Advice - Legal or Realistic?

[labman]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

And that is exactly where I hit another problem. The fact that the legal provisions exist to put a stop to an injustice sadly, nowadays, does not mean they would actually be utilised to do so. If every policeman was as 'old school' and well informed as you BB, then your statement may be true. The reality, as you know, is that that is not the case and so while a criminal remedy may be open in theory for a poster, in reality it is misleading to mention it, especially in early responses as in reality it probably does not exist.

Due to personal circumstance, I have tried several times recently to get the police to pursue criminal charges, every time without success, or with extremely limited success even though there was absolutely no doubt the law allowed for it and the evidence was there. Had I had mentioned to me on here the correct Acts I mentioned to the police in my house, I would have left the site sorely disappointed.

Returning to the earlier metaphor, I received pistols when bombs were theoretically available. To suggest otherwise by anyone is, to my mind, misleading.

[bluebottle]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

I agree with you to a point, but then we go our separate ways. A lot of the young officers in the police force these days could do with spending at least six months with an older and more experienced officer who would ground them and knock a lot of the stupid behaviour many young officers engage in on the head. Sadly, a lot of older and more experienced officers have been forcibly retired and this is to the detriment of the police service and the public who will now get a second-rate police service. All too often I have witnessed young officers abusing their powers or making up the law as they go along. They don't like it when I or other retired officers put them right, but they need this to be done in order to stop the public turning against them.

I'm afraid the reality is that police officers and civilian support staff, these days, all too often have read the Home Office Manual on Lower Gastro-Intestinal Ventriloquism and not used their commonsense or checked what they spout.

I strongly believe in self-empowerment and giving people the full facts so that they can make an informed decision as to what to do. Referral to a legal professional, either a high street solicitor or a Law Centre or the Community Legal Service, is often desirable as they will be able to advise them on the best route to take.

[labman]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

I don't think we've gone our separate ways at all there. The only potential difference being I believe in drip feeding in the full facts should that be necessary. Often a simple couple of letters will resolve it and there is no need for anything else.

[Guest]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

HI
I have to agree with Labman on this, further as I have said before I think it is not only unrealistic to quote these criminal acts on these forums, i think it is inappropriate.

It's a case of horses for courses.

We are fine at offering support and even some legal assistance on civil matters , if a DCA is misbehaving or even if bailiffs are overcharging, but when it comes to real criminal behavior we are simply not qualified. Please don't misunderstand me BB I am sure you know what you are talking about, what I am saying is that we, as a resource are not qualified, we cannot provide the hands on and technical support that is required in those sort of problems. These are a matter for the police and the social services, and posters experiencing those problem should be referred there.

Regarding accusations of fraud and other criminal accusations on disputes with DCA's or even Bailiffs, the fact is that they are inappropriate coming from a member of the public no matter how well informed.

If a DCA turned up at your door and said , i am taking posession of your car because you owe this money, you would tell him to sod off, quite rightly. IF a certified bailiff turned up at your door and said the same thing then you better take it seriously. The same applies with these threats to DCA's, coming from joe public they mean nothing, we cannot carry them through. We would have to go to the police and see if they come to the same conclusion and then see if they will do anything about it, not going to happen and they know it.

One or two letters have been sent to DCA's on here i notice, mentioning the fraud thing, sarcastic letters have been received back saying , thanks for the letter we will await the contact from the police.

D

[wales01man]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

IN respect of the debate about too much or too little info on here in replies to posters questions i feel that any info or laws quoted should be weighed up by the OP and others in similar positions the good thing to come out of many forum debates is that someone reading and inputting into the thread will have gone through the same as the OP it can be helpful to know you are not alone ,
All of us faced with the problems that are discussed on here should look at all the advice filter out what does not apply to our situation and make decisions apart from this and many more similar forums there is free advice out there and the forums often point one in the right direction as said before every law rule and reg can be interpretated in many ways as we all see many posters have different views i read all and try to decide myself at times the argumentative tone of some replies needs to cease this adds nothing to the post and can often detract from the OPs problems
Finally IMO anything that can help with a difficult situation is welcome im sure its always helpful to know someone has faced the same problems and come through and started again my favorite saying is
theres always light at the end of the tunnel

[alham]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

I've read this thread with great interest and whilst certain terminology has legal definitions "fraud, theft etc...", they are only legal if police takes an interest in them. However, one can pursue wrongdoers through the civil courts where proof requirement is of a lower threshold - balance of probability VS beyond reasonable doubt. However, when one deals with governmental or quasi-governmental organisations, especially if one alleges misuse or overstepping of powers, civil action is often the only course. Thanks to this forum (and others like this) we, joe public, become better informed, get information (that one MAY be able to find online but trying to make sense?!!) and get wise advice from others , who often been their before, and last , but not least, someone listens and tries to help!!!

[bluebottle]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

I've read this thread with great interest and whilst certain terminology has legal definitions "fraud, theft etc...", they are only legal if police takes an interest in them. However, one can pursue wrongdoers through the civil courts where proof requirement is of a lower threshold - balance of probability VS beyond reasonable doubt. However, when one deals with governmental or quasi-governmental organisations, especially if one alleges misuse or overstepping of powers, civil action is often the only course. Thanks to this forum (and others like this) we, joe public, become better informed, get information (that one MAY be able to find online but trying to make sense?!!) and get wise advice from others , who often been their before, and last , but not least, someone listens and tries to help!!!

If there is evidence to support an allegation of fraud, etc., these are properly pursued through the Criminal Justice system. Whilst they can be pursued through the civil courts, this does require consent from the DPP/CPS. I agree 100% with the comment about abuse/misuse of powers by government/quasi-governmental bodies.

[labman]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

If there is evidence to support an allegation of fraud, etc., these are properly pursued through the Criminal Justice system.

That is my worry - are they? How many on this site can say when they posted, they were advised Company X were in breach of the Fraud Act 2006, a criminal investigation was launched as a result of this advice and the company was prosecuted?

I suspect the answer is probably as few as 0.

[Guest]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

That is my worry - are they? How many on this site can say when they posted, they were advised Company X were in breach of the Fraud Act 2006, a criminal investigation was launched as a result of this advice and the company was prosecuted?

I suspect the answer is probably as few as 0.

Because the accusation would not have come from anyone with the power to enforce, the legislation is designed to be used by the police not forums like this, IMHO.

D

[labman]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

Because the accusation would not have come from anyone with the power to enforce, the legislation is designed to be used by the police not forums like this, IMHO.

D

And that is EXACTLY why I started this thread. My concern is this type of legislation is being posted too liberally on these forums, and we should be making suggestions which genuinely do something for the poster - a letter, ignore and don't worry we've been there, the bailiff won't break in as they are not allowed to etc... If necessary then, I think there is a place for saying you need to seek professional legal advice or go to the police, and I've often seen this suggested quite correctly. The people who give that legal advice or the police advise on whether or not any criminal aspects should be pursued.

It is a fine line between empowering consumers and oversteping the mark in my opinion.

[alham]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

And that is EXACTLY why I started this thread. My concern is this type of legislation is being posted too liberally on these forums, and we should be making suggestions which genuinely do something for the poster - a letter, ignore and don't worry we've been there, the bailiff won't break in as they are not allowed to etc... If necessary then, I think there is a place for saying you need to seek professional legal advice or go to the police, and I've often seen this suggested quite correctly. The people who give that legal advice or the police advise on whether or not any criminal aspects should be pursued.

It is a fine line between empowering consumers and oversteping the mark in my opinion.

You are right BUT as, often, we are talking about misdemeanor by powerful entities, and we, a small fry, have to make them listen somehow. For example, recent report about Hillsborough - it confirmed all allegations made by families, proved wrongdoing by authorities ... and result will be nothing will be done, I suspect. And that's a high-profile case!

We need to stand up for our rights when we can otherwise every time someone allows b******s to win by default they just get meaner and uglier. And often the forum members are so far in the corner, feel abandoned and tired that even a glimmer of hope is enough to re-invigorate their fight.

[teaboy2]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

Theres i no reason why a civil case under the fraud act can not be brought against a company. It is simply an alternative remedy to criminal prosecution, which should in my opinion by used to the fullest when its a clear cut case of fraud or attempt to defraud when the police themselves refuse to deal with it and refer it to being a civil matter. I base my view on the simple priniciple that justice is free to all and we all have the right to see justice done - Whether that be criminal prosecution or by way of civil court.

If someone assualted me in the street (though more fool them if they tried) then regardless of whether they are charged and/or convicted or not. I can still take them to court for assualt to claim damages for my injuries so long as the proof is their that they were the attacker.

RLP use this route, but they mess up on not being able to substantiate the costs they are claiming, yet if the person they were claiming from was convicted for the offence, it would be a whole different ball game and RLP would likely be successful in claiming damages from them in court.

I think the real issue here is people advising this and that without enough evidence to back up such a allegation. So we should be making sure we are 100% certain and the evidence supports the allegation before we advise people how to act on it.

[Guest]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

I think the issue is that what you are referring to is civil action, which of course is what this forum is all about.
What is inappropriate is to advise action based on criminal legislation, which is exclusively in the purview of the police.
D

[bluebottle]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

Because the accusation would not have come from anyone with the power to enforce, the legislation is designed to be used by the police not forums like this, IMHO.

D

It also depends a lot on the circumstances. Each offence has points to prove which must be satisfied. With Fraud offences, the Ghosh Test is applied to establish dishonesty. If you can't satisfy ALL the points to prove for an offence, forget it. The police simply won't run with it. If you can satisfy the points to prove, then speak to the police.

[labman]

Re: Advice - Legal or Realistic?

This is where I get concerned see. You know that because you were a police officer, but I certainly didn't know about the Ghosh test, nor would I know where to find out about it. If I thought a fraud had been committed I would go straight to the police and let them tell me there was no point in pursuing things.