Flaperon – Member

@amplebrew – got to disagree. If my property was removed without my consent, I'd consider it theft. I strongly recommend Lyons informs the police

Completely understand where you're coming from, but you need the intention to permantly deprive someone of their belongings for it to be theft.

The landlord called Lyons to tell him what he'd done and where the bike was left, so that intention wasn't there.

It is bang out of order what he's done, but I fear that the Police will tell you it's a civil matter.

Lyons – Have you checked your bikes and bits? Is any of it damaged as a result of it being moved?

You haven't got a theft as there was no intention to permantly deprive

Well, I don't know…s6(1) of Theft Act says:

(1) A person appropriating property belonging to another without meaning the other permanently to lose the thing itself is nevertheless to be regarded as having the intention of permanently depriving the other of it if his intention is to treat the thing as his own to dispose of regardless of the other’s rights; and a borrowing or lending of it may amount to so treating it if, but only if, the borrowing or lending is for a period and in circumstances making it equivalent to an outright taking or disposal.

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?ActiveTextDocId=1204238

I don't have the slightest idea how the case law has been decided with regards to the Theft Act but in the civil law tort of conversion, for instance, joyriding in a van was considered "treating as if it were the thief's own", even if there was an intention to return.

I am cynical about the cops' likely enthusiasm to bother doing anything about this but on the other hand I am just guessing (=talking through my trousers) on that.

Can you sue for trespass and conversion in Small Claims Court? That would be where I started looking.

if his intention is to treat the thing as his own to dispose of regardless of the other’s rights

I think the landlord would have had to have left the belongings somewhere were you'd be likley not to find them for it to be classed as diposing.

It's the fact the landlord called you that has probably thrown a spanner in the works.

You can twoc a bike, but only if it's for your own use, anothers use or allowing himself to be carried on it.

Lyons – I'd call the local Police just to see what they say, then pay the CAB a visit.

Wel, ima amazed the parts were still there, they were left in an alley, overlooked by a playing field, in one of the worst parts of hemel…

I think the landlord would have had to have left the belongings somewhere were you'd be likley not to find them for it to be classed as diposing.

As I say, I don't know how this has been decided in the past and have no practical experience, and I don't feel strongly about this (is that enough qualifications?) but I would have thought that a) disposal is just whatever happens after you finish actively dealing with it and b) the fact that the landlord chose what to do with the bike without reference to the owner's rights would tick both boxes.

But as I say, I defer to anyone who has experience/better knowledge, and I wouldn't want to suggest I feel very strongly about it, so…

Definitely conversion in tort law, though.

Just on the pedantic legal point i'm sure it ain't theft or indeed burglary damage, but it is the crime of twoc( take with out owners consent) section 12 theft act:-
"(5) Subsection (1) above shall not apply in relation to pedal cycles; but, subject to
subsection (6) below, a person who, without having the consent of the owner or other
lawful authority, takes a pedal cycle for his own or another’s use, or rides a pedal cycle
knowing it to have been taken without such authority, shall on summary conviction be
liable to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds."
Case law is clear that any moving of a car without the owners consent amounts to a section 12(1) offense so that will easily cover this scenario. However I'm prepared to believe you local police will not want to get involved, it is a clear breach of you tenancy's covenant for quiet enjoyment and there for gives rise to a civil action. I would suggest that as you can no longer occupy the property in the knowledge that your personal possessions are safe the landlord has fundamentally breached the tenancy agreement entitling you to move out recover your full deposit and any additional expenses.
(usual terms and conditions apply to all criminal advise all civil law is at least 20 years out of date and made up.)

As a landlord I can confidently say that your landlord could be heading for prison. This is harassment . Call cops and local council housing, keep the voicemail.

Sounds like you have a great case for playing 'hide the dook' when you leave, or the alternate version 'where's my kipper'.

Choose your weapon dook = poo, kipper = any fish. Your challange is to find somewhere to hide your chosen weapon somewhere it won't be easily found and has the greatest chance of omitting its foul odour.

Go…

I don't think it can be TWOC because it's not taken for use, but I do agree with crankboy that if you have a remedy it will be Civil, the right to "quiet enjoyment" is a good startpoint. I'm pretty sure the police will not be interested unless you make a "very very abusive phonecall" so be careful with that side of it.

I'm not a landlord, but I can confidently say that your landlord will not be heading to prison because he moved your bicycle.

Just on the pedantic legal point i'm sure it ain't theft or indeed burglary damage, but it is the crime of twoc( take with out owners consent) section 12 theft act:-

Ach, well, there you go, I'm barking up completely the wrong tree and talking utter gash. Ignore everything I said on the criminal side and probably everything on the civil side too.

I'm not a landlord, but I can confidently say that your landlord will not be heading to prison because he moved your bicycle.

You don't have any experience of The Protection from Eviction Act 1977 and the Housing Act of 1988. It's an imprisonable offence and landlords today get locked up for threatening or abusing tenants.

To the OP contact your local councils housing officer pronto. They will come down on the landlord for you.

It isn't any criminal offence as there is simply no intent, it is quite clear that the landlord is being a d*** over anything else. Sorry but housing issues like these are a nightmare to resolve, get out and find somewhere else quickly!

If the voicemail is on a mobile, make sure you have saved it (option 2 after listening to it?) as it will probably be deleted at some point now you've heard it.

Munqe-chick – Member
It isn't any criminal offence as there is simply no intent, it is quite clear that the landlord is being a d*** over anything else. Sorry but housing issues like these are a nightmare to resolve, get out and find somewhere else quickly!

+ 1

Munqe-chick – Member
It isn't any criminal offence as there is simply no intent, it is quite clear that the landlord is being a d*** over anything else. Sorry but housing issues like these are a nightmare to resolve, get out and find somewhere else quickly!

+ 1

+2

Theres no way the police will be interested in locking anyone up for putting a bike outside. Its a waste of time in their eyes and they WILL make it drag. It isn't worth pursuing just move out.

3000 quid bike and frame, or a chicken pie from tesco, wonder which the police respond to fastest,both have been taken without the owners consent.

Perhaps email your landlord a copy of this thread.

Lyons, hope you get my text

Lyons,
I just saw your bit about being in Hemel. Just wondering what part and who your landlord is as we have lived in Hemel in the past(in Berkhamsted now) and had a really bad experience with a particular scum bag.

Munqe-chick – Member

"It isn't any criminal offence as there is simply no intent,"

?? what criminal intent do you need for twoc that the landlord does not have in this scenario munge-chick?

?? what criminal intent do you need for twoc that the landlord does not have in this scenario munge-chick?

"Taken for use" is clearly missing.

I think some of you are letting your outrage get the better of you, you need to see what's likely to be achievable by calling the police and in my opinion even trying to get them interested is nothing but a waste of time better spent finding somewhere to live where the landlord isn't a dick.

I would go to the police not for the fact that they might do something but to have a registered record of what has taken place for any possible future legal action. What you have to remember is he thinks he can do this, it is his right to go in to your room and remove stuff. If he does it again and your frame gets stolen or even worse you come home and he has removed all of your belongings the previous police report shows a history of intimidation. Some landlords think that just because they own the property they can do what they like but they can't and as mentioned before there are very big fines for this sort of thing. Protect yourself why should you lose £3k worth of stuff you have worked hard for just because he's a f**king c**k?

Its nothing to do with theft its all about the harassment.

This is NOTHING to do with TWOC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The intent is that it is going to be used by yourself or another (for TWOC), he was quite clearly NOT going to do that! You need mens rea and intent.
You cannot TWOC a chicken pie either that could be theft AGAIN depending on intent. Mr MC and I have 15 years criminal law between us.

I think Johners has some good points. Burls has some good points too, you can report it so there is a record to refer to in the future if it happened again, however I'd get out sharpish so it couldn't happen again.

Munqe-chick on reflection you may well be right that this is not twoc. You can compare the cases where a short move of a vehicle amounts to twoc e.g. the poachers move the gamekeepers car to get there own away, with those where it does not eg the moving of a car a short distance as a joke to confuse a friend who owns it. But given the wide definition of "use" i'd not be confident that picking someones bike up taking it out of their flat and placing it in the street for your own ends did not amount to using it. …………certainly pushing a car can be twoc. Mens Rea and intent are the same thing, by the way, you need Mens Rea and Actus Reus to be guilty of a clasic crime. Your point would be that the Mens Rea is the intention to use the bike for oneself or another and the Actus Reus would be the taking of the bike.

Yuyp I'm aware of mens rea and actus rea, intent etc! I was trying to make this slightly simpler for those people with no legal knowledge on here. You would not get a TWOC out of it! I can't even go into explaining it any more. I'm moving on.

Nothing to do with twoc or theft, its landlord harassment.

Lyons – can you update us on the pedals?

Sorry to hear of your landlord troubles!!