Landlady out of order?

[PlanB]

Re: Landlady out of order?

you cannot turn the clock back, as once an offence has been committed, it has been committed. Returning possessions would mitigate the matter, but the decision to take the matter further would lie with the tenant. If they are happy for it to be recorded as NFA (No Further Action), that is their prerogative. Alternatively, if they want to make complaint, again, that is their prerogative, but it is unlikely to go anywhere.

That's interesting BB :mod:

How long does a "NFA" stay on the police database (if it does)? And can it be stored even if the incident is never investigated or evidenced and then brought up as a negative against the person in future? What if the Tenant was being malicious and there's no proof that any of his stuff is in the back of the Landlady's car? I ask because I'm curious and not because I intend to commit a burglary :hand: But I am a Landlady so I feel I should be told

[bluebottle]

Re: Landlady out of order?

No thank you, but I am in line to graduate this summer with a first class degree from a well respected university. On a daily basis I come into contact with some of the finest legal academics and professionals, I have studied the subject of criminal law in depth and I have a solid grasp and understanding of it. That being said, I am certainly no expert - but I do have a good understanding of it.

With the greatest of respect to you, as an ex-police officer, there are a huge number of police on the streets of this country that have as good as no understanding of the law. An example of this would be the two police officers that I witnessed threatening to make an arrest for "section 5 public order offence" - despite the words in question being spoken inside a private dwelling to someone in the same room, with no chance of it being heard outside that room! Tell me about it. One of our more learned members, who is a barrister, has noticed this. I have witnessed serving police officers threatening to arrest persons without any real grounds for doing so. In one case, a woman officer slammed someone up against the window of a cafe, almost resulting in the window going through, when she had no grounds for the use of such force, nor had the person committed an offence, other than to tell the woman officer to go away and stop interfering in an argument that was causing no alarm, distress or harassment to anyone. When myself and other people surrounded her and the person she had assaulted, she pushed her red button on her handset, which is the "I need urgent assistance" alert. Her Duty Officer (Inspector) was not best-pleased when I spoke to him and explained what had actually happened as she had placed not only her colleagues' lives in danger, she had also placed the lives of the public in danger. An "Urgent Assistance" alert has police vehicles responding at high speed. You can imagine the sort of risks this gives rise to. The last I heard of the matter, the police had decided to take no further action against the person who had nearly gone through the cafe window, but the woman officer's actions were sufficient to consider disciplinary action against her.

I am not for one moment suggesting that you were one of this class of officer. I make the above statement simply to demonstrate that your question is really rather irrelevant because being in law enforcement does not necessarily equate to any real level of understanding. Would it interest you to know that the questions in the law exams police officers sit during their training are drawn from Bar Exams? Also, I have found that how a legal professional looks at an offence differs from that of a police officer. Yes, a legal professional will ensure the "Points to Prove" are, indeed, proven, but I have witnessed a police officer question a barrister's statement and logic in an open court in front of a judge. The barrister, I hasten to add, was rapidly peeing-off the judge by asking what sounded like irrelevant questions and, simply, wasting the court's time. What is funny, however, is a barrister or solicitor going up to a police officer, outside a court-room, and asking them about a particular point of law. I had that happen to me a number of times and I have seen it happen at the Crown and Magistrates Courts local to where I live. Sounds surreal, feels surreal, but it does happen.

To come back to the point, my last substantive post was correct. You yourself stated that for the offence of burglary to be made out, there either needs to be an entry accompanied by the intention to carry out one of more names offences (stealing in this instance) or there needs to be an entry coupled by the actual carrying out of such an offence. Experience of dealing with rogue landlords has taught me that they will use any excuse going to justify their actions. Some are very plausible, but others are just plain ridiculous. My gut-feeling and experience tells me that if this landlady were put into a recorded interview-room and pressed to explain her reasons, she would be unable to provide a plausible or justifiable reason for her actions. If I were attending this particular matter, I would be arresting the landlady on suspicion of Burglary, as a holding charge, the actual offence she had committed being determined after interviewing her under caution. Arresting someone on a holding charge and the actual offence committed being determined following interview under caution in a recorded interview is not unusual. I was a serving officer before and after PACE came into force.

Stealing means the same as theft for this purpose - meaning that it needs to be shown that she intended to commit theft of property or she actually committed theft. Either way, there needs to be some demonstration of dishonesty, whether intended or actual. See last paragraph in red text.

Response in red text.

[UnitedFront]

Re: Landlady out of order?

I agree with the information and sentiment in your last post - it is honestly a shame that all officers are not more like you.

I agree this lady has committed the offence of burglary (amongst other offences), my original point was more along the fact that the issue (if there was to be one, which there probably isn't) would certainly not be about intention permanently to deprive. You had quite rightly made this point earlier in the thread, and I was merely concurring. In terms of the dishonesty issue, I certainly wasn't saying that she was not dishonest or that she had not committed burglary - just that it needed to be shown and that this would be the only potential sticking point.

I also agree that there are solicitors and barristers out there that have a far from acceptable level of professionalism and/or understanding. I think it is probably the same in every industry, profession and walk of life.

[bluebottle]

Re: Landlady out of order?

I agree with the information and sentiment in your last post - it is honestly a shame that all officers are not more like you. I've been retired for a while now. Sadly, most of the experienced officers have been downgraded to PCSOs or pensioned-off through "efficiency savings". It's a travesty as they know how to keep the boneheads masquerading as warranted police officers in line and teach them to use their brains. There are times when I wonder if some currently serving officers have had their brains removed and replaced by a microchip. Remember Jim Davidson's "Nick Nick" routine? That's what it's getting like.

I agree this lady has committed the offence of burglary (amongst other offences), my original point was more along the fact that the issue (if there was to be one, which there probably isn't) would certainly not be about intention permanently to deprive. You had quite rightly made this point earlier in the thread, and I was merely concurring. In terms of the dishonesty issue, I certainly wasn't saying that she was not dishonest or that she had not committed burglary - just that it needed to be shown and that this would be the only potential sticking point. Agree with you 100% on that.

I also agree that there are solicitors and barristers out there that have a far from acceptable level of professionalism and/or understanding. I think it is probably the same in every industry, profession and walk of life. Believe it or not, the barrister who was challenged by a police officer in an open court in front of a judge is now a Recorder. Work that one out if you will.

I don't know if you have had the opportunity to do so, UF, but have you spent time with serving police officers - uniformed and CID - as part of your law degree? If you have not, it might be worth approaching a police force and asking if you can spend some time with police officers observing how they deal with offenders. It will provide you with a valuable insight into how offenders are dealt with, prior to legal professionals become involved. If you are considering going into practice as a solicitor, solicitor advocate or barrister, such experience could be invaluable.

[enquirer]

Re: Landlady out of order?

As has been pointed out before, s.6(1) helps to define the necessary intention and, in the current context, the essence is that the landlady intends to treat the property as her own to dispose of ...

I would agree if, for instance, she were to take the property and then simply abandon it where the owner would be unlikely to recover it. She has however stated that the goods are merely being held hostage.

As regards the Ghosh test :

The problem could come if this lady actually believes that reasonable and honest people would not judge her to be dishonest because she intends to return the property.

I suspect that most people would not consider her to be dishonest. Nor am I inclined to doubt that she herself believes this to be so.

[QueenAnne]

Re: Landlady out of order?

Sorry there's something I don't get... So op's gf asks ll for the deposit. I assume then ll drove over and took the goods (I assume ll took her hubby to help) and then called back op's friend's gf to say that she took the goods.
or version b: op's friends gf called ll and then ll did the deed (same as above) but didn't call back the gf... Op's friend got home, saw he's been robbed (i'd assume that in the situation) called gf... Gf told op of the conversation with ll (of which we need to know if ll seemed reluctant to give back the deposit, or indicated otherwise that the moneys gone - why else would ll force the guy to move this way unless she doesn't have the money) so op's friend called ll, and ll said she has the goods and wants the keys in return. I'm pretty sure ll doesn't have the deposit, spent it, and wants op's friend to be threatened to get lost...

why didn't then op's friend call the police immediately after? And the local council both... I don't know if they'd call it theft or burglary leave that to you but isn't then the police able to go to ll's address (hoping ll didn't take the tenants copy of the ast agreement and/or tenant can give the address to the police...)
is it too optimistic to think that in this case the police should go to ll's house to make the arrest? Or check for the goods and make the arrest? Isn't this - ll admitting to tenant or the gf/3rd party enough cause for that?

i thought I had rubbish ll before but this ll is the worst I ever heard of....
Sorry for stepping into the talk of the grown ups, I'm trying to understand why isn't it obvious that the police would arrest ll. She stole from this guy, and refuses to give back blackmailing the guy. Plus the trespass. Plus if she spent the deposit (I'm quite sure she did as mentioning deposit triggered this all...)

I'd consider this ll dishonest without a doubt. I think I'd do because of how mentioning deposit triggered this & it's obvious you cannot just take away someone else's belongings when they are your paid tenant.., also I'd think that not knowing the law doesn't mean that one can be exempt of the law. I think she knew exactly she's doing something illegal (sure doesn't know if theft or burglary of if this is actually blackmail or not) but I find ll very dishonest.... I believe I represent the average Jane in this.

[wales01man]

Re: Landlady out of order?

There have been a lot of instances posted on LB where a crime may have been committed and the Police called but for some reason they are not called.We can all draw our own conclusions as to why not I have mine in some cases but then so do others.