Possessions torts

[Benjc87]

Afternoon everyone!

I have a bit of a strange question that I need advice on. I'll try to keep it as short and sweet as possible.

- I am currently serving in HM Forces.
- I moved out of married quarters and back onto the establishment in February 2017 after separating from my wife.
- I work in a certain section of the establishment, and had access to a key to a garage which I believed to be used by my section.
- The garage is within the establishment.
- In February I opened the garage and stored quite a few of my personal belongings (estimated £5-6k)
- I (thought) was the sole key holder for the garage.
- On 28th February 2017 I opened the garage to find 90% of my belongings removed/stolen/disposed of.
- I reported the matter the next day.
- Upon questioning the contractor in charge of the rentals - the garage was not being used, or registered by my section.
- I took ownership of the garage, and paid all outstanding fees. I was now the only custodian.
- Another serviceman was told by the contractor to remove goods and dispose of them accordingly. So he did.
- The Military Police took action and found no theft had occurred.
- Serviceman contacted me and confirmed he had thrown all of the items away.
- I followed (under guidance) the procedure for compensation for lost/damaged articles - claiming against the military.
- Contractor (manager) was suspended, and then her contract terminated.
- I removed what was left in the garage in June, and terminated the rental.
- 7 months later, I received notice today that the sole blame lies with the contractor, and I should pursue them. No further guidance received.

My question is, where do I go next? I branched out for some guidance via a solicitor today, and was told that the best form of action would be to take the matter to a small claims court. However, I have no receipt of items removed/disposed of. Only the statement made by the serviceman, and an up to date statement (if possible). I have every document submitted to the military for investigation.

Since then, there has been notices around stating that people need to claim garages before an ultimatum, or possessions will be removed. (Rectifying the outstanding problem - now aware of their incompetence)

It seems incredible (but not entirely surprising, unfortunately) that the military offer absolutely no help or guidance past this point, and have effectively washed their hands of the case.

Possessions included some high value items, and some very sentimental items. My whole life, or what was left of it, had been thrown away.

I understand that this isn't the normal case, but believe there to be some wrongdoing legally by the contractor.

I hope everything makes sense, if not, please ask any further leading questions.

Thank you for any help or guidance.

[R0b]

Re: Possessions torts

Hello

The legal term for this tort is wrongful interference with goods by way of conversion. The legal basis for conversion is where Person A misappropriates goods belong to Person B with the result that it prevents you from use or possession of those goods. There's a number of types of conversion e.g. destruction, taking possession as if it were one's own, loss of goods etc. so you would need to identify which type of conversion would apply, though it seems as though it might be destruction of goods from the sound of it.

Claims under conversion can only be made in connection with a chattel, and in the legal sense a chattel is anything that physically exists and can be touched and can be moved. In terms of damages, the starting point for assessment is the market value of those chattels but if it is not possible to obtain a market value for those chattels, the court will decide the measure of damages according to the evidence before it.

I don't know if there is any law that excludes a claim against the military for the tort of conversion so that would need to be looked into however the solicitor is right in that it is likely to be a claim that will fall within the County Court and small claims track which limits the recovery of costs to both sides.

Whether you choose to bring a claim is the risk you have to assess yourself, but the starting point would be to gather all your evidence first and start from there. For me, looking at it from the outside I would have several questions that need answering:

1. You had access to the garage, did you enter into any form of written contract (since you mention rental) and was this with the military or the contractor?
2. You said that you thought only you had access to the garage but you appear to say that you believe the section to have access, sounds confusing.
3. Is there any inventory list of your belongings that you kept or bank statements of purchases or online order confirmations, photographs that you took recently with those items that could assist?

As with any claim you bring, you would need sufficient evidence to prove your claim. The goods news is that if you have a statement from the serviceman I would suggest you get that in writing and signed and dated from him, and if he can recall what items he removed that would be even more helpful and get it in writing. Normally a court is reluctant to speculate on things but in some case they may deviate from that if it was not possible to obtain any evidence, which might appear to be the case here. With the serviceman's statement and if he is willing to attend as a witness in court, I don't think liability is in issue (whether military or the contractor), it would be a question of damages and that I guess would be up to the court to decide a value of those lost possessions.

What that ultimately means if you might not get the full amount you expected.

[des8]

Re: Possessions torts

Hi and welcome
deleted as crossed with R0b's better post!!

[Benjc87]

Re: Possessions torts

Hello

The legal term for this tort is wrongful interference with goods by way of conversion. The legal basis for conversion is where Person A misappropriates goods belong to Person B with the result that it prevents you from use or possession of those goods. There's a number of types of conversion e.g. destruction, taking possession as if it were one's own, loss of goods etc. so you would need to identify which type of conversion would apply, though it seems as though it might be destruction of goods from the sound of it.

Claims under conversion can only be made in connection with a chattel, and in the legal sense a chattel is anything that physically exists and can be touched and can be moved. In terms of damages, the starting point for assessment is the market value of those chattels but if it is not possible to obtain a market value for those chattels, the court will decide the measure of damages according to the evidence before it.

I don't know if there is any law that excludes a claim against the military for the tort of conversion so that would need to be looked into however the solicitor is right in that it is likely to be a claim that will fall within the County Court and small claims track which limits the recovery of costs to both sides.

Whether you choose to bring a claim is the risk you have to assess yourself, but the starting point would be to gather all your evidence first and start from there. For me, looking at it from the outside I would have several questions that need answering:

1. You had access to the garage, did you enter into any form of written contract (since you mention rental) and was this with the military or the contractor?
2. You said that you thought only you had access to the garage but you appear to say that you believe the section to have access, sounds confusing.
3. Is there any inventory list of your belongings that you kept or bank statements of purchases or online order confirmations, photographs that you took recently with those items that could assist?

As with any claim you bring, you would need sufficient evidence to prove your claim. The goods news is that if you have a statement from the serviceman I would suggest you get that in writing and signed and dated from him, and if he can recall what items he removed that would be even more helpful and get it in writing. Normally a court is reluctant to speculate on things but in some case they may deviate from that if it was not possible to obtain any evidence, which might appear to be the case here. With the serviceman's statement and if he is willing to attend as a witness in court, I don't think liability is in issue (whether military or the contractor), it would be a question of damages and that I guess would be up to the court to decide a value of those lost possessions.

What that ultimately means if you might not get the full amount you expected.

Hi R0b, thank you very much for your reply.

Just to answer your questions;

1. I initially had use of the garage without any paperwork being completed (the premises are owned by the MOD, and the contract for the upkeep is from a civilian contractor (large company)). On discovering my property had been removed, I entered into a contract with the MOD and the civilian contractor, and paid any fees outstanding for the initial period where I was using it without paying. (4 weeks in total)
2. I believed my section had use of the garage, but was not using it for anything (so had a garage in case we needed to store things - we are a training section on the base). Upon enquiry, my line manager said he thought it was ours to use, so I took the key, and became the sole custodian (or so I thought).
3. I have an inventory list that I used when initially enquiring into the loss of my property. I have photo's of the most expensive item (Carbon road bike wheels) attached to my bicycle, but honestly, not much else. I would have to trawl through my previous bank statements to find anything, and even then, I'd be unsure of whether that would be the correct transaction.


I understand that this looks quite murky, and will be hard to prove much of this. I am in work tomorrow and will try and track down the other serviceman. Fingers crossed he is still on his course here and is willing to provide a statement of the property he removed and disposed of.

I spoke with a solicitor on the phone and she recommended that I send a letter to the company stating my intentions. Is there anything I can use on that letter to enhance my claim?

Once again, thank you for any help provided.

[Benjc87]

Re: Possessions torts

I also have 2 witnesses who helped me move, they both can state that they helped move and witnessed the property inside the garage. Not sure if that will help me?

[wales01man]

Re: Possessions torts

The contract was signed and paid after the goods went missing? does the contract insure the goods or state anything about security and does it cover you for theft or their negligence prior to signing it.

[Benjc87]

Re: Possessions torts

I believed the garage to be used by my section (which is why we held a key for the garage at my place of work). Therefore, after asking around on my section for ownership, used the garage. I was unaware that the garage had not been allocated to my section. This is why the other serviceman was allowed to sign the garage keys out and check the contents. The company breached its own rules there (he shouldn't have been allowed free roam of the garage), they then told him to remove the property (which he said he told them twice he didn't want to do, before finally doing it). This is where I believe the law was broken, as no notice of intention was ever given to me.

When discovering that my property had gone missing, I reported it and was told I need to take over the paperwork side of things, including paying for previous weeks that my stuff had been stored there.

No insurance is given, it is literally a piece of photocopied paper which you sign stating that they will charge £28~ a month, and that you are custodian.

I do apologise for lack of clarity, there is many external factors which have caused this to turn into a bit of a nightmare. I have casework which details everything, but cannot share online due to security.

Unfortunately the armed forces run on a bit of a shoestring and things like this rarely happen. Therefore the procedures are antiquated at best.