Civil vs criminal please help please

[Johnboy007]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

Consent to use the car, Andy, but not to keep or sell it. Where a person who has borrowed something assumes rights of ownership they do not have and then treats whatever they have borrowed as their own, it is at that point it ceases to be a civil matter and becomes a criminal matter, especially if the lawful owner would not have consented to whatever they had loaned being retained or sold without their consent.

The way in which the loan was obtained is also in question.

I agree 100% BB..

[Guest]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

I agree 100% BB..

Then you would be similarly incorrect.
If he has sold the car then it is for the creditor to pursue, if he wishes. he could report the matter to the police, but it is unlikely, they are far more likely to pursue the OP for the contractual repayments.
However the OP is free to check with the police if they wish, they will confirm everything I say.

[Johnboy007]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

Then you would be similarly incorrect.
If he has sold the car then it is for the creditor to pursue, if he wishes. he could report the matter to the police, but it is unlikely, they are far more likely to pursue the OP for the contractual repayments.
However the OP is free to check with the real police if they wish, they will confirm everything I say.

If the car belongs to the bank Andy, surely he therefore does not have permission to use it, as OP is not the legal owner?
So in effect, would he not have taken the car without consent, a criminal offence I believe.
I am just trying to clarify this matter.
It's bloody confusing.

[des8]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

Just back after day out and find this thread has moved on apace,

IMO there is yet another aspect of this affair which has not been explored.
As the finance was arranged with SCF, can we assume it was arranged in the car showroom?
If it was why did the dealer (acting as agent of SCF or as an independent intermediary) arrange a Conditional Sale Agreement with restrictive conditions, when it was patently obvious
(deposit paid by third party and insurance in yet another parties' name) that those conditions were to be broken.?
Were these restrictions brought to OP's attention?
This smells of mis-selling by a dealer anxious to clinch a sale, and if he was acting as Santander agent, they are at least partially responsible.

Otherwise I go along with BB and Jb.
Ex is keeping a car which he was allowed to drive (in contravention of the finance agreement). As Bwithjj does not own car she cannot pass good title to it, it belongs to SCF.
Ex is treating vehicle as if he owns it, he is therefore committing a criminal act, as well as a civil offence.

PS. is ex driving vehicle viewing licence problems alluded to, or is it someone else running around in it?

[Johnboy007]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

Evidently Des, it was being driven by the ex's relative. And was then sold by the ex to, who knows?
The car insurance was in relatives name, as ex didn't have any, so couldn't legal drive it.
JB

[Bwithjj]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

Just back after day out and find this thread has moved on apace,

IMO there is yet another aspect of this affair which has not been explored.
As the finance was arranged with SCF, can we assume it was arranged in the car showroom?
If it was why did the dealer (acting as agent of SCF or as an independent intermediary) arrange a Conditional Sale Agreement with restrictive conditions, when it was patently obvious
(deposit paid by third party and insurance in yet another parties' name) that those conditions were to be broken.?
Were these restrictions brought to OP's attention?
This smells of mis-selling by a dealer anxious to clinch a sale, and if he was acting as Santander agent, they are at least partially responsible.

Otherwise I go along with BB and Jb.
Ex is keeping a car which he was allowed to drive (in contravention of the finance agreement). As Bwithjj does not own car she cannot pass good title to it, it belongs to SCF.
Ex is treating vehicle as if he owns it, he is therefore committing a criminal act, as well as a civil offence.

PS. is ex driving vehicle viewing licence problems alluded to, or is it someone else running around in it?

He has some issues with his driving licence. As I am not aware of the actual issue, so I can't give you a right answer. He told me that he had an accident but address in his driving licence was not updated when he moved to new address. I know that he had some court hearing (not sure if that was related to this issue or something else)

[bluebottle]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

The OP allowing their ex-partner and his relative to use the car in contravention of the finance agreement is a purely civil matter. However, where criminal law comes in is the selling of the car by the ex-partner's relative with the ex-partner's consent or connivance. Yes, SCF could report it as stolen, being the lawful owner, but it is also the responsibility of the OP, as the other party to the loan agreement, which requires them to keep the car in their possession, to report it as stolen. The police are being lazy by claiming it is all a civil matter. There may also be issues connected with the way in which the loan was obtained and the ex-partner's relative obtained motor insurance. Whoever the ex-partner's relative sold the car to is going to have a shock when the car is recovered as either stolen or subject to finance, more likely, stolen.

[Guest]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

To repeat.

The op does not have a criminal claim. The police will confirm this. He does not own the car. If the cr has been sold or he suspects he has then he should report theses concerns to the owner the credit company.

As far as the OP's position is concerned there course for redress is through the civil court, and as said this process is best served by sending a recorded letter before actin the other party and then pursuing hem through the small claims court.

He should of course keep the creditor appraised of all his actions in the matter as they have a perfect right to know what is happening with their property. In the mean time they will undoubtedly pursue the OP for contractual payments.

As for accusations of the police being "lazy" we;; you can put this to them if you like but I would not recommend it and i suspect they will just say that the matter is not within their remit as indeed they already have in this and many other similar situations which i have seen.

[Johnboy007]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

To repeat.

The op does not have a criminal claim. The police will confirm this. He does not own the car. If the cr has been sold or he suspects he has then he should report theses concerns to the owner the credit company.

As far as the OP's position is concerned there course for redress is through the civil court, and as said this process is best served by sending a recorded letter before actin the other party and then pursuing hem through the small claims court.

He should of course keep the creditor appraised of all his actions in the matter as they have a perfect right to know what is happening with their property. In the mean time they will undoubtedly pursue the OP for contractual payments.

As for accusations of the police being "lazy" we;; you can put this to them if you like but I would not recommend it and i suspect they will just say that the matter is not within their remit as indeed they already have in this and many other similar situations which i have seen.

Andy, I'm not really clear on why you think that no criminal act has been committed.
She lent him the car.
It was HE who sold the car and kept the money.
It is not his to sell, so he has committed a criminal offence.

[Guest]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

Andy, I'm not really clear on why you think that no criminal act has been committed.
She lent him the car.
It was HE who sold the car and kept the money.
It is not his to sell, so he has committed a criminal offence.

We are talking about form the OPs perspective and the OP does not own the car. he cannot report it as stolen from him because he does not own it. He can advise the owner what has happened, they may decide it is worthy of reporting to the police they may not.(unless it was taken without consent)
As far as the relationship between the police and the contractual keeper of the vehicle is concerned the relationship is a civil (contractual one) and beyond their remit.

There may be an issue of falsifying documents , as far as this is concerned the DVLA should be notified, although this will not solve the Ops problem and is to my mind just a side line issue.

The purpose of these forums is to my mind recommend real world solutions t people, if the OP wishes to embark on a rant against the injustices of the system that is a matter for them, and I am sure BB will accommodate that, if however they wish to resolve the matter they should IMO follow the course of action I have outlined on here.

[des8]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

The OP may not be the direct victim of the theft of this vehicle, but still (as a witness to a crime) has the right (not duty) of reporting it to the police.
I believe in Britain there is no legal obligation to report crime.

When a crime or alleged crime is reported, the police should take the reporters details, record the alleged crime and allocate a crime reference number.
They should then carry out an appropriate investigation and decide on further steps if necessary

Dismissing the matter at the desk as a "civil" affair seems inappropriate.
This concern about police not taking reports of crime seriously enough is not new:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...e-scandal.html

[bluebottle]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

To repeat.

The op does not have a criminal claim. The police will confirm this. He does not own the car. If the cr has been sold or he suspects he has then he should report theses concerns to the owner the credit company.

As far as the OP's position is concerned there course for redress is through the civil court, and as said this process is best served by sending a recorded letter before actin the other party and then pursuing hem through the small claims court.

He should of course keep the creditor appraised of all his actions in the matter as they have a perfect right to know what is happening with their property. In the mean time they will undoubtedly pursue the OP for contractual payments.

As for accusations of the police being "lazy" we;; you can put this to them if you like but I would not recommend it and i suspect they will just say that the matter is not within their remit as indeed they already have in this and many other similar situations which i have seen.

I'm afraid your post shows your lack of knowledge and understanding of the Criminal Law. I explained the situation in Post #52. Also, "It's a civil matter," is a common answer by the police these days. This is a consequence of target-driven policing where crime is sidelined in favour of easier and softer targets. However, the quality of police officers these days is open to question.

[Kati]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

just a thought ....

A key element of any larceny or theft crime is what an offender intends to do with the property after taking it. Typically, an offender is guilty of a theft crime when he takes the property of another with the intention of permanently depriving him of it. Deciding later to keep the property an offender orginally intended to use temporarily and then return becomes a larceny or theft crime at the moment the offender's intent changes. The perfect example of this is a rental car you decide not to return. A lawful rental becomes a larceny or theft crime the moment you fail to return it on time with the intention of keeping it.

http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/c...turn_owner.htm

[Guest]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

I'm afraid your post shows your lack of knowledge and understanding of the Criminal Law. I explained the situation in Post #52. Also, "It's a civil matter," is a common answer by the police these days. This is a consequence of target-driven policing where crime is sidelined in favour of easier and softer targets. However, the quality of police officers these days is open to question.

Yes it is indeed a common answer by the police, because many like your self do not understand the difference between the two and advise others to complain incorrectly.

Irrespective of this, it is agreed taht this is what the police say and is their position on this, so unless you intend taking them to court and challenging their deision the only way forward is the one I recommend and the one usually recommended in similar situations.

[Guest]

Re: Civil vs criminal please help please

just a thought ....



http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/c...turn_owner.htm

\yes the key element her of course is depriving the owner, the OP here is not the owner, also there must be a complaint, the owner here has not made one, and through experiences may not bother if they can recover the cost of the car through the contractual obligation encumberant to the OP.