Police screw up. legal help please?

ben500

littlepockets wrote: »

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/insurance/car-insurance/article.html?in_article_id=420126&in_page_id=35

Well......its being discussed by the RAC/AA/IAM and the Shadow Home Secretary as far back as May 2007

I'm sure it's being discussed by many, that still doesn't make it a "stealth tax" I'm sure your plssed about it, but that doesn't make it a "stealth tax" I'm sure you'll continue to rant about it and call it a "stealth tax" but that still won't make it a "Stealth tax" how about we just call it an expense your not happy about paying?

daveturney

ok update, have spoke to the police again and asked wether or not the phonecall the police made to me is available via the freedom of information act, as the officor on the call clearly stated that the vehicle was recovered for forensic reasons. Backing up my claim that there was no intention for them to offer me a choice in the matter, and I also referred to the Wiltshire police website stating their rules regarding this, and also the fact that the section on this forces website regarding me to ask a question, has failed to reply to me.

starlight_xx

Youll probably find the call isnt on tape. I know in our force the only place the calls are recorded is in the control rooms. None of the phones in any office are taped so its probably unlikely that'll be available.

dunstonh

ok update, have spoke to the police again and asked wether or not the phonecall the police made to me is available via the freedom of information act,

It all makes sense now. You are one of them. The type that go through the small print looking for holes for the sole purpose of financial gain. Creating more small print and expense for everyone else. Thank God I am not in public sector and have to put up with that.

You have probably cost the taxpayer more than the bloody charge in the first place.

CopperPlate_2

dunstonh wrote: »

It all makes sense now. You are one of them. The type that go through the small print looking for holes for the sole purpose of financial gain. Creating more small print and expense for everyone else. Thank God I am not in public sector and have to put up with that.

You have probably cost the taxpayer more than the bloody charge in the first place.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

impecunious

Meooww!! Saucer of milk, anyone?! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I personally think Daveturney's point has been lost somewhere. And I believe it is why should a victim of crime have to pay to to help the police with their enquiries? Why shouldn't the criminal (supposing he/she is caught, prosecuted and convicted) pay??? If offender is caught, I dare say that you could go to SCC and sue ....

littlepockets

daveturney
Have you had a response to your letter to the Chief Constable

it sounds like you haven't but you need to chase this response

The process is that you complain to the CC and he/she refers it to the vehicle recovery unit to investigate

The Vehicle recovery unit is staffed by civilian police workers and the manager of that section will investigate

Time vehicle was reported stolen
Time it was recovered
Recommendation from the officer at the scene (ie tow it or contact owner)
Time the Recovery firm was told to collect car etc..

If there was a procedural error then it will be highlighted
If your account differs to theirs then try contacting the Officer you spoke to and he may well help

Let us all know how you get on

That way other Moneysavers can learn if faced with a similar situation and recover this stealth tax

Good luck !!

cakehead

I have not read all the posts on this subject but; shouldn't the person/persons who stole the car in the first place pay storage costs. The car was stored at the owners home before it was taken without permission. Maybe if the police made the culprits pay up they might think about not taking the car in the first instance. My insurance premiums go up because of these light fingers so and so's.

ajaxgeezer

cakehead wrote: »

Maybe if the police made the culprits pay up they might think about not taking the car in the first instance.

......the police don't have the power to make thieves pay, they can only get them into court.

Ironically, part of catching the thieves is collecting evidence through checks like fingerprinting... that same fingerprinting which the OP is hoping will move the cost of keeping his car safe from him/his insurance to the public purses.

s1h

even if the insurance did pay this, there wouldnt be any point in claiming.

Your excess is probably at least £100 i would imagine.