Vehicle Has Been Seized By Police Incorrectly
Options
Comments
-
But he's been found Not Guilty (allegedly) :eek:Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »Perhaps OP has been, er...unavoidably detained?0 -
Perhaps they are put off by all the people calling them a liar.Changing the world, one sarcastic comment at a time.0
-
The OP may have a case for wrongful arrest.
Basically the Babylon can nick you if they've got a warrant, or they reasonably believe you're about to commit an arrestable crime, or if they reasonably believe you've been involved in one, or if the crime isn't arrestable but, if they don't nick you, they won't be able to later because they dunno who you are.
To make a claim of wrongful arrest stick, you'd need to show that Plod had no reasonable basis for believing any of that, and / or that arresting you was anyway unnecessary (eg because you'd have voluntarily accompanied them to the cop shop).
If the OP could show that, or that he wasn't correctly treated after being arrested, he might be entitled to compo not limited to refund of his £150.
However, if he's what the Sweeney would call "a face on the manor" and he's previously been done for crimes similar to those the rozzers were investigating, then the pigs are quite a long way towards showing that the belief was reasonable.
If the OP is still with us an ambulance-chasing no win no fee lawyer might the best first port of call.0 -
westernpromise wrote: »The OP may have a case for wrongful arrest.
Basically the Babylon can nick you if they've got a warrant, or they reasonably believe you're about to commit an arrestable crime, or if they reasonably believe you've been involved in one, or if the crime isn't arrestable but, if they don't nick you, they won't be able to later because they dunno who you are.
To make a claim of wrongful arrest stick, you'd need to show that Plod had no reasonable basis for believing any of that, and / or that arresting you was anyway unnecessary (eg because you'd have voluntarily accompanied them to the cop shop).
If the OP could show that, or that he wasn't correctly treated after being arrested, he might be entitled to compo not limited to refund of his £150.
However, if he's what the Sweeney would call "a face on the manor" and he's previously been done for crimes similar to those the rozzers were investigating, then the pigs are quite a long way towards showing that the belief was reasonable.
If the OP is still with us an ambulance-chasing no win no fee lawyer might the best first port of call.
This is the reason you shouldn't accept advice online.
Arrestable offences haven't existed for over a decade, they just need a statutory reason to arrest.0 -
Advice still applies to this instance though.AndyMc..... wrote: »This is the reason you shouldn't accept advice online.
Arrestable offences haven't existed for over a decade, they just need a statutory reason to arrest.
https://www.hudgellsolicitors.co.uk/news/civil-liberties/what-is-wrongful-arrest/0 -
westernpromise wrote: »Advice still applies to this instance though.
https://www.hudgellsolicitors.co.uk/news/civil-liberties/what-is-wrongful-arrest/
Just because it's online doesn't mean it's correct.
They're about as wrong as you are only they have better grammar.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards