agents ?

[@martinrichard542]

Also a power to seize if the vehicle is not insured to be on a road.

[@peterharknett4695]

police removed me from my vehicle over unpaid council parking, private enforcement agent told police i stole vehicle after bulk processing centre issued order without Due Process. council says i must pay first then police will say not stolen. do i have any rights left?

[@richardwalker6417]

Surely if payments have not been made there is also the factor it has no insurance for that driver?

[@JelMain]

Ownership of the vehicle may also impact its insurance and taxation, meaning it's on the road with incorrect documentation on those counts as well.

[@workspacephotography1028]

It would be interesting to know how many of these end up with a charge and conviction. If it’s a very low charge and conviction, which I guess it is, then I think it’s not the police’s job to do this, it should go through a civil court system.

[@davidhooper1767]

Crime number for a burglary with no sign of the police turining up to investigate.

[@c7ulm]

Who's in charge of drawing the line, with the police lending a hand with car finance related issues.? That's the problem.

[@tgheretford]

I wonder if debtors' prisons will return?

[@tixy7768]

You can still be committed to prison/police station for non payment of a court fine

[@laceandwhisky]

I can understand police being involved to aid seizure of the vehical if at first the debt recovery have tried several times and under threat been unable to recover. But there must be a process for it 😊

[@stephenford8304]

I speak as I find, and of the 6times I’ve called on the Police for help, all involving vehicle theft, they have never attended, absolutely bloody useless, I have no time or respect for the Police, waste of space to a man.

[@alanrodgers3441]

If the leasing company cancels the contract, is the driver insured. Because there is no current contract. There is reason for seizure.

[@waltersobchak1719]

That would be between the driver and their insurance company, but I think it would be reasonable to assume that the insurance company would not knowingly provide insurance for such a vehicle.

[@Si74l0rd]

I would assume GDPR would prevent them informing the insurer about the payments having been defaulted on.

[@waltersobchak1719]

@@Si74l0rd That’s a very good point👍. Ultimately though, in a case like this the insurance company would do an investigation into the circumstances and then just decline to pay out on any claims if it did come back as stolen or fraudulently obtained.

[@Si74l0rd]

@@waltersobchak1719 Yeah they may or may not honour any claims made under such circumstances, and it might not be renewable at the end of the term. Especially if there's a credit marker, and they pay in installments. But the insurance would more likely than not, be valid at the point of the intercept, so it shouldn't flag on the PNC as uninsured. Again meaning there has been no crime committed, nor reasonable suspicion for a criminal investigation to take place.

[@waltersobchak1719]

@@Si74l0rd Very true, but Insurance companies and the police do talk to each other and share information, so anything untoward is likely to come up. Any chance that might exist for the company not to have to pay out, they are going to take it!

[@patajj9340]

I suspect he no longer had permission to use that vehicle so would be an uninsured driver which would also give the police power to seize it.

[@user-ml7dh8ph6i]

Police commissioners have their own company and will charge a fee to the Lease company. Just like vehicle recovery. Old boys club. Disgusting

[@derekheeps1244]

The screenshot at the beginning of this item stated that the DRIVER of the vehicle had stopped making payments . While that may be the case , it is also perfectly possible that the driver was an employee of the person who leased it , and therefore completely innocent of any wrongdoing , and might be entirely unaware of his boss having stopped payments . The lease company should , instead of involving the police , simply obtain a court order for recovery of the vehicle and instruct bailiffs or recovery agents to recover the vehicle . If they are concerned about knowing where the vehicle is , they can fit a tracker to what is , after all , THEIR vehicle . This should not need to involve the police , and questions should rightly be asked .

[@benrevell]

It states "The powers conferred by subsections (2), (3) and (4) are exercisable by a constable..........". Does that mean that the subsection does not apply to a policeman of higher rank?

[@atlanticx100]

The Police are often saying this is a civil matter so they can't get involved. If the car in question was being driven by the registered keeper and not reported stolen by the keeper, they should not get involved or just said to the driver could you please get in touch with ************. I am saying this as against if there was a High Court Writ for the seizure. But for that scenario, I do not know whether they could as they are not High Court bailiffs. As a matter of interest could the person sue the police for unlawful seizure?

[@waltersobchak1719]

Probably not. Just because they are the Registered Keeper does not mean that they are the owner of the vehicle.

[@CommanderStarblaster]

Here's a true story for you... My brother owned a tech company and one of his employees had one of my brother's company cars as part of his contract of employment. Eventually he was fired for failing to do his job, so he left the company but kept the car. When my brother asked for it back, the ex-employee said my brother still owed him some kind of severance pay so he's going to keep the car until he is paid. My brother went to the police and they told him it was a civil matter and nothing to do with them. Even though the ex-employee was holding the car to ransom. Isn't that the same as this? It seems to me, the police are very selective in what they can and can't be bothered to do regardless of the law or their lack of knowledge of it.

[@robinwells8879]

Perhaps the poor judgement comes in widely publicising their actions without sufficient explanation to explain the background to the incident. Police and social media seems to be a marriage made in hell! Not stupid but definitely poor judgement when their reputation is already under attack.

[@thepoloman6515]

A thought, if the leasing company isn't paid and says you are not to drive the car. Does this mean that any insurance is invalid? If so is the car being driven without insurance that would be a crime would it not?

[@Normanskie]

I am a little bit concerned abut they might ship it abroad, surely a person would have the sense to ship it abroad BEFORE they stopped payment, also if I sell a car and was given a cheque that wasn't honoured could I request the police retrieve the car.

[@Mark-yk1ny]

It sounds like deception or theft. Definitely a job for the cops

[@jerrygeorgopolis8015]

BBB, I expected the High Court Debt Collectors would have Jurisdiction ? Thank for the video, and good day from the U.S.A.

[@tunderhay]

I can see no honest explanation for ceasing to make repayments and then going completely silent, whilst still being alive and able to drive. It seems reasonable that the police intervened in this case, though I wouldn’t want this to become the norm just for simple missed payments, which should of course be a civil matter. It seems there should be some period of time after the lessee is in arrears, when it should move from a civil to a criminal matter and treated as theft, though I don’t know if such a law exists.