Wheels stolen 29/9/10

[dieselboy]

Just telling how it is.

[BUSHWHACKER]

I'm after around £500 which is around half the price of the wheels & tyres. The tyre size is 33x12.5x15 General Grabber AT2

Pic included

Gorgeous!


Is that the tail end of a '88 Camaro I can see?

[dieselboy]

Gorgeous!


Is that the tail end of a '88 Camaro I can see?

Yes it was my friends. He bought that after losing his Mustang LX. The Mustang LX was mint Even had a Ford GT40 air intake manifold.

He now has another identical Mustang after selling the Camaro but this one is auto and a lower spec GT not an LX. He has a brand new diff, gears, half shafts subframe connectors (Bl00dy thick ones) and other bits n bobs which were delivered from USA the other week sitting at home. This one has had a reworked gearbox for quick shifting and lower ratios or something. It was featured on a centre spread of American Car magazine around December or November time. I keep telling him to get some decent wheels as his ones don't have enough negative offset and the tyres are not wide enough. When he floors it, it spins up all the way into 4th gear which isnt good! Has been well looked after though
I want one!

[Albannach]

The result is that is has not been prosecuted and he also is requesting legal ownership of the wheels / tyres as "he bought them in good faith".

Have you explored the possibility that he didn't steal them and did buy them in good faith?

Also, I thought your insurance had paid out? If they have, they own the wheels; not you.

[flounderbout]

The situation right now is that the thief that stole them went to court, booked an alibi and gave some sketchy details of "where and how he bought them".
The result is that is has not been prosecuted and he also is requesting legal ownership of the wheels / tyres as "he bought them in good faith".

Because of this the Police have to write to him to allow him time to claim them with proof of receipt.

My points I have tried to make is:
- since he has many many previous convictions for the similar auto thefts etc then why are the police even entertaining that he may be telling the truth.
- If he is telling the truth then he would provide as much info as possible about the "person he bought them from"
- If he cannot prove he legally bought them, shouldn't this alone say to everyone that he cannot claim legal ownership? I mean if he can't prove he paid money for them to a specific person and the police cannot prove he stole them then they shouldn't just say "oh okay you can come to the station and collect them if you want".

Edit, one reason we know the person I confronted when I see him driving down the road with my wheels on his Landcruiser stole them or at least knew they were stolen, was that he told me he bought them from a shop and I queried why he had the wrong centre caps fitted. He said they came with them. Of course I knew they didn't as I had to specifically request the centre caps I bought and which were on his Landcruiser. The idiot even put the open ended caps on the rear.
Any way he then went on to say he bought them off gumtree. I could see the passenger beginning to get irate and some movement in the back (blacked out windows) so I told him they are all marked and walked away with the number plate and a description. When the police went round to nick him ALL but one centre cap had been removed. The one which had not been removed had been bashed to pieces where they tried and failed.

Err, hang on. It doesn't matter whether he bought them in good faith or not. He has no claim to them. The only issue about his good faith is whether he can be prosecuted for handling stolen goods. But the ###### Pope could have bought them (or for that matter someone innocent, rather than an ex-Nazi Youth kiddy fiddler apologist) - it still wouldn't give him a claim to ownership of the goods.

They were stolen. They belong to you (or more accurately, the insurance company). He has absolutely no rights to claim them whatsoever.

Someone has got themselves all in a muddle. There is every chance it is the police, since their knowledge of the law usually extends to the law of gravity as applied to suspects "falling down stairs" and no further.

It may just be that they need to hold onto the goods as evidence pending prosecution, and they are awaiting his so-called evidence of good faith in order to decide whether to prosecute.

And my very reasonable bill for all of that invaluable advice is first dibs if you do get them back...

[Albannach]

Have you explored the possibility that he didn't steal them and did buy them in good faith?

Err, hang on. It doesn't matter whether he bought them in good faith or not. He has no claim to them.

You stole my thunder; I want it back... Please...

[flounderbout]

PS - my apologies to the extremely knowledgable policemen on here that I just slandered solely for comedy value.

Oh yes, and the Catholics...

[biosurf]

and my very reasonable bill for all of that invaluable advice is first dibs if you do get them back...

[Ace Piker]

I don't understand the law in this country, it's no wonder so many people break it! Even if he bought them in good faith I would have thought possesion of stolen property was a crime in itself. Sorry you are going through sh1te Tony, it must be awful.

[dieselboy]

Have you explored the possibility that he didn't steal them and did buy them in good faith?

Also, I thought your insurance had paid out? If they have, they own the wheels; not you.

Thank you for this. I do not care whether he stole them or not. Fact is that he had possesion of the wheels which the police then recovered. His reasoning is that he purchased them, although he cannot provide the police with who whe purchased them from, or what date or time or any kind of contact information for the person he bought them from or a receipt. These are the facts. This would say to me that he probably did steal them but this is my opinion (not taking into account the previous and long criminal record he is supposed to have).

My point I am trying to make is even if he is telling the truth, he should be required to provide evidence to this. He cannot be prosecuted due to lack of evidence, so his right to claim ownership of the wheels should be waived due to similar lack of evidence.

I hope this answers your question?

[dieselboy]

I don't understand the law in this country, it's no wonder so many people break it! Even if he bought them in good faith I would have thought possesion of stolen property was a crime in itself. Sorry you are going through sh1te Tony, it must be awful.

I have a feeling things will work out and I really appreciate your comment

[BUSHWHACKER]

It appears that what we have all learned from this thread is.......

If you live in Britain, are a bit of a Pikey and want a gorgeous set of brand new alloys and tyres, just go out and nick them.

[dieselboy]

It appears that what we have all learned from this thread is.......

If you live in Britain, are a bit of a Pikey and want a gorgeous set of brand new alloys and tyres, just go out and nick them.

That is the general idea. I think as long as no one actually sees you doing it you really do not have to worry too much about finger prints or anything like that for a minor crime such as this. You can call on a mate of a mate to say you were with him on the night it happened. And you can give vague information that the police cannot disprove so it just must be true.
Actually the police officer dealing with my case has obviously been a great help to me. It is actually the Crown Prosecution Service that decided not to take any further action.

[slobodan]

That is the general idea. I think as long as no one actually sees you doing it you really do not have to worry too much about finger prints or anything like that for a minor crime such as this. You can call on a mate of a mate to say you were with him on the night it happened. And you can give vague information that the police cannot disprove so it just must be true.
Actually the police officer dealing with my case has obviously been a great help to me. It is actually the Crown Prosecution Service that decided not to take any further action.

I think it is probably harder to contest a speed camera offence than it is a criminal offence.

[flounderbout]

I think it is probably harder to contest a speed camera offence than it is a criminal offence.

It is always hard to contest an offence where you are caught doing it on camera along with a unique identification plate!