Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • March 23: As the coronavirus crisis escalates, the UK is placed into lockdown with strict limitations on travel. The Government guidelines state: “You should not be visiting family members who do not live in your home.” The prime minister tells the UK public they "must stay at home". People are warned not to meet friends or family members they do not live with. Those with symptoms had already been told to self-isolate     Friday 27 March: Downing Street On the day Cummings ran out of No 10, his wife, Mary Wakefield, appears to have been already ill, according to her Spectator article about the experience, in which she says: “My husband did rush home to look after me.”   Both Boris Johnson and Health Secretary Matt Hancock test positive for coronavirus, while chief medical officer Chris Whitty says he has symptoms of the disease and is self-isolating.   Mr Cummings said: "I suddenly got a call from my wife who was looking after our four-year-old child. She told me she suddenly felt badly ill." He went home and after a couple of hours his wife felt better and he returned to work. "There were many critical things at work and she asked me to return [to work] in the afternoon and I did." He then "drove up to Durham that night arriving at roughly midnight" with his family.     In spectator articles on 24th and 25th April * Wakefield (wife) wrote in the spectator that Cummings said “I feel weird” and collapsed 24 hours after he came home to look after her * She went on to explain that for the next 10 days “Dom couldn’t get out of bed. Day in, day out for ten days he lay doggo with a high fever and spasms that made the muscles lump and twitch in his legs.” * Cummings wrote that “at the end of March and for the first two weeks of April I was ill, so we were both shut in together.” * The following days, by Wakefield’s account, were a mixture of family idyll and health nightmare, as she made a “palace out of polystyrene packaging” with their son … even as Cummings’s breathing got so bad that she feared he should be in hospital. But 10 days after her husband first fell ill, she said, he began to feel better – just as Boris Johnson went into hospital. That would place the improvement in his condition around Sunday 5 April,     Sat March 28th Is apparently the day Cummings said “I feel weird” and collapsed 24 hours after he came home to look after her His wife went on to explain that for the next 10 days “Dom couldn’t get out of bed. Day in, day out for ten days he lay doggo with a high fever and spasms that made the muscles lump and twitch in his legs.” Cummings wrote that “at the end of March and for the first two weeks of April I was ill, so we were both shut in together.” 10 days from March 28th – would take us to the 7th April.   Mon March 30: Downing Street confirms Mr Cummings is suffering from coronavirus symptoms and is self-isolating.   Tuesday 31 March/1st April: Durham The police have said that on 31 March they were “made aware of reports” of Cummings’s presence in the area and had then contacted the family to “reiterate the appropriate advice around essential travel”.   2 April: During the night, Mr Cummings' four-year-old son "threw up and had a bad fever". Following medical advice, an ambulance took the child to hospital. He was accompanied by Mr Cummings' wife   3 April: Mr Cummings' son spent the night in hospital and woke up the next day having "recovered". He was tested for coronavirus and his mother, who was with him at the hospital, was told "they should return home". According to Mr Cummings, there were no taxis so he "drove to the hospital, picked him up and returned home". He said he "did not leave the car or have any contact with anybody on this short trip".   Sunday 5 April: The ‘Abba’ sighting (despite claims of ten days where he couldn’t get up with a high fever) Cummings alledgedly seen in Garden with AbbA blaring But 10 days after her husband first fell ill, she said, he began to feel better – just as Boris Johnson went into hospital. Which would place the improvement in his condition around Sunday 5 April, … Although the claimed 10 days after the 28th – the earliest point at which Cummings was said to have been symptomatic – would be the 7 April. The Guardian approaches Downing Street about the story, only to be told by a spokesman: “It will be a no comment on that one.” Mr Cummings said "after I started to recover, one day in the second week, I tried to walk outside the house". He confirmed he, his wife and his son went for a walk into woods owned by his father and it was at this point he was seen by passers-by but his family "had no interaction with them". The exact date is not clear but his second week isolating in Durham would have between 4-11th   6 April: At some point in the week leading up to this date, Mr Cummings discussed his decision to travel to Durham with the prime minister. "When we were both sick and in bed," he said, "I mentioned to him what I had done. Unsurprisingly given the condition we were in, neither of us remember the conversation in any detail."   Fri April 10: Number 10 is again contacted for comment regarding Mr Cumming’s trip by the Guardian. Instead of defending the journey, officials declined to comment.   Fri 10th/Sat 11th April: The 14-day period of Cummings’s isolation would have expired on 10/11th April, assuming it is counted from when Wakefield appears to have first fallen ill on 27 March or when Cummings fell ill 24 hours later.   11 April: Believing he had recovered by this date, albeit "feeling weak and exhausted", Mr Cummings said he "sought expert medical advice". "I explained our family's symptoms and all the timings and asked if it was safe to return to work on Monday or Tuesday, seek childcare and so on. I was told that it was safe and I could return to work"   Sunday 12 April: Barnard Castle Wakefield’s birthday, according to Companies House records – they allegedly made a trip to Barnard Castle, a charming town 30 miles from the Cummings’s family property, described on the English Heritage website as having “fantastic views” and “plenty to do for families on a day out”. That detail emerged in an interview with Robin Lees, a retired chemistry teacher who lives in the town. Lees, who says he has a photographic memory, told the Guardian he was “a bit gobsmacked” to see Cummings, and then was so incensed that he made a note of the family car’s numberplate and checked it online when he got home. Cummings acknowledges he drove to Barnard Castle, 30 miles from his parents' home in Durham, with his wife and child. He explained this episode as needing to test his driving was fine before making the long drive back to London. He said he'd been having problems with his vision   Tuesday 14 April: London The Guardian asked Wakefield to confirm whether the family had been in London throughout the lockdown period, but received no reply. Cummings was photographed back in Downing Street on 14 April   Sunday 19 April: ‘bluebell’ woods - Cummings and Wakefield in Houghall woods? Could Cummings have then gone back to the north-east from London? Downing Street is emphatic that he did not. The denial came after another witness claimed to the Guardian and Sunday Mirror that they had seen Cummings and Wakefield on a country walk in Houghall Woods, a beauty spot near his parents’ property in Durham. According to this account, Cummings said: “Aren’t the bluebells lovely?” Cummings says he did not return to Durham   Monday 20 April Cummings seen in London again   May 23: Downing Street statement: “Owing to his wife being infected with suspected coronavirus and the high likelihood that he would himself become unwell, it was essential for Dominic Cummings to ensure his young child could be properly cared for.” The statement said: “At no stage was he or his family spoken to by the police about this matter, as is being reported. “His actions were in line with coronavirus guidelines. Mr Cummings believes he behaved reasonably and legally.” Speaking outside his home, Mr Cummings reiterated: “I behaved reasonably and legally”. When a reporter suggested to him that his actions did not look good, he replied: “Who cares about good looks? “It’s a question of doing the right thing. It’s not about what you guys think.” Later at the daily Downing Street briefing, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said Mr Cummings had the PM’s “full support” and that Mr Johnson “knew that he was unwell and that he was in lockdown”. Mr Shapps said it had always been permissible for families to travel to be closer to their relatives as long as they “go to that location and stay in that location”. Meanwhile, deputy chief medical officer for England, Dr Jenny Harries, said that travelling during lockdown was permissible if “there was an extreme risk to life”, with a “safeguarding clause” attached to all advice to prevent vulnerable people being stuck at home with no support.   Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak have tweeted their support for Mr Cummings.   Education Secretary Gavin Williamson said on Monday morning that Mr Cummings had "set out absolutely clearly and absolutely categorically he didn't break the rules and didn't break the law". The attorney general, Suella Braverman, tweet on Saturday in which she quoted the full text of the No 10 statement on Boris Johnson’s chief aide in which the prime minister said he had behaved “responsibly and legally”.   (Disgraceful) Boris Johnson said at the weekend Cummings acted “responsibly and legally and with integrity”   “The PM’s risible defence of Cummings is an insult to all those who have made such sacrifices to ensure the safety of others,” said Johne Inge, the bishop of Worcester, on Twitter.   “What planet are they on?” asked a front page headline in the Daily Mail, an influential right-wing paper usually supportive of Johnson.   https://descrier.co.uk/politics/dominic-cummings-and-wife-tried-to-cover-up-lockdown-breach-in-articles-for-the-spectator/   https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/24/dominic-cummings-timeline-what-we-know-about-his-movements   https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/uk/timeline-the-coronavirus-lockdown-and-dominic-cummings-trip-to-durham/   https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52784290   https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/25/attorney-general-faces-calls-to-resign-defends-dominic-cummings-suella-braverman   https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-britain-cummings/what-planet-are-they-on-no-respite-for-johnson-and-aide-idUKKBN2310UE   https://cyprus-mail.com/2020/05/25/what-plant-are-they-on-press-slams-johnson-and-cummings/
    • simply tell them on the phone writing only sorry as I might want to escalate this to the fos or court. sorry but no speaky..speaky   you night find this interesting?   https://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/jun/09/life-insurance-misselling-aviva-hamilton-life   dx
    • I've had a few missed calls and then text from RBS wanting to talk about the letter I sent, two posts up.    Am I best to wait for them to write? Didn't really want to get into a discussion with them about it ideally!
    • I haven’t even looked.  I doubt some PR bod would have been in the loop.
    • Gove will be rubbing his little hands together in glee. He been quite careful in his limited wording in 'supporting demonic. but he poo'd his own pot a bit with that priority preferential test   No confidence vote (in PM not party).
  • Our picks

    • View this quiz Employment status during COVID-19
      What do you do if you’ve been told not to come to work due to the current crisis.  Watch the video here or on the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page.

      Did you learn anything? Do the quiz
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 8 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 0 replies
    • One Parking Solutions - Damning judgement. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421148-one-parking-solutions-damning-judgement/
      • 63 replies
    • View this quiz Coping with extreme hardship
      Life can be tough when you're entering the world of work and in the present virus crisis, things are even more difficult.

      Watch the video below or go to the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page . Afterwards, you can see if you've understood the points which are being made by taking the quiz.
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 8 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 1 reply
    • View this quiz: Pre-pay meters
      An explanation of how some gas and electric companies offer emergency quarantine support.

       
      Watch the video here – or go to the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page and watch it there. Then come back here and do the quiz
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 6 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 1 reply
sandy12

conned out of £4k

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4866 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

went to the cop shop again and they basicly said that cos i was willing to give this guy the money - nothing they can do. I said it was a loan and they said no contract was signed so it was not a loan. would be my word against his

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ian cognito

It would be your word against his - if they could be bothered looking for him to ask and the police turning up on his doorstep may just be enough to make him cough up, assuming he doesn't make a habit of this sort of thing.

 

Nothing they can do? what about all the old people who are conned out of money, they manage to do something about that - is there a difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rubbish its obtaining money by deception & they know it they are just fobbing you off. You must involve a solicitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ladies and gents.

 

This is not a matter for the police.

 

How does anyone know that this bloke has conned Sandy. There is no evidence whatsoever that he has lied or deceived anyone.

 

The police cannot go around dealing with disputes like this. If that was the case we would be going to the Police station everytime the bank charged us 35.00. Apparently they have deceived us into paying by telling us that it costs them xx.xx pounds etc etc.

 

If you can give some sort of evidence that he has conned you or deceived you and as a result you have handed over this money then the police will deal with it. If you cant then youre wasting your time.

 

Im just being realistic so dont jump down my throat.


7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger, I tend to disagree. With intervention by the police, Sandy can at least get to the bottom of who this guy is. At the moment, she only knows his first name and no details of his address or how to contact him. She has clearly stated that this was a loan. What kind of person accepts £4,000 then cuts off all contact with whoever gave it to him? Sounds like a conman to me! The least the police can do is investigate, find this person and ask for his side of the story. After all, what do we pay our taxes for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ian cognito

I'm with you there stansfield, this isn't £35, most of us could accept £35 but £4k is a substantial amount of money and without looking into it the police don't know that he isn't doing this all over the place all the time. It's not particularly difficult to find out which bank it is, you can do that on the web, then the bank would have to give over his personal details to the police. Hardly full scale crime investigation is it?

 

If it turns out the details held by the bank turn up nothing, then they have a criminal on their hands - exactly what we pay our taxes for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with you. In all probability a deception has taken place but there is no evidence to support this and as such reports and complaints to police are not going to get anywhere.

 

Its frustrating I know but if the police where to take on all complaints of this nature they would become little more than a debt collecting agency and lets be honest they have precious little time as it is.

 

I would also be surprised if the bank would disclose to the police the details of the man in question in these circumstances. The Police have no automatic exemption from the DPA and for this sort of information to be disclosed they would have to apply for it and have very compeling evidence that a serious crime has taken place. Its all very unsatisfactory I know but Im just being realistic.

 

In this position I would get back on to the chat lines with a different username and try and find the bloke. If hes done it once he will do it again. If you manage to find him again doing the same thing then you would have a far stronger case and as a result you may be able to pursuade the police to get involved.

 

What else do you know about him.

 

Name Maybe false

his rough Location

previous bank

possible ISP address

phone number

whatever else he may have disclosed to you.

 

With that sort of info Id be surprised if with a little bit of effort and lateral thinking you couldnt find him.

 

Good luck


7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

roger I'm sorry but your comments are completely wrong.

 

The police investigate such allegations all the time.

 

If I borrow money from anyone for once purpose & use it for another then I have commited the offence of obtianing a pecuniary advantage by deception.

 

As for the evidence how do they know there is none until they at least make enquiries. If for example their enquiries where to reveal that there never were bailiffs knocking on the door (false claims which may be evidenced by this persons email) & this persons was making it all up (as now seems likely) then that is evidence of deception

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the account in question is closed then the details of residence etc would still be there, its a sad state of affairs when the police wont get involved in what is a truely cruel con. We all know the police are under pressure and are understaffed however surely the least they could do would be to have an initial look into it to see if this person has a history of this sort of thing and what can be done to help.

Sandy did the police offer any advise at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also be surprised if the bank would disclose to the police the details of the man in question in these circumstances. The Police have no automatic exemption from the Data Protection Act and for this sort of information to be disclosed they would have to apply for it and have very compeling evidence that a serious crime has taken place. Its all very unsatisfactory I know but Im just being realistic.

 

35. - (1) Personal data are exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where the disclosure is required by or under any enactment, by any rule of law or by the order of a court.

(2) Personal data are exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where the disclosure is necessary-

    (a) for the purpose of, or in connection with, any legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings), or

    (b) for the purpose of obtaining legal advice,

or is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights.


PUTTING IT IN WRITING & KEEPING COPIES IS A MUST FOR SUCCESS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

george They seem to have plenty of time to chase after berry pickers. The excuse that they don't have time is rubbish. They have plenty of time. The continually trotted out excuse about the amount of paper work is just an excuse. Witness the recent publicity about the local cooper who holds the record for the No' of villains he's knicked, something like 4-8 per day. How does he do it.......writes quicker maybe!

 

The fact is they love the paper work after all where would you rather spend your day, outside in all weathers risking life or limb or indoors in the warm at no risk & able to have refreshment at any time. It's a no brainer

 

Also like many other institutions they hide unlawfully behind the DPA all the time as an excuse not to act. I personally have had to threaten legal action more than once to make them reveal vital information about a 3rd party. One particular forces own solicitor conceded they where acting unlawfully because denying the info was effectivley perverting the course of justice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JonCris

 

everyone is entitled to their opinion but Im afraid I find yours personally offensive so I will butt out of this thread

 

Have a look at this website

 

policememorial.org/Nationalroll/nationalroll.htm

 

Add www. at the front and it will give you a list of police officers who chose not to sit at their desk doing paperwork and gave their lives as a result.

 

My intention was to give some practical advice to the thread starter, advice which is likely to save time and able them to focus their efforts in the most productive direction Not to slag the police off so Im not going to get involved.


7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger, I dont think anyone is trying to "slag" the police off. I think we all just think that their duty of care to the community is too often focused in other areas. For example, we see far too many police cars sat at roundabouts or backed into little hideaways in order to catch the unsuspecting motorist (who are mostly law abiding citizens). Sadly, I think our policing today is more about revenue than presence on the streets catching and discouraging real crime - not that I am in any way suggesting that traffic crime is less important. It just that we seem to see the police pouring more of their efforts into revenue based areas. I have the greatest respect for the police as individuals but as a member of the public, and having paid taxes all my life, I would expect a little concern and at least some investigation. Roger, your comments are most welcome here. This is afterall a debate, and like you, others are merely expressing their opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite right I am only expressing my opinion. It is however based on some knowledge as having dealt with the police for over 30 years I can say that the policing in this country is much worse than it was even 10 years ago. As for those who gave their lives I see no link to what I referred too as a failure to patrol the streets but to opt for the comfort of the station & to suggest otherwise is pure humbug. I have police officers in my family whom I like & admire but have actually been told this is their preferred option, make an arrest & spend much of the day in the nick. Throughout the country there have been at least 3 recent murders which could have been avoided had the police done their job. The forces in question have had to issue public apoligies for their failure to protect these victims when they could have

 

Finally their refusal to investigate the alledged crime complained of here when we are constantly told they investigate ALL alledged crimes to justify arresting and charging Christians & berry pickers make a nonsense of such claims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite right I am only expressing my opinion. It is however based on some knowledge as having dealt with the police for over 30 years I can say that the policing in this country is much worse than it was even 10 years ago. As for those who gave their lives I see no link to what I referred too as a failure to patrol the streets but to opt for the comfort of the station & to suggest otherwise is pure humbug. I have police officers in my family whom I like & admire but have actually been told this is their preferred option, make an arrest & spend much of the day in the nick. Throughout the country there have been at least 3 recent murders which could have been avoided had the police done their job. The forces in question have had to issue public apoligies for their failure to protect these victims when they could have

 

Finally their refusal to investigate the alledged crime complained of here when we are constantly told they investigate ALL alledged crimes to justify arresting and charging Christians & berry pickers make a nonsense of such claims.

 

:-x

 

Rubbish. I do not know any Police Officer who would rather stay in the nick than go out and patrol the streets. This is what they joined to do. They all get frustrated by paper work. But like any job you will get those who simply can not be bothered and can not do the job properly. Yes it does happen even in the Police. They are not whiter than white and do make mistakes like every other human being. If those you have spoken to are say this then they wouldn't even bother to chase your berry pickers either.

 

The police do not investigate ALL alleged crimes (they would never have time for anything else like rea l commited crime). They need some evidence to begin an investigation and all the evidence available to us here seems to suggest a gift/donation upon request. As it stands at this time it would simply be a civil matter not a criminal one. The police have no jurisdiction over civil matters.

 

This sheds a little more light on the matter. BBC - h2g2 - Section 16(2)(a) of the 1968 Theft Act (England and Wales) - A203716

 

sandy12 Get some more evidence to support your claims if you can and they will then look into the matter. All they are telling you at this stage is it would really be a waste of yours and their time as it stands now because, as quite clearly pointed out, it is simply your word against his.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WOW, i did not know people like you existed, This guy has probablydone it loads of times, My thoughts are the money is gone and thats a shame because no doubt you will think twice about helping some one in the future, My thoughts are that maybe you should reregister on the site you met him and try to get conned again by him cos no doubt he is still on ther under a new name, maybe this time you will get him to slip up, BUT never meet him alone, take a 7 foot wrestler with ya, or if you have his screen name maybe the site owners can help you with info.


TOTALLY debt free as of 2007, Fantastic,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The police are after all there to investigate any wrongdoing in the eyes of the complainer, I also have friends in the force and have been told that many officers are NOT interested in actually doing the best they can when they are working and this is not something im going to dwell on as said earlier there are good and bad in every race, religion and occupation, the point i was getting at is that i feel they could have helped some more than they actually did, this may be due to lack of evidence or manpower however if they want to be seen in a better light then maybe they should be seen to be helping in more needy cases such as Sandys and not some of the trash we read about in the press mostly every other week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:-x

 

Rubbish. I do not know any Police Officer who would rather stay in the nick than go out and patrol the streets. known a lot over the years have you This is what they joined to do. They all get frustrated by paper work. But like any job you will get those who simply can not be bothered and can not do the job properly. Yes it does happen even in the Police. They are not whiter than white and do make mistakes like every other human being. If those you have spoken to are say this then they wouldn't even bother to chase your berry pickers either.

 

The police do not investigate ALL alleged crimes Thats not what they claim when asked why the bother with likes of the berry pickers (they would never have time for anything else like rea l commited crime They don't or perhaps you don't keep abreat of current affairs). They need some evidence to begin an investigation and all the evidence available to us here seems to suggest a gift/donation upon request. As it stands at this time it would simply be a civil matter not a criminal one. The police have no jurisdiction over civil matters.

 

This sheds a little more light on the matter. BBC - h2g2 - Section 16(2)(a) of the 1968 Theft Act (England and Wales) - A203716

 

sandy12 Get some more evidence to support your claims if you can and they will then look into the matter. Rubbish it's not upto a member of the public to collect evidence, that the police's job. All they are telling you at this stage is it would really be a waste of yours and their time as it stands now because, as quite clearly pointed out, it is simply your word against his.

More rubbish. Most crimes only ever involve anyones word against another until they investigate the allegations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all.

 

Yes I have known plenty over the years thank you, both personally and socially. Your sarcastic attitude is no help whatsoever. If you can't take criticism of your comments then don't provide them on a public forum.

 

sandy12 needs to provide something to support her allegations. Nearly all crimes have some evidence present or presented on which to base the investigation.

 

In cases like this what would stop anybody making such allegations againsts anybody else? EVIDENCE. At the moment all that exists is a verbal and possibly written (electronic) agreement which is a legally binding contract. sandy12 needs to try and show that the money was lent and not given. The case would never get to court and that is not down to the police it is the CPS that make such decisions.

 

Have you ever thought that the problem may not lie at the feet of the police? After many years of spineless jellyfish descisions at the hands of the CPS many of them have also lost the will to carry on. They spend all their time gathering evidence and compiling court papers and files for either the CPS to pull out at the last minute or the case to be thrown out due to lack of evidence.

 

EVIDENCE is what makes a case not the allegation. Particularly with fraud and deception crimes the physical and electronic evidence is crucial as no forensic evidence exsists.

 

I am not saying that the crime hasn't been committed. I am just telling it as it is not as it should be. We live in the real world now not the how it was or how it should be world.

 

If you want to blame anyone blame the government. Believe it or not most Police Officers are probably more frustrated than the public. It is caused by the target and figure culture that the government ram down all our public sector necks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not at all.

 

Yes I have known plenty over the years thank you, both personally and socially. Your sarcastic attitude is no help whatsoever. If you can't take criticism of your comments then don't provide them on a public forum. Pot & Black come to mind

 

sandy12 needs to provide something to support her allegations. Nearly all crimes have some evidence present or presented on which to base the investigation. More nonsense the poster has made allegations & that IS enough for the police to act (ask Tony Blair)

In cases like this what would stop anybody making such allegations againsts anybody else? EVIDENCE. happens all the time At the moment all that exists is a verbal and possibly written (electronic) agreement which is a legally binding contract. sandy12 needs to try and show that the money was lent and not given. No they don't they have made their allegations & it's upto the police to investigate to see if there is evidence to support the persons allegationsThe case would never get to court and that is not down to the police it is the CPS that make such decisions. How does anyone know unless it's investigated.

 

Have you ever thought that the problem may not lie at the feet of the police? After many years of spineless jellyfish descisions at the hands of the CPS many of them have also lost the will to carry on. They spend all their time gathering evidence and compiling court papers and files for either the CPS to pull out at the last minute or the case to be thrown out due to lack of evidence. Lack of evidence! Who's fault is that then the CPS!

 

EVIDENCE is what makes a case not the allegation. Particularly with fraud and deception crimes the physical and electronic evidence is crucial as no forensic evidence exsists. But what starts a case IS the allegation

 

I am not saying that the crime hasn't been committed. I am just telling it as it is not as it should be. We live in the real world now not the how it was or how it should be world. This is the real world. Under the Police Act if an allegation is made then they ARE required to investigate. Something they in common with the banks would like the rest of us NOT to know

 

If you want to blame anyone blame the government. Believe it or not most Police Officers are probably more frustrated than the public. It is caused by the target and figure culture that the government ram down all our public sector necks.

You still haven't commented on the police officer who managed to arrest hundreds whilst his fellow officers didn't. As I said was it maybe because he could write faster or what or was it because he wanted to do his job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JonCris

 

You appears to be making judgemental sweeping statements with little knowledge. The little knowledge you do have seems to have been gleened from the press

 

Let me put you straight on a few things

 

I have had the pleasure in working with and knowing many 100s of police officers in the last 30 years. The overwhelming majority are honest, hardworking and brave individuals. You have highlighted a couple of stories in the press and as a result you have decided that all police officers are lazy etc etc.

 

I think the vast majority of people on this website will agree that we in this country have probably the best Police service in the world. The police in this country employ in excess of 200,000 officers and staff and of course amongst them will be some who do not deserve such praise but they are few and far between

 

Sandy12 has attended the police station to report the circumstances of her losing 4000.00. She has been given the correct information however unpalatable to you this may be the fact remains it is correct. To commit an offence under these circumstances there must be evidence of deception, and dishonesty and as a result the money was handed over. In Sandys case this hasnt happened. As far as I can see the man hasnt even asked for the money Sandy has offered it. If at a later stage this man decides he isnt going to pay it back dosnt mean he has committed an offence of deception. To make a statement like " If you borrow money for one thing and spend it on another means you commit an offence of obtaining a percuniary advantage by deception demonstatres what little grasp you have of the legilation.

 

Imagine you borrowed some money from a friend and a few weeks later the police kicked your door down and threw you in a cell because your friend thought you werent going to pay it back. You would be the first on here shouting about poor performance of the police, acting outside their powers.

 

To answer your question. If a police officer is arresting 4-5 people a day then someone else is doing the paperwork. If you read official home office figures they recently did a study on the time taken to process arrested persons and I believe it was in excess of 5 hours per person. Its nothing to do with how fast a police officer can write as the majority of time is spent inputtiong into a computer, arranging various assistance,ie. Doctors, interpretters, solicitors, responsible adults all of which I imagine the arresting officer has no control over.

 

Your opinion is as valid as the next persons but it doesnt give you, me, or any member the right to say what they like with impunity


7 actions in progress

 

amount refunded so far £6500

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully agree rogerebaker.

 

Without evidence of a crime it is a civil dispute which the police have no authority to be involved with. They are only obliged to investigate criminal allegations and without evidence to the contrary it is a civil dispute.

 

If sandy has offered to lend the man the money how has he committed a crime? By accepting it?! It is for sandy to show what terms the offer was made under.

 

JonCris on a final point I can quite happily take response and criticism to my postings. Unlike you I reply in a professional and constructive manner. I do not tag on sarcastic and obnoxious comments to your posts.:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, this is an appeal for peace - please keep everything neutral from now on, this bickering is not helping the OP. This includes little off-the-cuff endings to posts, marshyc, they're just as bad as being 'obnoxious'.

 

So what most people are saying is: the OP would have to provide evidence of terms of contract, otherwise it would be considered a gift, and would therefore be subject to a civil action in recovery, not a criminal one. If the OP can provide evidence that this was a loan - an email with the guy promising to pay her back when he could, something like that - then the police can get involved as it was obtaining money by deception. Correct?


-----

Click the scales if I've been useful! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry couldn't help it.:)

 

Yes that is how I see it.

 

It is just like other issues on here where people are advised to get a copy of the agreements as without them you cannot be held responsible or accountable for payment etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a matter of interest ... you said he needed £4000, and you happened to have £5000 in a bank account ... a conveniently similar amount. Did he know you had that £5000 before he told you he needed £4000? If so, they would tend to confirm he's a con-artist. If not, who else knew you had £5000 in the bank?

 

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...