ChatterBank1 min ago
Man Arrested After Looters Target Flooded Homes
http:// news.sk y.com/s tory/16 14407/m an-arre sted-af ter-loo ters-ta rget-fl ooded-h omes
What are these people? Words fail me.
What are these people? Words fail me.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.A good point, Khandro.
It's extremely difficult to get a successful prosecution for theft if someone takes something from a skip as the person taking it might reasonably assume that whoever put the item into the skip has no further interest in it and wouldn't mind if someone took it.
"A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as dishonest . . . if he appropriates the property in the belief that he would have the other’s consent if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstances of it"
[Section 2, Theft Act 1968]
Note that it is completely irrelevant as to whether the owner of the property would, or would not, have consented to its removal from the skip. As long as the person taking it had a genuine belief that the owner wouldn't mind, he can't be found guilty of theft.
It's extremely difficult to get a successful prosecution for theft if someone takes something from a skip as the person taking it might reasonably assume that whoever put the item into the skip has no further interest in it and wouldn't mind if someone took it.
"A person’s appropriation of property belonging to another is not to be regarded as dishonest . . . if he appropriates the property in the belief that he would have the other’s consent if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstances of it"
[Section 2, Theft Act 1968]
Note that it is completely irrelevant as to whether the owner of the property would, or would not, have consented to its removal from the skip. As long as the person taking it had a genuine belief that the owner wouldn't mind, he can't be found guilty of theft.
Once you put something into a skip, it doesn’t actually belong to the ex owner but to the owner of the skip.....who may well be delighted that someone else is going to dispose of it....also khandro, those items may well look serviceable but once they have had a good dunking, the insurers may well be very unhappy for the person to continue using them, risking fire after flood.
We had a skip in surrey once that was magic. We would put stuff in the skip and find that overnight it had magically turned into other stuff....the following night that other stuff would have magically been changed again into other stuff...it was fascinating.
We had a skip in surrey once that was magic. We would put stuff in the skip and find that overnight it had magically turned into other stuff....the following night that other stuff would have magically been changed again into other stuff...it was fascinating.
Someone on the radio was saying that the skips were provided by the insurance companies so that the people could get ruined stuff out of their house to a place where the insurance company could check it (did it really exist/is it ruined/what quality is the carpet etc). Anything removed from the skip will not attract insurance compensation so, in effect, the stuff is being stolen and the householders are losing out.
This isn't about people taking stuff discarded in skips - and Chris, I'm not surprised. Just sickened.
A pat on the back for these chaps.
http:// www.ind ependen t.co.uk /news/u k/home- news/uk -floodi ng-bike rs-prot ect-yor kshire- homes-f rom-loo ting-a6 791071. html
A pat on the back for these chaps.
http://
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.