Police (without telling me) seized my car from my allocated parking at my home wrongly

ontheroad1970

NBLondon said:

DB1904 said:

NBLondon said:

OP says they have a letter from the police stating no connection and to collect the car with no charge.

If there was such a hearing - wouldn't the OP have been informed of that first?  And the letter from the police would say so?

Yes - it is possible that the pound/recovery company whoever did so with the correct paperwork so they are blameless - in which case the organisation (the court? the police force?)  that wrongly issued said paperwork has been negligent.

So it's a very good idea for the OP to get a solicitor (or their insurance company's solicitor) to be taking on this investigation.

It is and it highlights the problem had the OP taken your initial post on face value. 

If the OP were to take my suggestions as written - they would be contacting the pound first and finding that out...  then getting hold of a solicitor to work out the next step.  They might even have read the bit where I suggested there must be a delay between the car being seized and the car being authorised to be crushed.  

But y'know - I'm here to try and help the OP within the limits of my knowledge and wisdom.... and the information they have passed on to us.  Do you have any better advice for the OP then?

(BIB) We await with bated breath. 

DB1904

ontheroad1970 said:

NBLondon said:

DB1904 said:

NBLondon said:

OP says they have a letter from the police stating no connection and to collect the car with no charge.

If there was such a hearing - wouldn't the OP have been informed of that first?  And the letter from the police would say so?

Yes - it is possible that the pound/recovery company whoever did so with the correct paperwork so they are blameless - in which case the organisation (the court? the police force?)  that wrongly issued said paperwork has been negligent.

So it's a very good idea for the OP to get a solicitor (or their insurance company's solicitor) to be taking on this investigation.

It is and it highlights the problem had the OP taken your initial post on face value. 

If the OP were to take my suggestions as written - they would be contacting the pound first and finding that out...  then getting hold of a solicitor to work out the next step.  They might even have read the bit where I suggested there must be a delay between the car being seized and the car being authorised to be crushed.  

But y'know - I'm here to try and help the OP within the limits of my knowledge and wisdom.... and the information they have passed on to us.  Do you have any better advice for the OP then?

(BIB) We await with bated breath. 

New username same old mercedesdriver.

DB1904

NBLondon said:

DB1904 said:

NBLondon said:

OP says they have a letter from the police stating no connection and to collect the car with no charge.

If there was such a hearing - wouldn't the OP have been informed of that first?  And the letter from the police would say so?

Yes - it is possible that the pound/recovery company whoever did so with the correct paperwork so they are blameless - in which case the organisation (the court? the police force?)  that wrongly issued said paperwork has been negligent.

So it's a very good idea for the OP to get a solicitor (or their insurance company's solicitor) to be taking on this investigation.

It is and it highlights the problem had the OP taken your initial post on face value. 

If the OP were to take my suggestions as written - they would be contacting the pound first and finding that out...  then getting hold of a solicitor to work out the next step.  They might even have read the bit where I suggested there must be a delay between the car being seized and the car being authorised to be crushed.  

But y'know - I'm here to try and help the OP within the limits of my knowledge and wisdom.... and the information they have passed on to us.  Do you have any better advice for the OP then?

I'd be speaking to the police, someone there has clearly shared a fair amount of information with the OP and since that point something appears to have gone wrong. 

ontheroad1970

I was merely stating that since from your posts several years ago you were in the service, so your much learned experience might be useful - or do I have you mixed up with another poster with a different username?  Apologies if I have you confused.  

DB1904

ontheroad1970 said:

I was merely stating that since from your posts several years ago you were in the service, so your much learned experience might be useful - or do I have you mixed up with another poster with a different username?  Apologies if I have you confused.  

Do you mean before 28 August 2020 when you were posting under the name of mercedesdriver? 

Maybe you could refresh my memory on those posts. I don't remember stating anything to do with my occupation. 

Robbo66

DB1904 said:

Robbo66 said:

When a car is towed you have 14 days to contact the pound, if you don't then yes the vehicle is crushed

https://www.impoundedcar.co.uk/how-to-get-a-car-out-of-a-police-pound.html

So the link you direct the OP to advises you produce a document that clearly states it's not proof of ownership as proof of ownership?

I suspect it'll contain more misleading advice if it were further read. 

Did you bother to read further than the first line, it also says that you have to take photo i.D and a proof of address that corresponds with the V5, I'm quite aware that a V5 doesn't prove ownership but it is the document you have to produce to get a vehicle out of the pound