Vehicle Incorrectly Seized

Manxman_in_exile

TooManyPoints wrote: »

So did he simply assume that, because your car was not shown as insured on his database it wasn't insured? Are you certain he did not ask you to produce evidence of insurance? Did he decline to ask you for one on the basis that "they can be forged?"

AIUI the OP has already answered (I presume truthfully) your questions several times many pages ago.


If I were the OP I'd simply do what I suggested also many pages ago.


1. Get written confirmation from his insurer that he was actually insured at the material time.


2. Pass a copy of this written confirmation to the police (or whoever is responsible for prosecuting the case).


3. If the prosecution isn't dropped, plead not guilty at court, as the consensus seems to be that he ought to be acquitted of the insurance charges.


4. If the case is dropped or he's acquitted, write a complaint to the Chief Constable and Police and Crime Commissioner claiming a refund of his itemised costs/expenses incurred as a result of the police's actions. (Ignoring distress etc as the OP doesn't seem susceptible to stress to me).


5. If no satisfactory reply from the CC, consider whether its worth suing them.


(Sorry if I've missed anything since my last post rendering the above redundant - who'd have thought it would go on so long).


The OP's race (I hope), ludicrous number plate, ludicrous choice of trainers and being pursued by four police cars seem irrelevant to me. (Although the reasons for the police pursuit could, I suppose, have some bearing on why they weren't interested in letting him show documentation and the decision to seize the car. The reasons could also influence whether the OP gets a satisfactory response to his complaint. Only the OP will know, and he may not be certain).


EDIT: I know George suggested writing a complaint now, but personally I'd wait for the prosecution to be dropped or an acquittal. All assuming of course that the OP's version of events is accurate.

George333

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

AIUI the OP has already answered (I presume truthfully) your questions several times many pages ago.


If I were the OP I'd simply do what I suggested also many pages ago.


1. Get written confirmation from his insurer that he was actually insured at the material time.


2. Pass a copy of this written confirmation to the police (or whoever is responsible for prosecuting the case).


3. If the prosecution isn't dropped, plead not guilty at court, as the consensus seems to be that he ought to be acquitted of the insurance charges.


4. If the case is dropped or he's acquitted, write a complaint to the Chief Constable and Police and Crime Commissioner claiming a refund of his itemised costs/expenses incurred as a result of the police's actions. (Ignoring distress etc as the OP doesn't seem susceptible to stress to me).


5. If no satisfactory reply from the CC, consider whether its worth suing them.


(Sorry if I've missed anything since my last post rendering the above redundant - who'd have thought it would go on so long).


The OP's race (I hope), ludicrous number plate, ludicrous choice of trainers and being pursued by four police cars seem irrelevant to me. (Although the reasons for the police pursuit could, I suppose, have some bearing on why they weren't interested in letting him show documentation and the decision to seize the car. The reasons could also influence whether the OP gets a satisfactory response to his complaint. Only the OP will know, and he may not be certain).


EDIT: I know George suggested writing a complaint now, but personally I'd wait for the prosecution to be dropped or an acquittal. All assuming of course that the OP's version of events is accurate.

Why wait?

Complaining could see the prosecution dropped quicker.

Manxman_in_exile

George333 wrote: »

Why wait?

Complaining could see the prosecution dropped quicker.

That's true but...


As you pointed out earlier, who's to say that it'll be read by anyone in a position to make a decision about dropping the prosecution? Anyway, if it was going to be dropped I would have hoped that that decision would already have been made at the earlier stage of providing the police with evidence that the OP was actually insured.


To my mind it makes sense to wait and give the police time to act on the evidence. If they don't drop it at that stage, at least the OP can be seen to have given them a reasonable chance to do so. And if the OP is acquitted in court, it strengthens the complaint.


I agree that if the OP were so anxious and stressed out that it was absolutely imperative that they avoid a prosecution, then it would make sense to complain now. But you don't seriously think the OP is stressed out by this do you? They seem up for a fight (with everyone!) to me. Of course, if they get convicted...:o

George333

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

That's true but...


As you pointed out earlier, who's to say that it'll be read by anyone in a position to make a decision about dropping the prosecution? Anyway, if it was going to be dropped I would have hoped that that decision would already have been made at the earlier stage of providing the police with evidence that the OP was actually insured.


To my mind it makes sense to wait and give the police time to act on the evidence. If they don't drop it at that stage, at least the OP can be seen to have given them a reasonable chance to do so. And if the OP is acquitted in court, it strengthens the complaint.


I agree that if the OP were so anxious and stressed out that it was absolutely imperative that they avoid a prosecution, then it would make sense to complain now. But you don't seriously think the OP is stressed out by this do you? They seem up for a fight (with everyone!) to me. Of course, if they get convicted...:o

I advised making the complaint direct to the professional standards department. They will investigate the matter and end further proceedings.

Why do you think admin staff would check the insurance status of a TOR written a month ago?

TooManyPoints

You seem to be directing your replies only to the matter of No Insurance (which should not be too difficult to deal with). But the OP seems as much concerned about claiming compensation for his expenses, trauma and distress for his vehicle being "incorrectly" (as he puts it) seized. To succeed his car must have been unlawfully seized. He has to be able to show that he was not warned that it would be seized unless he produced evidence immediately of cover being in place and not given the opportunity to produce proof of such cover. I know he has said he was not but I fear he may be challenged on that point if it comes to the crunch.

George333

TooManyPoints wrote: »

You seem to be directing your replies only to the matter of No Insurance (which should not be too difficult to deal with). But the OP seems as much concerned about claiming compensation for his expenses, trauma and distress for his vehicle being "incorrectly" (as he puts it) seized. To succeed his car must have been unlawfully seized. He has to be able to show that he was not warned that it would be seized unless he produced evidence immediately of cover being in place and not given the opportunity to produce proof of such cover. I know he has said he was not but I fear he may be challenged on that point if it comes to the crunch.

He wont get any compo for trauma and distress. He'll also need to quantify his loss because as it stands the numbers dont add up.

Manxman_in_exile

George333 wrote: »

I advised making the complaint direct to the professional standards department. They will investigate the matter and end further proceedings.

Why do you think admin staff would check the insurance status of a TOR written a month ago?

Ah. I thought you'd suggested complaining directly to the IOPC.


I'd be quite happy to send proof of my insurance in and see what happens. Then I would wait and see what they do before complaining. In the circumstances the OP has told us, I think I'd be quite happy to go to court if they don't drop it. It wouldn't stress me out or inconvenience me. It would be an interesting diversion.


Having worked in the public sector for over 25 years, I wouldn't expect anyone to check anything - perhaps especially in the police.

Manxman_in_exile

TooManyPoints wrote: »

You seem to be directing your replies only to the matter of No Insurance (which should not be too difficult to deal with). But the OP seems as much concerned about claiming compensation for his expenses, trauma and distress for his vehicle being "incorrectly" (as he puts it) seized. To succeed his car must have been unlawfully seized. He has to be able to show that he was not warned that it would be seized unless he produced evidence immediately of cover being in place and not given the opportunity to produce proof of such cover. I know he has said he was not but I fear he may be challenged on that point if it comes to the crunch.

The question of reclaiming expenses and costs etc has been done to death in previous pages. The only issue seems to be that his numbers don't add up. Everyone has explained to the OP he's got no hope of claiming for trauma or distress (which I would suggest he obviously hasn't suffered anyway).


The whole idea of complaining to the police and to the crime commissioner is to try to get some offer of recompense without going to court.


Of course the OP will be challenged about his version of events. I'm sure he's aware of that.

AdrianC

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

The only issue seems to be that his numbers don't add up. Everyone has explained to the OP he's got no hope of claiming for trauma or distress (which I would suggest he obviously hasn't suffered anyway).

TBF, I'm quite happy to accept that he has.

But not arising from the stop and seizure. Arising solely from his ill-judged attempt to commercialise the incident in the gutter press.

I don't think he ever admitted to how much he was paid for the story?

George333

Manxman_in_exile wrote: »

Ah. I thought you'd suggested complaining directly to the IOPC.


I'd be quite happy to send proof of my insurance in and see what happens. Then I would wait and see what they do before complaining. In the circumstances the OP has told us, I think I'd be quite happy to go to court if they don't drop it. It wouldn't stress me out or inconvenience me. It would be an interesting diversion.


Having worked in the public sector for over 25 years, I wouldn't expect anyone to check anything - perhaps especially in the police.

Sending proof of his insurance or waiting for the outcome has no effect on his complaint waiting will only delay things. If anything waiting may weaken the complaint.

I'm glad to see that you wouldn't find a day in court an inconvenience.