The Police and lost, lost property!

[carinaman]

I've heard good things about police property auctions. I heard of one person that got their stolen bicycle back before the auction. A police officer that gave me no cause to doubt him did once mention that lost property can be a nightmare area. Someone in my family has had something returned after it was handed in at a police station.

[pork911]

XCP said:

Police property auctions are very public. I have mentioned them before on this forum as a way of obtaining a bicycle.

I can only speak for how monies were distributed in my force but dozens of different charities benefited every year. Each district/dept was invited to nominate worthy causes in their area. A very senior officer makes the final decision. One year I nominated our local branch of Mencap, for example. The idea that it gets diverted to some kind of slush fund for police officers is frankly, ridiculous.
None of this is secret, in fact, our force used to publicise the good work they were doing very widely. Accounts were published annually. All in accordance with the Police Property Act.

I also used to approach the Detained property staff and obtained a very nice stereo for a youth club on my patch that would otherwise have been destroyed. Not to mention dozens of free Santa hats that had been seized in an operation.
You seem to be suggesting some kind of corruption that in my fairly extensive experience does not exist.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/448726/Undercover-cops-sacked-for-running-a-car-buying-scam-while-working-for-the-force

[Rovinghawk]

XCP said:

You seem to be suggesting some kind of corruption that in my fairly extensive experience does not exist.

I'm not suggesting it's corrupt- I'm suggesting that corruption would be possible with the facts given.

They shouldn't just be honest, they should be seen to be honest; this is certainly not the case here.

[julian64]

GC8 said:

Derek Smith said:

GC8 said:

Yes but this isn't about half-arsed opinion. It is about the law and the law says that the bike belongs to the OP.

And what law would that be then?

Im disappointed to see this post Derek.

Well perhaps he's a bit miffed, as I am, that you see fit to start your posts aggressively, and with ridicule.

You completely ignore the fact that the experiences posted throughout the thread indicate there is no global agreement or 'law' throughtout the force on this one.

[Rovinghawk]

carinaman said:

I've heard good things about police property auctions.

A station relatively local to me uses an eBay account- all very visible and public. This will negate any allegations of improper conduct and private auctions in the force canteen.

Others might do well to follow this example.

[3Dee]

Hang on!
Did the OP not say that it was a PCSO that was coordinating this?

[Zeeky]

The classic case is at http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/1722/J94.ht...

Parker v British Airways Board contains a good analysis of the later authorities.

General rule is that a non-trespassing finder of property has better title to it than everyone other than the true owner. The finder is obliged to take reasonable steps to re-acquaint the true owner with the property.

This applies to abandoned or lost property.

[XCP]

Rovinghawk said:

A station relatively local to me uses an eBay account- all very visible and public. This will negate any allegations of improper conduct and private auctions in the force canteen.

Others might do well to follow this example.

I don't see how. What is to stop the good stuff being syphoned off before it gets to ebay, if the auctions are taking place in the canteen as you allege?

eta. And everyone on ebay remains anonymous except the winning bidder and only the seller knows that! Hardly very transparent.

Edited by XCP on Wednesday 30th April 09:31

[Rovinghawk]

XCP said:

I don't see how. What is to stop the good stuff being syphoned off before it gets to ebay, if the auctions are taking place in the canteen as you allege?

I didn't so allege- I suggested that a public auction would reduce the risk of such allegations being made.

XCP said:

And everyone on ebay remains anonymous except the winning bidder and only the seller knows that! Hardly very transparent.

In the original post, the OP didn't even know that an auction had taken place- very poor form. This way, anyone with an interest in an item of that type has opportunity to bid.

[Cat]

Rovinghawk said:

XCP said:

I don't see how. What is to stop the good stuff being syphoned off before it gets to ebay, if the auctions are taking place in the canteen as you allege?

I didn't so allege- I suggested that a public auction would reduce the risk of such allegations being made.

Information about Police property auctions is not exactly kept out the public domain - link.

The OP's profile suggests that it was likely Suffolk Police in this case - hardly a well kept secret how they dispose of property or what they do with the funds raised - link

Cat

[Muncher]

Following the link through, unless it was auctioned before the 19th March, which I think is probably unlikely then it does not appear in the items they have auctioned from that date to now.

http://www.bumblebeeauctions.co.uk/XcAPSearch.asp?...

[Rovinghawk]

Cat said:

The OP's profile suggests that it was likely Suffolk Police in this case - hardly a well kept secret how they dispose of property

I can't see what they did in the case of this bicycle- that would fit quite well with any reasonable definition of secret.

[Muncher]

I have just checked the all of the auction listings for police in Suffolk on that page and it does not appear to be listed at all...

[Derek Smith]

Zeeky said:

The classic case is at http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/1722/J94.ht...

Parker v British Airways Board contains a good analysis of the later authorities.

General rule is that a non-trespassing finder of property has better title to it than everyone other than the true owner. The finder is obliged to take reasonable steps to re-acquaint the true owner with the property.

This applies to abandoned or lost property.

The '68 theft act is applicable here I think and there have been some very clear decisions that most of us can understand. However, the case you quoted is civil law and my belief is that the questions on the thread are more about criminal law: will I get arrested if I keep it.

Property abandoned along with all rights cannot be stolen as it has no owner as such. There can be civil cases but you are normally in the clear with regards theft, especially if you seek the advice, not to mention script before you answer questions. (Terms and conditions apply. Please read the small print.)

[Cat]

Rovinghawk said:

Cat said:

The OP's profile suggests that it was likely Suffolk Police in this case - hardly a well kept secret how they dispose of property

I can't see what they did in the case of this bicycle- that would fit quite well with any reasonable definition of secret.

I would suggest that claiming because you (someone with no direct involvement) are unable to see what happened in this specific case indicates that property is disposed of in secret is a strange assumption to make. Just because information about the disposal of every item of property isn't openly available to everyone doesn't mean that the information is a secret.

Cat

[GC8]

julian64 said:

GC8 said:

Derek Smith said:

GC8 said:

Yes but this isn't about half-arsed opinion. It is about the law and the law says that the bike belongs to the OP.

And what law would that be then?

Im disappointed to see this post Derek.

Well perhaps he's a bit miffed, as I am, that you see fit to start your posts aggressively, and with ridicule.

You completely ignore the fact that the experiences posted throughout the thread indicate there is no global agreement or 'law' throughtout the force on this one.

Perhaps Julian, but it was neither aggressive nor was it ridiculing. It was certainly short, but what do you expect when you pontificate about whether lost property should ever be returned to its finder.

The post is about facts and the law/procedure as it stands, not about peoples half-arsed opinions.

With regards to law, I believe that there is case law, with the person finding the item having the second greatest claim to the property behind the owner themselves.

I posted as I did because I don't expect to see obtuse posts from DS, although I am becoming accustomed to seeing them from you.

[Rovinghawk]

Cat said:

Rovinghawk said:

Cat said:

The OP's profile suggests that it was likely Suffolk Police in this case - hardly a well kept secret how they dispose of property

I can't see what they did in the case of this bicycle- that would fit quite well with any reasonable definition of secret.

I would suggest that claiming because you (someone with no direct involvement) are unable to see what happened in this specific case indicates that property is disposed of in secret is a strange assumption to make. Just because information about the disposal of every item of property isn't openly available to everyone doesn't mean that the information is a secret.

If I wanted to attend an auction to find a bike of this nature, the information is not available for me to do so. I was talking about this specific case, as were you (quoted above). Direct involvement in the issue or not, a public disposal means that the information is.....err.....public.

The 'assumption' that the disposal was done in secret is backed up by the fact that it doesn't appear to have been done in public.

[julian64]

GC8 said:

julian64 said:

GC8 said:

Derek Smith said:

GC8 said:

Yes but this isn't about half-arsed opinion. It is about the law and the law says that the bike belongs to the OP.

And what law would that be then?

Im disappointed to see this post Derek.

Well perhaps he's a bit miffed, as I am, that you see fit to start your posts aggressively, and with ridicule.

You completely ignore the fact that the experiences posted throughout the thread indicate there is no global agreement or 'law' throughtout the force on this one.

Perhaps Julian, but it was neither aggressive nor was it ridiculing. It was certainly short, but what do you expect when you pontificate about whether lost property should ever be returned to its finder.

The post is about facts and the law/procedure as it stands, not about peoples half-arsed opinions.

With regards to law, I believe that there is case law, with the person finding the item having the second greatest claim to the property behind the owner themselves.

I posted as I did because I don't expect to see obtuse posts from DS, although I am becoming accustomed to seeing them from you.

Gave you a chance to moderate your tone, and you post back with an even more unfortunate and aggressive post?

Strange thing the internet. I appologise if I've upset you on some previous thread?

[Cat]

Rovinghawk said:

If I wanted to attend an auction to find a bike of this nature, the information is not available for me to do so. I was talking about this specific case, as were you (quoted above). Direct involvement in the issue or not, a public disposal means that the information is.....err.....public.

What are you talking about? The Suffolk Police website explicitly states how they dispose of property and advises people to go to the auction website to view the items.

Rovinghawk said:

The 'assumption' that the disposal was done in secret is backed up by the fact that it doesn't appear to have been done in public.

How do you figure that? From the OP it would appear to be approximately 2 weeks since the property store said the bike was still there to the PCSO calling yesterday to say it was gone. To me this would suggest that the bike is still to make it's way on to the auction site as opposed to it having been disposed of in secret.

Hopefully the OP will follow this up and we'll find out what actually happened rather than some posters simply implying corruption and dishonesty.

Cat

[Rovinghawk]

Cat said:

How do you figure that? From the OP it would appear to be approximately 2 weeks since the property store said the bike was still there to the PCSO calling yesterday to say it was gone. To me this would suggest that the bike is still to make it's way on to the auction site as opposed to it having been disposed of in secret.

From the way he was told "it's been auctioned" I'd have to disagree.

Cat said:

Hopefully the OP will follow this up and we'll find out what actually happened rather than some posters simply implying corruption and dishonesty.

Hopefully yes, there will be a good explanation showing probity in all respects.

It's often better to travel in hope than to arrive, though.

Edited by Rovinghawk on Wednesday 30th April 16:00