Police impounded car

[jools2014]

Hello, this is my first post so apologies if I've not posted it in the correct place.

 

my brother got a flat tyre and/or ran out of petrol, not sure which.

He left the car parked not obstructing anything overnight.

He came to it the next day to find it was gone,

reported it stolen to find out the police had taken it

-reason, because he'd left tools in the back which he'd just collected that day

-he's a mechanic and these are the only tools he has!

 

He was told they'd ring him back and tell him where his car was, they didn't.

 

Finally got through to them and they didn't know what they'd done with his car!

 

Finally found it, and told him where it'd been taken to

-all this time it's racking up fees.

 

Was told he has to pay nearly £300 to get it back.

He can't actually afford that, and without his tools can't do any work either.

 

can he appeal this,

what right did the police have to take his car like this when it wasn't causing any issue?

 

Just because he had tools in the back?

 

Do they just say they "can't find it" so it takes longer and adds up more fees before they find it?

Or are they just incompetent?

Thanks.

[BazzaS]

Has he asked them on what grounds they removed it?.

Is he the registered keeper & his address with DVLA up to date?.

 

The grounds on which they removed it ('not just " tools in back"' but are they claiming e.g. 'under common law to safeguard property' or 'under statute Y')

will be key to determining if their actions (and any charges) are lawful or not.

[ssparks2003]

Also where was it left? residental road or hardshoulder of M25; it will effect how they treat the vehicle.

[jools2014]

Thanks for replies. Apparently he left it in a field, or near a field e.g in the gateway, not sure which but it definitely wasn't on the road. They took it because of all the tools in the back it made them think it had been abandoned and the tools could've been stolen. My brother does have a record, but the tools and whatever else he had in it are completely legal. Everything is up to date with the car and legal.

 

They waited a week before they told him where they had put the car. They have apparently been checking through all the tools, presuming they have found they are ok and he can have them back, and want nearly £300 for him to get the car out.

[BazzaS]

Has he asked them on what grounds they removed it?.

Is he the registered keeper & his address with DVLA up to date?.

 

The grounds on which they removed it ('not just " tools in back"' but are they claiming e.g. 'under common law to safeguard property' or 'under statute Y') will be key to determining if their actions (and any charges) are lawful or not.

 

 

 

Thanks for replies. Apparently he left it in a field, or near a field e.g in the gateway, not sure which but it definitely wasn't on the road. They took it because of all the tools in the back it made them think it had been abandoned and the tools could've been stolen. My brother does have a record, but the tools and whatever else he had in it are completely legal. Everything is up to date with the car and legal.

 

They waited a week before they told him where they had put the car. They have apparently been checking through all the tools, presuming they have found they are ok and he can have them back, and want nearly £300 for him to get the car out.

 

I asked re: if he was registered keeper & DVLA details up to date.

I noted "The grounds on which they removed it ('not just " tools in back"' but are they claiming e.g. 'under common law to safeguard property' or 'under statute Y') will be key"

 

Unfortunately, you repeating "they did it because there were tools in the back" doesn't answer those questions, and will make it harder for you to get reliable advice. Good luck.

[jools2014]

Sory I thought I had replied that everything is up to date, and he is the registered keeper when I said it was all legal.

 

As far as "are they claiming e.g. 'under common law to safeguard property' or 'under statute Y') will be key"-well no neither of those. Sorry my answer isn't clear for you, or doesn't answer your questions I guess he doesn't know on what grounds they removed it if the fact they thought it was abandoned and had possibly stolen items in the back isn't a sufficient reason. They haven't given a reason they took his car beyond what I've already "repeated".

[BazzaS]

Sory I thought I had replied that everything is up to date, and he is the registered keeper when I said it was all legal.

 

As far as "are they claiming e.g. 'under common law to safeguard property' or 'under statute Y') will be key"-well no neither of those. Sorry my answer isn't clear for you, or doesn't answer your questions I guess he doesn't know on what grounds they removed it if the fact they thought it was abandoned and had possibly stolen items in the back isn't a sufficient reason. They haven't given a reason they took his car beyond what I've already "repeated".

 

See previous : has he asked them on what grounds they removed it (the actual statute or if they claim not under statute if by common law)?

 

If not, would that be a good first step?

 

It may be awkward that it is hard to advise without that info, but that is the way it is. Their actions may have been entirely lawful (in which case he'll have to pay the fees) or not : depending on if they acted within their authority or if they exceeded it.

 

Respondents will be guessing without the details.

[Raykay]

I guess he doesn't know on what grounds they removed it if the fact they thought it was abandoned and had possibly stolen items in the back isn't a sufficient reason.

 

 

He needs to find out why it was removed and then decide what action to take.

 

 

For example, the police have powers under s.99, Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and s.4, The Removal and Disposal of Vehicles Regulation 1986, to remove vehicles they consider to be abandoned. If it was considered to be the involved in crime, the police have power to seize under s.19 and 23, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

[jools2014]

Yes, I understand. He does need to find out why exactly they removed it. I guess what I'm wanting to know is, now that they know the vehicle hadn't been abandoned, and they've checked the stuff out and found out it's legal, do they still expect my brother to pay? No worries if you can't give an accurate answer without knowing more details-I will try and find out some more. Can't do yet as my brother has gone on holiday for a few days-he's basically leaving the car there as he can't afford to get it out, so he'll probably end up losing it as it's costing more and more everyday.

 

The car is only worth a few hundred, but I don't like to think of the police making anything out of it-should they scrap it or sell it or whatever. Not that I know much about what the police do with cars like that, but at the end of the day they do have my brothers property and I assume if it's not claimed they can make money out of it selling it or whatever? Don't like the idea of them getting nearly £300 to release it though either, don't see why they should, I know some of that is storage fees, but they messed him about and didn't tell him where his car was for a week!

 

Guess just make sure you never break down or run out of petrol is the moral of the story!

 

Oh, and he has made a complaint against them, but I don't know if it'll do any good, I mean it seems that always the police just say they had sufficient reason to do something and so the complaint gets dropped.

[BazzaS]

Yes, I understand. He does need to find out why exactly they removed it. I guess what I'm wanting to know is, now that they know the vehicle hadn't been abandoned, and they've checked the stuff out and found out it's legal, do they still expect my brother to pay?

 

Answered above.

 

Their actions may have been entirely lawful (in which case he'll have to pay the fees) or not : depending on if they acted within their authority or if they exceeded it.

 

To reiterate. If their actions were lawful, he'll have to pay, even though they may now know it wasn't abandoned, and the items therein weren't stolen. The police will have contracted out recovery / storage, and the firm will expect to be paid. If the actions were lawful the police won't pay : your brother will have to, if he wants the car back.

 

If the police exceeded their authority : they'll have to pay.

[jools2014]

Yeah, the police will win they always do. He'll probably let them keep the car, he's not really bothered, he just wants his stuff in it out of the back. I suppose the fact that they "lost it" for a week before they told him where it was will mean that's my brothers fault too and he'll have to pay a whole weeks extra fees if he wants to get it out because the police didn't know what they'd done with it.