Police forced door ... who pays ... Scotland ?

Scots

Bryando wrote: »

The fact it was a 'arrest warrant' the Police are NOT liable for the Damage. So if the person is found not guilty, the Police are still not liable.

The Police must have the warrant on them if they force entry. The are not even responsable for damage if the person was not in or has never been there.

Ok but is it the owner or the person living there that is responsible ?

Bryando

Scots wrote: »

Yes I can try and get the DSS tenant to pay, but the chances of getting it are slim, plus why is it my job to that, why don't the Police chase him for the money or the courts for that matter.

The house door wasn't open until the Police opened it. They caused it to be open. If they had phoned me or the agent I would come down and let them in.

The Law allows it.

Bryando

Scots wrote: »

Ok but is it the owner or the person living there that is responsible ?

''Where there is no occupier, the tenant will be required to pay and where there is no tenant, the owner of the premisies will have this obligation.''

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/45/section/61

BoGoF

Scots wrote: »

Yes I can try and get the DSS tenant to pay, but the chances of getting it are slim, plus why is it my job to that, why don't the Police chase him for the money or the courts for that matter.

The house door wasn't open until the Police opened it. They caused it to be open. If they had phoned me or the agent I would come down and let them in.

So were they supposed to guess your/the agent's name and address?

starlight_xx

BoGoF wrote: »

So were they supposed to guess your/the agent's name and address?

I was wondering that too!

How would they even know the flat was rented and not owner occupied.

antrobus

Bryando wrote: »

Scottish Law requiress the Police to secure ANY building. So if the discover a house door open and knowbody about, they can secure it and recover cost.

If you rent the house, then raising Civil action via the Sheriff court for the door would be in order. NOT against the Police, but against the occupier of the house.

The legislation is: Section 61 Civic Goverment (Scotland) Act. 1982

Well s61 states, as regards the 'Protection of insecure premises'.

(1)Where—

(a)any premises have been left open, unlocked or otherwise insecure; and

(b)in the opinion of a constable, the insecurity of the premises is likely to conduce to the commission of an offence,the constable may take such reasonable steps as he may consider necessary to make the premises secure.

(2)Any reasonable expense incurred by a constable in making any premises secure under subsection (1) above may be recovered by the police authority from the occupier (or, where there is no occupier, from the tenant or, where there is no occupier or tenant, from the owner) of the premises.

This answers part of the question, but it doesn't address the issue of what happens when the police were responsible for making the premises insecure in the first place.

Bryando

The law allows them to force entry and also allows them to secure the house.

Bryando

As I said in a previous post. The Police are not liable for the damage caused in the execution of the apprehension warrant. Then by the door being insecure they are obliged to secure the premise.

So it does not really matter how the premise is insecure, the Police have to secure if they think it will lead to an offence.

orangeslimes

starlight_xx wrote: »

I was wondering that too!

How would they even know the flat was rented and not owner occupied.

legally details of owner of rented properties should be available here:
https://www.landlordregistrationscotland.gov.uk

rogerblack

antrobus wrote: »

r (or, where there is no occupier, from the tenant or, where there is no occupier or tenant, from the owner) of the premises.

This bit would seem to indicate clearly that it's the tenants problem - they do not stop being a tenant because they are away from the property.