I can see that this needs to be proved in order to prosecute (ultimately leading to a conviction and a few hours community service)davethebirdman wrote:What needs to be proved is that the new owner knew or believed the goods to be stolen.

I can see that this needs to be proved in order to prosecute (ultimately leading to a conviction and a few hours community service)davethebirdman wrote:What needs to be proved is that the new owner knew or believed the goods to be stolen.
I don't think its a case of hi-jacking the post (although I'd have expected other's to chip in!); I think the position regarding ownership is higly relevant and I'm sure of interest to all.davethebirdman wrote:Sorry to hi-jack this post...
I have to say I don't really agree with some of what you say. although I'm sure much can turn on what evidence there is in a case I don't see that generally an innocent buyer can legitimately claim ownership. Also, even though the case you refer to may have ended up the way you say, not knowing the fact's, all I can say is that there seems to be often cases reported of innocent motorists having cars claimed back because they were originally stolen somewhere along the line (in fact, on BBC news this evening there was a report about an owner having her car repossessed because, even though she acted dilligently, the car she had bought had been previously stolen).davethebirdman wrote: The new purchaser of the goods now has a right of ownership to the machines...Bought in good faith, paid market rate etc. (Hence my comment about allwins and the common man not knowing their true worth)
I once dealt with a case involving a new new motor vehicle where there were claims from two lawful owners. It took years to sort out and the court (Civil because there was never any criminal charge) awarded the car to the second owner. So it doesn't always follow.
In the modern world it is the insurance company, after paying the original owner out that takes the fall...
This now tends to be the norm. The position of ownership has changed over the past few years. So let's now just try and find those machines and let the Police do the rest.Exactly, and an opportunist thief usually travels around in a van to collect their 'winnngs'! I don't think so and if this was an opportunist thief, then I would eat Jerry's hat!davethebirdman wrote:Why do you think it strange that a opportunist thief would steal coin operated equipment?
In my experience a thief will take what they can get away with...![]()
But, leaving aside the practicalities of proving ownership, if this is done then the owner is generally entitled to have the goods back as there's the old saying that a buyer cannot get a better title than the seller holds.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest