Can l be arrested for this?

antrobus

Stella66 wrote: »

My cousin owns the flat,... He was ok for him to stay without paying, but l thought that is rather unfair...

Which might lead to the argument that you had no legal standing to charge rent in the first place.

daisymay2008

antrobus wrote: »

Although of course you still have to convince the magistrates (or jury) that you did indeed believe that such a right existed. (Your worship, I honestly believed that I had a right in law to deprive Tesco of twelve cans of Special Brew and am therefore innocent of the charge...I'm not so sure that would work.)

Does the common law right of distress still exist for landlords? Apparently not for residential tenants.

See for example

"a landlord is *not* entitled to go in and take the tenants possessions"

http://www.landlordlawblog.co.uk/2010/02/19/urban-myth-landlords-can-take-tenants-property-if-they-are-in-rent-arrears/

or "distress is not available against residential tenants without the court’s leave"

http://www.rawlisonbutler.com/news/distress-and-insolvency--what-you-need-to-know

Ergo it's difficult to see how la landlord could claim that they honestly believed that they had a right in law to seize a tenant's possessions, when the law states that they specifically don't have that right.

Yes but I'm dealing with this specific question from OP, I cannot comment on landlords rights and civil law because I have no knowledge on those subjects, i am simply dealing with the theft question, and the law states that it is not Theft if you believe you have a legal right to the property

brit1234

daisymay2008 wrote: »

I haven't actually said OP will/will not be arrested, that will be a matter for the Police officer who investigates the matter, All I have said is the offence of Theft IS NOT made out in these circumstances and the OP would never in a month of sundays be charged with theft and it would not make the court process, it is clearly a civil matter, i have provided proven case law to prove that the offence of Theft is not made out as any Jury in the land would acquit the OP

The offence of theft is clearly carried out, he would be arrested, most likely charged or cautioned. If he did go to court it would most likely be a magistrates court not crown where they have no Jury.

Your case law does not apply and would be ripped apart. Trust me on this, lets say I have a little expertise in this field going back a few years.

daisymay2008

brit1234 wrote: »

daisymay2008 He sells the stuff and I challenge any police officer in the country not to arrest him.

Your giving bad advice.:mad:

To the original poster, I am sure their are legal ways to recover the costs. I would spend more time looking them up rather than activities which will likely generate a PNCID.

I have not actually given advice, I have provided information on the Theft Act and case law as such, please show me where I have said 'go in and take the stuff and sell it'??

All I said was it wouldn't be THEFT, and it isn't, if you think it is then please provide the part of the Theft Act thats says it would be?

clutton_2

""or "distress is not available against residential tenants without the court’s leave"

we are now talking about an EX tenant - very different rules apply - a LL has a duty to store furniture left behind for a month, they have to contact the ex tenant to see if they are going to collect them and if no response then the LL can dispose of them as they see fit......

daisymay2008

brit1234 wrote: »

The offence of theft is clearly carried out, he would be arrested, most likely charged or cautioned. If he did go to court it would most likely be a magistrates court not crown where they have no Jury.

Your case law does not apply and would be ripped apart. Trust me on this, lets say I have a little expertise in this field going back a few years.

Yes I also have alot of experience on this, so obviously with your vast experience you know that Theft is a triable either way offence and the defendant could elect for the matter to go to the Crown Court where it would be heard by a Jury

Kohoutek

clutton wrote: »

we are now talking about an EX tenant - very different rules apply - a LL has a duty to store furniture left behind for a month, they have to contact the ex tenant to see if they are going to collect them and if no response then the LL can dispose of them as they see fit......

Why do you think he's an ex-tenant? Leaving your property temporarily doesn't stop you being a tenant, even if you're in rent arrears.

If he's a student enrolled on a course that's every indication he intends to continue occupying the property after he returns.

brit1234

daisymay2008 wrote: »

I have not actually given advice, I have provided information on the Theft Act and case law as such, please show me where I have said 'go in and take the stuff and sell it'??

All I said was it wouldn't be THEFT, and it isn't, if you think it is then please provide the part of the Theft Act thats says it would be?

I return to my original post.

BRIT 1234 Yes it is clearly theft. The title of this thread is "Can l be arrested for this?" Where the original poster has taken the time to create a post where he believes his actions may be criminal if carried out. He is seeking confirmation of this and has been told they are criminal.

To sell the items after having thoughts it is dishonest is no protection. To ask people if it is criminal and get told by members here it is criminal and then carry it out is theft.

In the eyes of the law at this point if he takes possession of the items to sell the original poster would be guilty of theft. Proving his thought process in a court of law however would be harder.

The dishonesty is already there if he chooses to sell.

pmlindyloo

Wow, what an interesting thread (you can tell it is pouring with rain here and am spending a happy hour on this site!)

Have looked up all the relevant legal stuff and it all looks very complicated to me!

So, as interesting as it is, perhaps we need to get back to the OP and try to help.

Someone suggested going to CAB which I would second. They could give you different options to explore.

Can you contact your ex? Through Facebook for example? Ask him what he wants to do about the money he owes you. Does he want the furniture back? Will he give you permission to sell it?

Whilst I respect everyone's 'take' on whether it would be theft or not, is it worth taking any sort of risk?

Best to try the easier options first?

daisymay2008

brit1234 wrote: »

I return to my original post.



The dishonesty is already there if he chooses to sell.

So it's dishonest because some posters on here have said so??

Could you please quote the part of the Theft act that you are talking about where it says this act would be dishonest?

To be honest I'm getting a bit board now, I have provided the law that states the OP would have a CLEAR defence to this being Theft as they are owed money.....

you have sounded off about how it is a crime of Theft but cannot back it up with any proof from any part of the Theft act....

Lets leave it to the OP decide what they want to do