Is There Something Not Quite Right Here?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2381292/Police-let-gypsy-family-stay-couples-30-000-stolen-caravan-moving-breach-human-rights.html

Here we have a couple who have had their caravan stolen, and a travelling family who are in possession of the said stolen caravan, yet the police have no lawful rights to recover the couples property, why?

[FredPuli43]

Exactly Sandy. Human rights have got nothing to do with this case, but that won't stop the Daily Mail from claiming that they might or do!

[naomi24]

Fred, it’s not only the Mail that’s reporting it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10211103/Couples-stolen-caravan-cannot-be-returned-as-could-breach-traveller-familys-human-rights.html

//"They've told us social services would have to be involved to get the family accommodation before they could seize it, otherwise they said it could breach their human rights.”//

In that case, Social Services should be brought in – and rather than worry about finding the family accommodation, do it the simple way and provide them with a caravan worth the £300 they claim to have paid for the stolen one. Sorted!

This really is disgraceful.

[Sharingan]

It certainly wasn't 'Human rights' in the case of my mother's goods either, it was lazy complacent policing. They simply couldn't be bothered to do anything about it because it involved actually doing their jobs and not simply harrassing motorists or teenagers. I imagine the prospect of this lot turning up at a traveller's site filled them with so much terror I'm amazed they're not all off sick and requiring counselling :(
It makes me really, really angry.

[FredPuli43]

It's still nonsense in law though! As Sandy says, the same plaint could be made by a squatter. Anyway, are we to understand that the present occupant had no home at all and could only obtain one by buying a caravan at a gross undervalue from a man in a pub? He's lucky not to have been arrested and jailed! That would have solved his own housing problem for a while.

[Orderlimit]

The police have already been on the site Sharingan, that's how they discovered the caravan.

[Quoi]

Just another angle .... having personally had a caravan stolen and recovered from 'travellers' they probably dont want it back.
Remember it was a 20k caravan when they bought it in 2007 - not worth much more than 300 now.

[Sharingan]

It doesn't actually say that anywhere Orderlimit. It says-

Last September police located and identified the caravan in Hook, Hampshire, after interviewing a suspect for an unrelated offence. But because officers did not have evidence that the current occupier knew the caravan was stolen when he allegedly purchased it, he could not be prosecuted and the force said it was unable to seize it.

Nothing to suggest they ever visited a Traveller's site, just that they became aware of the caravan whilst interviewing the man in quesiton for something else. He might have been towing it somewhere and had a brake light out for all we know, but I'll bet you anything the police didn't go to a Traveller's site. They are entirely useless.

[naomi24]

Fred, as I understand it - and I might be wrong - the police are saying that whilst they know the caravan has been stolen, they have no powers to eject the family - in which case they should involve the appropriate authority.

[Orderlimit]

Why do you think the police wouldn't go on a Travellers site?.

From another source:

'A Hampshire police spokesman said: ''Officers attended the site of the caravan for an unrelated offence in September 2012, and while there, checks indicated the caravan was stolen. A 22-year-old man from Hook was arrested and interviewed on suspicion of theft,'

[Quoi]

The way the police are getting round doing nothing is that the occupiers 'bought it in good faith' which may be true. Doesnt mean the they shouldnt return what is stolen goods. It is still stolen.
I am not aware of any special case for caravans or for travellers excemption from this law.
If it was a car it would be handed back - even if you were driving it you would be walking home.

[FredPuli43]

But if, as alleged, the buyer bought a valuable caravan for £300 in a pub, that is more than enough to prosecute (as above R v Fuschillo; and in that case there was no loser identified, only the circumstances of a man being in possession of on ration sugar in a very large quantity). He claims he bought it in good faith, but they all say that. What would you think if some stranger offered you goods of good value, very cheap, in a pub? You'd think they weren't obtained lawfully, wouldn't you ?

[Orderlimit]

Hopefully the police will give a more detailed response to this decision in due course.

[sandyRoe]

At least nobody could claim that it fell off the back of a lorry.

[Orderlimit]

or bought it from some unknown geezer down the pub :)