Tweet
Locked in an establishment without notice, complained and told to go and sit down.
Excuse provided that they can lock people in (in an emergency)
Transpires and evidenced this was not an emergency.
Establishment will still not accept/apologise.
My question is this - What is the statute for deprivation of liberty? Is it kidnap statute?
I understand there are important elements of the Mental Capacities Act also which may apply - unlawful to restrict an individual with mental capacity but don't think thats the main one.
Any pointers appreciated. This was a big deal, I was headed out to attend to important family business and held up for only 15 minutes, but a significant 15 minutes.
'its the conspiracy that gets them' when I complained I expected a brief apology. Instead they conflated the 'we can do this in an emergency' with locking me in, but without claiming it was an emergency and without answering when challenged 'are you claiming this was an emergency' and so my position in law is they have lied by omission.
The establishment locked my brother in 2 weeks later, by coincidence and allowed him to leave when he protested.
The establishment, some weeks further, then admitted to me they had changed their policy and were telling the public they could leave before performing maintenance (admission of liability).
Excuse provided that they can lock people in (in an emergency)
Transpires and evidenced this was not an emergency.
Establishment will still not accept/apologise.
My question is this - What is the statute for deprivation of liberty? Is it kidnap statute?
I understand there are important elements of the Mental Capacities Act also which may apply - unlawful to restrict an individual with mental capacity but don't think thats the main one.
Any pointers appreciated. This was a big deal, I was headed out to attend to important family business and held up for only 15 minutes, but a significant 15 minutes.
'its the conspiracy that gets them' when I complained I expected a brief apology. Instead they conflated the 'we can do this in an emergency' with locking me in, but without claiming it was an emergency and without answering when challenged 'are you claiming this was an emergency' and so my position in law is they have lied by omission.
The establishment locked my brother in 2 weeks later, by coincidence and allowed him to leave when he protested.
The establishment, some weeks further, then admitted to me they had changed their policy and were telling the public they could leave before performing maintenance (admission of liability).
