Does this count as theft?
Discussion
A person is guilty of theft if they dishonestly appropriate property with the intention of permanently depriving the over of that item.
In the example above no, technically this would not be theft however it’s likely you would find yourself being interviewed by police and would struggle to prove your intention was to return the property.
My advice is whatever you are thinking of doing… don’t.
In the example above no, technically this would not be theft however it’s likely you would find yourself being interviewed by police and would struggle to prove your intention was to return the property.
My advice is whatever you are thinking of doing… don’t.
montecristo said:
If I go to Halfords and take something, fully intending to bring it back the day after, and I do bring it back the day after, unused, have I committed the crime of theft?
I ask because theft requires "intention to permanently deprive the other of [the thing]".
I ask because theft requires "intention to permanently deprive the other of [the thing]".
Theft Act 1968 said:
A person appropriating property belonging to another without meaning the other permanently to lose the thing itself is nevertheless to be regarded as having the intention of permanently depriving the other of it if his intention is to treat the thing as his own to dispose of regardless of the other’s rights; and a borrowing or lending of it may amount to so treating it if, but only if, the borrowing or lending is for a period and in circumstances making it equivalent to an outright taking or disposal.
So yes, you have committed a crime.I struggle to think of a situation whereby you'd take something with the intent to return it, unused, the next day.
I put it to you that you took it, hoping it would be suitable for whatever you needed and, when it proved not to be, you returned it. Had it worked, you'd have kept it.
Not theft, no (from looking at the language of the Act itself).
It *may* be a form of fraud under the Fraud Act. You'd be prosecuted for theft if caught, but it'd be hard to stick. It's a similar but more dishonest version of buying something to deliberatley return it after use.
Scummy stuff.
It *may* be a form of fraud under the Fraud Act. You'd be prosecuted for theft if caught, but it'd be hard to stick. It's a similar but more dishonest version of buying something to deliberatley return it after use.
Scummy stuff.
Doofus said:
Theft Act 1968 said:
A person appropriating property belonging to another without meaning the other permanently to lose the thing itself is nevertheless to be regarded as having the intention of permanently depriving the other of it if his intention is to treat the thing as his own to dispose of regardless of the other’s rights; and a borrowing or lending of it may amount to so treating it if, but only if, the borrowing or lending is for a period and in circumstances making it equivalent to an outright taking or disposal.
My thieving career peaked at curly wurlies a long time ago, I'm just confused by the part about depriving permanently - whether that means the Act envisages sometimes it's OK to take things from shops, or whether they want to avoid people-to-people accusations of theft around borrowing?
Edited by montecristo on Friday 24th January 14:37
Depriving permanently means just that, so either to keep it, sell it, dispose of it in a way that wouldn't be easily found (this is where TWOC for cars comes in too) or destroy it. Returning it after an extended period, say twelve months, would fit within theft as written in the Act.
Removing goods from a shop without paying unless with the consent of staff would most likely be theft.
If you were caught on the way out, saying that you intended to return it would be unlikely to constitute a defense.
Why not just buy it, and return it for a refund if it doesn't fit or whatever?
If you were caught on the way out, saying that you intended to return it would be unlikely to constitute a defense.
Why not just buy it, and return it for a refund if it doesn't fit or whatever?
Robertb said:
If you were caught on the way out, saying that you intended to return it would be unlikely to constitute a defense.
But the Act seems to allow for exactly this. Obviously the shop people wouldn't believe it, but the CPS should?I get that the real response of "the law" to this is "Come on!" but "Come on!" is not formal legal doctrine.
montecristo said:
This second part of the Act makes it more likely that I committed theft, I'd say. Although it depends what "dispose of" means - I'm guessing it just means "use".
My thieving career peaked at curly wurlies a long time ago, I'm just confused by the part about depriving permanently - whether that means the Act envisages sometimes it's OK to take things from shops, or whether they want to avoid people-to-people accusations of theft around borrowing?
What made you go straight?My thieving career peaked at curly wurlies a long time ago, I'm just confused by the part about depriving permanently - whether that means the Act envisages sometimes it's OK to take things from shops, or whether they want to avoid people-to-people accusations of theft around borrowing?
Edited by montecristo on Friday 24th January 14:37
ChocolateFrog said:
So piracy isn't theft after all?
If by piracy you mean taping the hit parade from the radio on Sunday afternoon, then no, it is not theft and never was. It is a copyright violation that is potentially actionable by the rights holder(s), which I think legal people call a tort, rather than a crime. If done on a commercial scale (e.g. mass duplication of 'pirate' DVDs) then it is potentially criminal but still not the crime of 'theft'.If however by piracy you are referring to Captain Blackbeard, then the offence of theft may be committed, amongst various others.
montecristo said:
But the Act seems to allow for exactly this. Obviously the shop people wouldn't believe it, but the CPS should?
I get that the real response of "the law" to this is "Come on!" but "Come on!" is not formal legal doctrine.
Why should the CPS? If they did nobody would ever be prosecuted for theft ever again. I get that the real response of "the law" to this is "Come on!" but "Come on!" is not formal legal doctrine.
montecristo said:
I get that the real response of "the law" to this is "Come on!" but "Come on!" is not formal legal doctrine.
In fact, criminal law is surprisingly highly influenced by this doctrine. The example you give isn’t really very helpful if you’re trying to explore a point. What is your real question: when does temporary deprivation become permanent?
As others have said, if you took something from the shelves and were apprehended at the shop doors, you’d have an almighty struggle persuading anyone that you did indeed intend to bring the item back, entirely unused, the following day.
Theft act also states
A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another may be dishonest notwithstanding that he is willing to pay for the property. If captured taking the item, the OP will need to prove that he intended to return the item - the same excuse every shoplifter could use.
'I was going to bring it back - honest!'
A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another may be dishonest notwithstanding that he is willing to pay for the property. If captured taking the item, the OP will need to prove that he intended to return the item - the same excuse every shoplifter could use.
'I was going to bring it back - honest!'
montecristo said:
If I go to Halfords and take something, fully intending to bring it back the day after, and I do bring it back the day after, unused, have I committed the crime of theft?
I ask because theft requires "intention to permanently deprive the other of [the thing]".
Bit cryptic but why would you need to? They have a very favourable returns policy, if you buy a part or tool or whatever and it turns out to not fit or isn't needed etc.I ask because theft requires "intention to permanently deprive the other of [the thing]".
paul_c123 said:
Bit cryptic but why would you need to? They have a very favourable returns policy, if you buy a part or tool or whatever and it turns out to not fit or isn't needed etc.
That made me smile - very pragmatic - but I was being hypothetical, and using Halfords because car forum.On a similar point, something I was wondering about the other evening. My local big Tesco has a large plaza area out the front as well as a large car park. I often cut through on my way home as it is a bit of a shortcut.
They stack various items outside such as compost and gravel etc. If I were to fill a trolley with compost and take it for a walk through the car park/plaza area, how far do I have to walk before it is theft? (of course I have no intention of doing this). The trolleys lock if you try to take them out of the car park/plaza and presumably this is all Tesco property. Therefore if I take a trolley full of compost to the exit of the car park and leave it there (apart from being really f
king annoying for the trolley boy) can I get in any legal trouble?
Presumably the answer is no, but try explaining to the policeman (monster energy drinking security guard) that you weren't going to take the items off of Tesco grounds.
They stack various items outside such as compost and gravel etc. If I were to fill a trolley with compost and take it for a walk through the car park/plaza area, how far do I have to walk before it is theft? (of course I have no intention of doing this). The trolleys lock if you try to take them out of the car park/plaza and presumably this is all Tesco property. Therefore if I take a trolley full of compost to the exit of the car park and leave it there (apart from being really f
king annoying for the trolley boy) can I get in any legal trouble? Presumably the answer is no, but try explaining to the policeman (monster energy drinking security guard) that you weren't going to take the items off of Tesco grounds.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff