We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
6 year Limitation Act Advice
A quick question ..
My neighbours dad had something stolen from his property around 9 years ago , while trawling ebay he came across it and contacted the seller to inform him - a police report was opened at the time.
The seller said he bought it in good faith around 8 years ago and has a handwritten receipt from the shop ( and photos from the time ) .
My neighbours dad wants to go to the police to recover the item ( dont think they would be interested ) but also I had a look online and there seems to be a 6 year limit if an item is bought in good faith … Is it worth taking it further to see if he can recover the item . Any help would be appreciated. The value of the item when stolen was around £2k but now worth around £5k .
Comments
-
The "something" that was stolen - whereabouts on the value scale does it lie from "garden gnome" to "Picasso"?
N. Hampshire, he/him. Octopus Intelligent Go elec / Fuse gas / Vodafone BB / iD mobile. Kirk Hill Co-op member.Economy 7 cap explainer. Gas vs E7 vs peak elec heating costs, Ecoflow Stream, Best kettle :-)
2.72kWp PV facing SSW installed Jan 2012. 11 x 247w panels, 3.6kw inverter. 37 MWh generated, long-term average 2.6 Os.0 -
Was an insurence claim made? If it was and the claim was paid out then the insurance company are the only ones entitled to have it back.
Even if that is not the case the current owner is protected by the limitations act 1980
0 -
There is no statute of limitation on criminal offences - furthermore title never passes regardless of how long someone holds a stolen item or whether they obtained it unaware that it is stolen - the item still belongs to its rightful owner.
It may be best to report the to the police for investigation,
0 -
Was the item insured?
Is the 'shop' still in existence?
And, does he have proof this is the same item that he reported stolen?
1 -
Sadly wasnt insured . It is definetly the same item a police report was made out at the time with the serial number etc .. When he spotted the item online he took screeenshots of the listing . He said wants to give the seller the opportunity to do the right thing before going back to the police as it seems the buyer did buy it in good faith .. It is a pawnbroker type store .
0 -
In short the time has run out as long as it's accepted they bought it in good faith. So was the price paid reasonable or much too low because of its "questionable origin" then thats it. Obviously you could investigate why its a hand written receipt and did the shop do such things at the time but its a long shot.
I disagree, in part. Criminal offences dont have a statute of limitations, though CPS may decide old offences dont meet the public interest part of the test.
S3 & S4 of the Limitations Act however do strip the OP of legal ownership of the goods 6 years after the original sale of good faith.
0 -
4 Special time limit in case of theft.
(1)The right of any person from whom a chattel is stolen to bring an action in respect of the theft shall not be subject to the time limits under sections 2 and 3(1) of this Act, but if his title to the chattel is extinguished under section 3(2) of this Act he may not bring an action in respect of a theft preceding the loss of his title, unless the theft in question preceded the conversion from which time began to run for the purposes of section 3(2).
0 -
That’s the subsection that can look as though it helps the original owner. Read in full, it doesn’t save the item, although it does keep a claim against the thief alive. Taking it phrase by phrase:
“The right of any person from whom a chattel is stolen to bring an action in respect of the theft shall not be subject to the time limits under sections 2 and 3(1)”
This is the owner’s protection against the thief. There is no six-year limit for suing over the theft itself. Section 4(2) extends the same protection to dealings related to the theft, such as the thief selling to an accomplice or to someone who knows the goods are stolen. Section 4(3) then says those dealings don’t start the s.3(2) clock either. On its own, this half means the thief and anyone acting in bad faith can never rely on limitation.
“but if his title to the chattel is extinguished under section 3(2) …”
This assumes the owner’s title can still be extinguished despite the first half. The only way that can happen is through a dealing that is not related to the theft. The unnumbered paragraph in s.4(2) says a good faith purchase is exactly that. So this clause is pointing at the good faith purchaser case.
“… he may not bring an action in respect of a theft preceding the loss of his title …”
Once title has gone, the owner also loses claims over thefts that happened before that point. For example, if someone had stolen the item from the good faith purchaser during the six years, the owner could no longer sue that second thief.
“… unless the theft in question preceded the conversion from which time began to run for the purposes of section 3(2).”
This is the exception. The conversion that started the clock was the good faith purchase, and the original theft came before it. So the owner can still sue the original thief, with no time limit, even after losing title to the item.
Putting it together:
- Against the thief: no time limit. The owner can sue for damages indefinitely.
- Against the good faith purchaser: six years from the purchase. After that, the owner’s title is gone under s.3(2).
- The item itself: stays with the purchaser once the six years have run.
The first half of s.4(1) protects the owner against the thief, but it never stops the s.3(2) clock running once a good faith purchase has happened.
1 -
As stated, there is no statute of limitations against theft. Title may pass to others e.g. the insurers in the event of a payout. Arguably laches may apply but I suspect a thief would have a hard time running this one in a civil court.
0 -
But the OP isnt pursuing the thief, for which there is unlimited time, but is talking about a person that has bought the goods in goodfaith from a shop (presumably pawnbroker or secondhand shop). It is the claim against them that becomes statute barred as long as its proven that it was in good faith not "bought from the back of a lorry". The legislation that protects the buyer after 6 years also strips the OP from having title to the goods at the same time
0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 355.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 456.1K Spending & Discounts
- 248.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 605.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 179K Life & Family
- 263.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards