Car was stolen - police trace it down to an innocent party - Police tell me it’s a civil matter?

waamo

You said earlier you had legal advice so you should have a considered opinion more qualified than anyone here that you haven't chosen to share.

Why not engage their service to aid some recovery?

Nebulous2

If you believe the police have treated you differently from how they're treating the person with your car submit a formal complaint. Police take complaints very seriously.

AndyMc.....

Nebulous2 wrote: »

If you believe the police have treated you differently from how they're treating the person with your car submit a formal complaint. Police take complaints very seriously.

But they may not have treated him differently.

There are too many variables one being there may be two different forces involved.

As for them treating this kind of complaint seriously. :rotfl:

AndyMc.....

rossmx31 wrote: »

The bar steward that stole my car is nowhere to be seen.

But from what I understand, said bar steward never legally had title of my car, so couldn’t legally sell it (and subsequantly, the innocent purchaser couldn’t legally purchase the title)

The police legal team have advised that I need to go to court to Claim my car back from its current keeper; the police will not recover it without a court order. But the police are telling me it’s a civil matter

Even if the bought it in the belief it was a genuine car from a garage?

Homersimpson

Many years ago a neighbour of mine swapped his car with one that turned out to be obtained by some form of deception.

The people who had his car then stripped it of all its bits and dumped it (it was replica of a high performance saloon of the era).

Some how he ended up keeping the stolen car and the police returned what was left of his original car to him.

I remember the car with the dubious history being locked in his garage for what seemed like ages whilst it was all sorted out.

Someone must of lost out on this but not my neighbour who was quids in!

Not sure of the exact circumstances but sometimes the law is an !!!.

The OP needs some proper legal advice as I suspect that this is a mine field, not least because the OP signed over the logbook to his original car to the scammer who in turn has passed this on and therefore the issue of whether the scammer obtained good title to the car is probably the most significant here.

I'm afraid the police are lazy and incompetent and don't really care about serious crimes let alone financial ones :-(

Homersimpson

I did a bit of googling and found this website; https://www.fsp-law.com/buying-stolen-property-some-cautionary-tales/

The most important section is below, I think the critical difference is that this is talking about a car originally stolen not handed over albeit that the person handing it over did not get what they were promised in return. I suspect that is where the legal issue the OP has stems from.

So what exactly is the legal position for individuals like Mr Murray in 2017? Can you acquire the legal right to goods that pass to you from someone who didn’t have the right to pass it to you? Has the law succeeded in preventing title from passing when dealing with stolen goods?

The general rule is that legal title, or ownership (though not necessarily physical) of an item, can only be passed from one who has the right to do so. This is reflected in Section 21 of the SGA, and stems from the maxim “nemo dat quod non habet” (“no one gives what (s)he doesn’t have”).

Not to be mistaken for the lovable orange Disney animated fish, the “Nemo” rule states that the purchase of goods from someone who has no ownership right to those goods, automatically denies the purchaser any ownership title to those goods.

The rule works to protect the true owner, but offers no real solace to the (usually) innocent third party purchaser (and potentially any further sub-purchaser); leaving them without redress.

NBLondon

AndyMc..... wrote: »

That would be a stolen car. Don't think taken from the street with the owner elsewhere think obtained by dishonest means.

That's the point Andy! If a dodgy character walks into a shop and pockets an item then walks out without paying - thats's theft. if they pay with a stolen credit card - that's fraud. It's a different crime. So when the OP signed over the car; he was intending title to pass and expecting recompense;the recompense wasn't what it was said to be. The perpetrator hasn't stolen the car; they have obtained it by deception. A different crime.

AndyMc.....

NBLondon wrote: »

That's the point Andy! If a dodgy character walks into a shop and pockets an item then walks out without paying - thats's theft. if they pay with a stolen credit card - that's fraud. It's a different crime. So when the OP signed over the car; he was intending title to pass and expecting recompense;the recompense wasn't what it was said to be. The perpetrator hasn't stolen the car; they have obtained it by deception. A different crime.

But the cars still stolen.

rossmx31

AndyMc..... wrote: »

Even if the bought it in the belief it was a genuine car from a garage?

Yes, because the bar steward never legally obtained title and therefore never possessed the title to sell. In turn, the garage never obtained title because the bar steward they were purchasing off didn’t have title. And so on.

Convoluted case.

Homersimpson

rossmx31 wrote: »

Yes, because the bar steward never legally obtained title and therefore never possessed the title to sell. In turn, the garage never obtained title because the bar steward they were purchasing off didn’t have title. And so on.

Convoluted case.

But as the response above with the cigarettes and stolen credit card the car was not stolen because the OP let it go expecting something in return which they got but was not what it should have been (i.e. it was stolen) so the OP's car has been fraudulently obtained but not stolen which I guess is the whole legal problem.

The police are presumably prosecuting the person who swapped the stolen car for either handling stolen good or theft if they stole it, the OP then has the issue that their original car is gone and the one they swapped it with has been taken by the police so the OP now has to take legal action against the person they swapped the car with to get their original car back (unlikely as they no longer have it) or compensation for the loss (unlikely as the person who they swapped it with is almost certainly low life criminal scum with no legitimate assets of money).

Most solicitors will do a free consultation to assess the situation and that is probably the best route but the OP needs to be careful that they don't throw more good money after bad as trying to get money from someone with no assets who may actually end up in prison for the original theft is highly likely to be a hiding to nowhere.