Have been accused of theft?

Have been accused of theft?

Author
Discussion

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
R1 Indy said:
Cheers guys,

I will get and find a solicitor, or are the duty solicitors usually fine?

<snip>
i think it depends where you are , in a market town there's a strong chance the duty is aa real solicitor with experience of the wide gamut of police station and mags work

in a big city you may not be able to a get an actual brief only an accredited person / FELIX type -

calibrax

4,788 posts

210 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
There's another good reason to try not to get arrested.

If you ever want go to the USA it's easiest to use the visa waiver program, and for that they ask the question "Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude".

Note that even just an arrest with no conviction will mean you are ineligible for the visa waiver, and will have to go through all the hassle of applying for a full visa.

anonymous-user

53 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
Rovinghawk said:
In the case you cite, it was mentioned by the judges that the inference of guilt was not a significant part of the evidence against him and therefore not relevant to the judgement.

I refer you to the Irish case where such inferences were considered relevant to the prosecution case.
I'm not citing anything other than the CPS page which shows how the law is applied. It provides the HRA tests that are relevant to the application of our laws. I assume the omission of the Irish one means it's not relevant. Email them if you're wanting to know if they consider that specific case.

Either way, that page makes it clear that inferences can be drawn in the right circumstances.

ED209

5,740 posts

243 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
no witnesses, no cctv and no admission. This case would not even reach the CPS as it wouldn't meet the evidential threshold test.

If a cop did take it to the CPS they would get a blocking as it clearly does not meet the test, the police would decide that no further action would be taken in relation to the allegation.

(Of course my answer assumes its an allegation made where there is zero evidence other than the fact you were in the house at some point, i have personally authorised NFA in numerous identical cases)

In relation to an adverse inference being drawn from the silence, even with the silence there still has to be some actual evidence to prove the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is no evidence there is no risk in staying silent. Likewise if you are innocent there is no risk in talking either.

Edited by ED209 on Tuesday 30th September 20:08

Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
ED209 said:
no witnesses, no cctv and no admission. This case would not even reach the CPS as it wouldn't meet the evidential threshold test.

If a cop did take it to the CPS they would get a blocking as it clearly does not meet the test, the police would decide that no further action would be taken in relation to the allegation.

(Of course my answer assumes its an allegation made where there is zero evidence other than the fact you were in the house at some point, i have personally authorised NFA in numerous identical cases)
She'll maybe find the necklace elsewhere in the house and if lucky she'll let Police know its been found. No crimed a few similar to this over the years. If the OP hasnt nicked the necklace and she hasnt been burgled then its possibly just misplaced.

Edited by Bigends on Tuesday 30th September 20:20

R1 Indy

Original Poster:

4,381 posts

182 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
Many thanks guys. Have got a meeting with a solicitor later in week.
Will also get her to send the customer a letter, regarding the letter she sent me, and for her to stop communicating with me.

Hopefully if she sees I have a solicitor acting for me, she will stop the "games"!

But we will see.

Pit Pony

8,266 posts

120 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
9mm said:
The OP isn't going to be able to say much more than "I've been there but I didn't" and "she's mad" though, is he?
And "If you don't charge her with attempting to pervert justice, for lying to the police, my solicitor, this bloke here, is going to sue her on my behalf for defamation of character, because she's making it up."

caziques

2,567 posts

167 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
If the family are as nutty as the OP makes out - it would be quite possible someone in the household has flogged the necklace - pocketed the proceeds - then used the OP as a fall guy.

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
calibrax said:
There's another good reason to try not to get arrested.

If you ever want go to the USA it's easiest to use the visa waiver program, and for that they ask the question "Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude".

Note that even just an arrest with no conviction will mean you are ineligible for the visa waiver, and will have to go through all the hassle of applying for a full visa.
not entirely accurate, admittedly not helped by the US embassy in London drumming up trade in visas ....

US INS does not have access to the UK PNC ...

Vaud

50,289 posts

154 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
mph1977 said:
not entirely accurate, admittedly not helped by the US embassy in London drumming up trade in visas ....

US INS does not have access to the UK PNC ...
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/travelling-from-the-uk-to-the-usa-with-a-criminal-record.88652/page-26
Post 758 here seems reasonably well argued.

R1 Indy

Original Poster:

4,381 posts

182 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
This is the letter I had by special delivery today:

If I believed someone had stolen something off me, the last thing I would do is invite them back around! confused

dudleybloke

19,718 posts

185 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
sounds like a right nutter.

Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
R1 Indy said:
This is the letter I had by special delivery today:

If I believed someone had stolen something off me, the last thing I would do is invite them back around! confused
Dont respond and let the cop thats dealing know about the letter

Cyberprog

2,186 posts

182 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
Ok, so the request for the refund would come under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations.
Now this would probably be an off-premises contract as you took payment and concluded the sale at the customers address.
You don't (I don't think) say how long between the phone call and you attending to install the equipment.
There are some exceptions to the cancellation rights, one of which being "Services which have been fully performed (i.e. completed)." so if you charged for the installation, then that would not be covered.
Was the installation an urgent requirement? "Contracts where the consumer has contacted the trader to effect urgent household repairs"
Assuming all the packaging materials and such have been opened and disposed of, it's likely a deduction could be made for the fact that the materials are no longer in the same condition as when they were sold. Anything that was bespoke (i.e. a length of cable cut to length and then terminated) could be considered (IMHO, and IANAL) bespoke and also exempt.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa... may be of some interest.

dudleybloke

19,718 posts

185 months

Tuesday 30th September 2014
quotequote all
Does googling their name show any instances of trying similar with other trades.

mildmannered

1,231 posts

152 months

Wednesday 1st October 2014
quotequote all
Have I understood this correctly so far?

1) Client not happy with install/equipment
2) Client accuses you of theft
3) Client wants you to come back and remove supplied equipment

? Sounds like you'll also need a solicitor to start civil proceedings against this client for loss of earnings and anything else you can throw at them.

Quite clearly bonkers. Can't believe the police would be that interested in pursuing such a "case" either, A tiny bit of due diligence would reveal that this isn't just about the alleged missing necklace. Staggered quite frankly.

Eclassy

1,201 posts

121 months

Wednesday 1st October 2014
quotequote all
mildmannered said:
Quite clearly bonkers. Can't believe the police would be that interested in pursuing such a "case" either, A tiny bit of due diligence would reveal that this isn't just about the alleged missing necklace. Staggered quite frankly.
This!

The police are able to pick and choose which cases they investigate based on their prejudices and other personal factors. In the OP's case and a mate of mine, they were happy to investigate based on just the allegation of one person against another with absolutely no other evidence.

In my case where I was threatned with a metal wrench, chased and cornered on a public road, then was almost rammed off road, some of this captured on video, suspect wasnt even spoken to.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 1st October 2014
quotequote all
mildmannered said:
Can't believe the police would be that interested in pursuing such a "case" either
If it's as thin as it sounds, I expect it it's merely finishing off a process that's been started, which is basically collecting both sides of the story to make a decision (the OP's comment the officer sounded like he though it were a waste of time is an indication of this).

There'll be slight variance as to what some officers will and will not even take on. I'm more of a fan of cutting investigations, when appropriate, at the earliest opportunity if it's clear it'll never reach the threshold required for a "positive" disposal. Keep in mind we don't actually know what the woman has said to the police so it may not be that clear cut on the face of it.

mildmannered said:
A tiny bit of due diligence would reveal that this isn't just about the alleged missing necklace. Staggered quite frankly.
Where would they obtain this "due diligence" that's sufficient to negate the allegation? From the OP? Aren't they trying to do that?

Eclassy said:
The police are able to pick and choose which cases they investigate based on their prejudices and other personal factors. In the OP's case and a mate of mine, they were happy to investigate based on just the allegation of one person against another with absolutely no other evidence.

In my case where I was threatned with a metal wrench, chased and cornered on a public road, then was almost rammed off road, some of this captured on video, suspect wasnt even spoken to.
The "prejudice" being that your Groundhog Day video shows a total non-event? Unless this yet another 'world vs Eclassy and friends' occurrence.



ATG

20,485 posts

271 months

Wednesday 1st October 2014
quotequote all
The OP seems to be taking a sensible approach. Some other posters less so.

Some loon reports a theft and makes an allegation. Police investigate. What else would anyone expect? Yes, it may be an inconvenience and a bit unnerving to be dragged into this, but cooperating and trying to make the process run as smoothly as possible is just part of one's civic duty. Yes, maybe the odd bad apple might try to stitch you up, but so what? Since when did we take such a craven and cowardly approach to life that we always assume the worse of everyone and, worse still, have so little confidence that if faced with an injustice we're incapable of standing up to it?

ED209

5,740 posts

243 months

Wednesday 1st October 2014
quotequote all
Eclassy said:
mildmannered said:
Quite clearly bonkers. Can't believe the police would be that interested in pursuing such a "case" either, A tiny bit of due diligence would reveal that this isn't just about the alleged missing necklace. Staggered quite frankly.
This!

The police are able to pick and choose which cases they investigate based on their prejudices and other personal factors. In the OP's case and a mate of mine, they were happy to investigate based on just the allegation of one person against another with absolutely no other evidence.

In my case where I was threatned with a metal wrench, chased and cornered on a public road, then was almost rammed off road, some of this captured on video, suspect wasnt even spoken to.
The police have a duty to investigate this matter, they are not picking and choosing, The national crime recording rules say that the crime must be recorded unless there is credible evidence that it didn't happen. From what i have reason this topic there isn't, yes theres no evidence against the OP but as far as the rules go if the woman says the neckless has been stolen then it has been stolen unless theres evidence to prove it hasn't been.

Re your incident, on the small amount of info you give it appears you were let down.