Found an abandoned vintage car, how can I claim it.
Discussion
selmahoose said:
the tribester said:
OP, you grab the car, I'll claim the house.
Finders keepers!
I've done this. And more than once. And I've currently got another one in the pipeline.Finders keepers!
People DO abandon properties, and in my experience are happy enough for you to take them over as long as you pick up the cost of doing it.
Breadvan72 said:
Threads like this reveal that many car enthusiasts are thieving scrotes, whose rule of life is “do whatever you think you can get away with”, which is nice.
Don't agree with you there.There is a difference between wanting to take a car that has <no> owner (ok, so the state is the owner but don't think the Queen fancies another project car) and taking a car that's actually owned by a living person.
Hol said:
No - that's fly tipping.
Unless, you are a part of the most secretive Underground (overground) Gang in South London.
No because the owner threw it away. This owner didn't and then died so it passes to their heirs or the crown. Unless, you are a part of the most secretive Underground (overground) Gang in South London.
Strangely if they do throw it away into a rubbish bin or skip then it still belongs to someone and you can steal from a rubbish bin or a skip; you also steal if you put your rubbish in a bin or skip that isn't yours...
All of which except in very few cases don't matter at all, yet exams have fixated on them since Peel got his first rattle.
xjay1337 said:
Don't agree with you there.
There is a difference between wanting to take a car that has <no> owner (ok, so the state is the owner but don't think the Queen fancies another project car) and taking a car that's actually owned by a living person.
Stealing from the public is ok then? This at least gives you moral equivalence with a benefits fraudster, so yaaaay!There is a difference between wanting to take a car that has <no> owner (ok, so the state is the owner but don't think the Queen fancies another project car) and taking a car that's actually owned by a living person.
Going with it being theft from a person's estate, you can take this further. So what about your house? It could be that the materials used to build it do not belong to you. Yes, you paid the previous owner, who paid the first owner. And the first owner of the house paid the builder, who paid the builder's merchant who supplied the materials. And the merchant paid the wholesaler, who presumably paid the refiner. And the refiner paid the miner or grower of the materials. But who did they pay? Who is to say that the land from which the materials were sourced did not belong to someone or some entity? Perhaps the rocks were owned by some caveman, or by Mr. Brontosaurus. And before that the earth was owned by some long defunct federation of planets.
My point while ridiculous is hopefully clear. Somewhere along the line someone, pauper or king, found something and declared ownership for themselves. There has to come a time when appropriating property is no longer theft, but just finding something.
My point while ridiculous is hopefully clear. Somewhere along the line someone, pauper or king, found something and declared ownership for themselves. There has to come a time when appropriating property is no longer theft, but just finding something.
You argument is that because once there was only lawless anarchy and force, that makes it ok to abandon the structure of rules we have put in place to replace lawless anarchy and force and just go back to take what you can. You are the secret love child of Jacob Rees Mogg and Ayn Rand AICMFP.
Graveworm said:
Hol said:
No - that's fly tipping.
Unless, you are a part of the most secretive Underground (overground) Gang in South London.
No because the owner threw it away. This owner didn't and then died so it passes to their heirs or the crown. Unless, you are a part of the most secretive Underground (overground) Gang in South London.
Strangely if they do throw it away into a rubbish bin or skip then it still belongs to someone and you can steal from a rubbish bin or a skip; you also steal if you put your rubbish in a bin or skip that isn't yours...
All of which except in very few cases don't matter at all, yet exams have fixated on them since Peel got his first rattle.
Are you saying it isn't?
Breadvan72 said:
xjay1337 said:
Don't agree with you there.
There is a difference between wanting to take a car that has <no> owner (ok, so the state is the owner but don't think the Queen fancies another project car) and taking a car that's actually owned by a living person.
Stealing from the public is ok then? This at least gives you moral equivalence with a benefits fraudster, so yaaaay!There is a difference between wanting to take a car that has <no> owner (ok, so the state is the owner but don't think the Queen fancies another project car) and taking a car that's actually owned by a living person.
Dipping you hand in that pot may look like a victimless crime, but it just means that the books need to be balanced with higher taxes.
If someone takes that away
Breadvan72 said:
xjay1337 said:
Don't agree with you there.
There is a difference between wanting to take a car that has <no> owner (ok, so the state is the owner but don't think the Queen fancies another project car) and taking a car that's actually owned by a living person.
Stealing from the public is ok then? This at least gives you moral equivalence with a benefits fraudster, so yaaaay!There is a difference between wanting to take a car that has <no> owner (ok, so the state is the owner but don't think the Queen fancies another project car) and taking a car that's actually owned by a living person.
If the car has <no> owner because the owner dies then the state is the owner, the state isn't the public, doubt they care.
I am not suggesting that stealing from the public is OK - however if I died, my car was not in my will then I wouldn't care what happened to it!!!!
Breadvan72 said:
Stealing from the public is ok then? This at least gives you moral equivalence with a benefits fraudster, so yaaaay!
Whilst I get where you are coming from, it's not really equivelent to benefit fraud is it?Benefit fraud is actually taking money out of the public purse which could otherwise be used elsewhere.
In this instance, the car has sat for around 15 years without being touched. Is there ANY realistic possibilty that the 'state' or 'public' will suddenly decide to acquire this car and do anything with it that would generate money for the public purse?
What would be nice is if there was a very simple (and low cost) way for somebody to apply for ownership in situations like this.
As I'm not a thief, the almost certain outcome would be that I'd watch it rot away to nothing and become worthless and wasted anyway. Which seems like a shame.
xjay1337 said:
Breadvan72 said:
xjay1337 said:
Don't agree with you there.
There is a difference between wanting to take a car that has <no> owner (ok, so the state is the owner but don't think the Queen fancies another project car) and taking a car that's actually owned by a living person.
Stealing from the public is ok then? This at least gives you moral equivalence with a benefits fraudster, so yaaaay!There is a difference between wanting to take a car that has <no> owner (ok, so the state is the owner but don't think the Queen fancies another project car) and taking a car that's actually owned by a living person.
If the car has <no> owner because the owner dies then the state is the owner, the state isn't the public, doubt they care.
I am not suggesting that stealing from the public is OK - however if I died, my car was not in my will then I wouldn't care what happened to it!!!!
Just because it is a faceless "victim" doesn't mean it's right, for someone to benefit someone has to lose.
Stealing by finding is an offence. If you find something and keep it without making reasonable attempts to find the owner or for the owner to declare the item lost and you decline to report it then it is theft. You have effectively deprived the owner of the item.
So you report the find and it gets logged. If, after a given time, it is not reunited with the owner you can then claim it. Based on logging police reports when they came in to our ops room.
You want that vintage car? Make efforts to trace the owner or the estate administrator. You can then negotiate. Laying claim by vacant property means and laws would be possible but lengthy.
Whichever route you take would leave a trail that could be pursued by the estate admin/GOV/HMRC/ Other interested parties.
So you report the find and it gets logged. If, after a given time, it is not reunited with the owner you can then claim it. Based on logging police reports when they came in to our ops room.
You want that vintage car? Make efforts to trace the owner or the estate administrator. You can then negotiate. Laying claim by vacant property means and laws would be possible but lengthy.
Whichever route you take would leave a trail that could be pursued by the estate admin/GOV/HMRC/ Other interested parties.
Lord.Vader said:
Who funds the state?
Just because it is a faceless "victim" doesn't mean it's right, for someone to benefit someone has to lose.
If working on the principle that the owner died with no one to inherent the car, and so it now belongs to the state, does it have any value to the state? Is there anyone who would care what happens to the car? What IS going to happen to it if no one does anything at all?Just because it is a faceless "victim" doesn't mean it's right, for someone to benefit someone has to lose.
I see both sides of the situation here. No, you can't really just go around claiming stuff as your own because you fancy it, but at the same time, it seems better to try and save something if no one is left to care about it and its going to just rot.
There has to be some kind of mechanism for dealing with these situations, and if it can be established that the owner is dead and no one else wants it, I don't see why the OP shouldn't be allowed to take ownership.
Part of this is that I suspect if left to "the state" or the local council or whatever, they'd just have it scrapped, which is a waste.
sospan said:
Laying claim by vacant property means and laws would be possible but lengthy.
It's actually not that lengthy, difficult or costly. The 'risk' in doing it is that you uncover someone who does have a prior right to it and exercises it.
tbh in THIS case I'd say that unless the wreck is hi-value nobody entitled is going to be interested in the cost and hassle of dealing with it, so if such a person does exist they'd probably just tell the op to get on with it.
Ditto the house. Potential inheritors really aren't interested in taking over derelict property with a good possibility of a load of NoPLs around it, especially if they're busy living normal lives somewhere. Some are going to want a small bung but not all, particularly if it involves a cheap property in a poor state and they're in Australia etc etc.
Local councils can appropriate a property that is vacant and has been for some time. I THINK recompense to the owner would be made if traceable. This was introduced to help reduce vacant properties and help housing needs. Correct me if I am wrong!
So any items on the site could be moved on by the council. Depending on how clever they are it could raise money. Probably through auction or scrapping or a clearance company.
Whether they would recognise items of potential real value is another matter!
So any items on the site could be moved on by the council. Depending on how clever they are it could raise money. Probably through auction or scrapping or a clearance company.
Whether they would recognise items of potential real value is another matter!
anonymous said:
[redacted]
There's the argument that it's wrong to claim something which isn't yours, an the argument that it's better than leaving it to rot.I don't think it has to be an either/or. It should be possible to claim it "properly", which leads to:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
We were typing at the same time, that reply did not exist when I started mine.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff