Advice needed - Bike seized

[jefmcg]

This seems just nonsense.

I don't see how having the serial number proves anything, if the bike is in your possession. All it proves is that at some point you have turned it over. Of course, if the robbed parties had the serial number of your bike, that would prove something. Which obviously they don't.

I wonder if they were ever robbed. The idea of denting a bike to prove it is yours in the event of a robbery, but not noting its serial number seems unlikely. I wonder if you are the victim of an poorly thought through scam?

 

[classic33]

This seems just nonsense.

I don't see how having the serial number proves anything, if the bike is in your possession. All it proves is that at some point you have turned it over. Of course, if the robbed parties had the serial number of your bike, that would prove something. Which obviously they don't.

I wonder if they were ever robbed. The idea of denting a bike to prove it is yours in the event of a robbery, but not noting its serial number seems unlikely. I wonder if you are the victim of an poorly thought through scam?

The OP didn't have the frame/serial number, at the time, either. Seems odd that three separate stations are involved in this though.

 

[matiz]

So if I'm out for the day on the bike 50miles from home and pass someone who has had the same make of bike stolen they can grab me call the police and dibble march off with my bike with no proof of wrong doing leaving me stranded, something strange is going on.

 

[classic33]

Seems as though it happened at a railway station, BTP involved. Who then passed the matter onto the local police.
If the BTP were involved, I'd be contacting them as soon as possible, via e-mail and telephone(reading from the e-mail).

 

[swee'pea99]

I dont know the ins and outs of this particular case, but seizing a bike solely for being the same make and model as one stolen 5 months ago is hard to justify as reasonable

Absolutely. Bizarre. You had your property taken away from you because somebody else, with absolutely no proof whatsoever, said it was theirs? What in God's name is the legal basis for that?

 

[classic33]

I think someone would be getting their arse kicked at the end of this.

If not, they should be!


At present the OP posts appear to be under moderation, new poster, which might explain why he doesn't answer a question for some time. Worth bearing in mind.

Mod edit: he should be out of moderation now, I think. Spinney

 

[Gez73]

I checked my phone last night and I have several photos from the time I bought my bike but not really useful if the claimant is saying theirs was stolen before the dates of the photos. I would probably have refused to hand it over myself but then I have a lengthy commute and would not want to be without my bike anyway. Sounds very odd procedure and a little unreasonable on the OP. Will wait with interest for the outcome. Gez

 

[Pale Rider]

I think the OP has been badly done to, but I wonder if the bike was seized to enable the coppers to diffuse a potentially difficult situation.

There were three blokes, who presumably would have been angry if the OP was allowed to ride off into the sunset.

At that point, there may have been only one or two policemen - not good odds, even with a uniform.

Even so, it might have been fairer if the coppers followed the OP home to check the proof, or made some attempt to establish his identity/address at the roadside.

That might not be simple, few of us carry such documents when cycling, although the thread was originally posted in commuting, so a call to the OP's workplace may have moved matters forward.

Nonetheless, it is tempting to complain about the police's conduct.

I have some limited experience of that from both sides.

Seems to me complaints are taken seriously.

No one will get the sack here, but I doubt the OP wants that.

What may happen is the officers concerned receive appropriate advice from a senior officer which they would do well not to ignore.

 

[mjr]

Of course, if the robbed parties had the serial number of your bike, that would prove something.

It'd prove they'd looked under the BB while the bike was stopped/parked?

 

[Brandane]

I can't understand this.

Were you arrested and cautioned? I can't see how the police would have the power to just take your bike from you without doing that. And if it was an online purchase there will be a record on both yours and the sellers PC.

Looking at this from the Police POV, they are as usual in a no-win situation.
They have 3 people telling them the bike is possibly stolen, and another person claiming to be the rightful owner. The Police have the power to seize property which they have reasonable cause to believe is stolen. What are they supposed to do?
Consider the scenario, which is not unlikely, that the bike IS actually stolen, but they let the rider go off with the bike because they cannot prove the case there and then. How would you feel if you were the rightful owner of the bike and the Police had just let the thief disappear with your bike, and the evidence?
The Police have done the right thing here IMO by taking possession. At least everyone knows where the bike is until the situation is resolved, which is the whole point of them taking it. The OP may be inconvenienced for a few days but such is life. Better that than the 3 amigos confronting him again and forcibly taking the bike from him; at least now they might be placated by the fact that the bike is proven to be NOT the one they had stolen.

 

[Drago]

On the evidence presented I wouldn't have seize it. Simply being on the same make and model of bike sold by a huge national retailer 5 months after a similar one stolen falls short of reasonable... unless the original crime report included information relating to unique features of the stolen machine such as serial numbers, damage, accessories.

You wouldn't expect to have your Barbour jacket, Casio watch or even Ford Focus seized 5 months after a similar item was stolen, and why should a Carrera XYZ be any different?

Without some degree of corroboration such as a unique identifying feature there's no evidence. Simply being on a bike of same make and model is not a reasonable suspicion.

 

[Brandane]

On the evidence presented I wouldn't have seize it. Simply being on the same make and model of bike sold by a huge national retailer 5 months after a similar one stolen falls short of reasonable... unless the original crime report included information relating to unique features of the stolen machine such as serial numbers, damage, accessories.

You wouldn't expect to have your Barbour jacket, Casio watch or even Ford Focus seized 5 months after a similar item was stolen, and why should a Carrera XYZ be any different?

Without some degree of corroboration such as a unique identifying feature there's no evidence. Simply being on a bike of same make and model is not a reasonable suspicion.

You've got 3 witnesses all claiming that the bike has a unique identifying feature (the bent bars, although I don't believe for one second that anyone would deliberately bend their bars so that they could identify it if it was stolen in the future). I think you would be in a bit of bother if you didn't take possession of the bike and it later transpired that it WAS stolen. I would have taken the bike until further enquiries were made.

 

[jefmcg]

It'd prove they'd looked under the BB while the bike was stopped/parked?

I assumed the bike had been previously reported stolen.

If it hadn't, there is no possible justification for this action. You can't expect to police to step in to reclaim your property if you never reported the theft.

 

[Drago]

The power of seizure is one of reasonable belief, not of suspicion.

You'd be in equal bother is you usurped an innocent persons rights by unlawfully seizing property. Seizing items "just to on the safe side" will get you prosecuted.

The OP hasn't gone into great depth, but I can't see why details of the original crime report weren't establish (minutes at most, seconds at best if the local Force use the same command and control system as BTP). If the bent bars are corroborated in some way on the original crime report (a photo is the obvious means) then you're laughing. If it isn't, you're grounds for reasonable belief are evaporating. 3 guys in the street you never met pointing at a bike you've never seen and shouting about a 5 month old theft of which you've never heard is undoubtedly an emotional moment, but of itself is not evidential. The evidence gathered during investigation is on the crime report, and no power exists to allow an officer to seize property on a speculative basis to see if it might turn out to be stolen. You got grounds to believe at that moment in time, or you don't.

"That's my Ford Focus officer, mine had bald front tyres too!" Did it, cos if it ain't written down, it may as well never have happened.

BTW, I got A level English language. I don't need capital letters to emphasise words. I can read and comprehend without them.

 

[JMAG]

I do have sympathy for the police in this situation, but the premise that people can claim property as theirs without proper proof is not on particularly when you are talking about mass produced items.

In the same way, someone who has had a Rolex stolen can not go around stopping everyone wearing the same model Rolex and claim it as theirs without proof of ownership including serial number. Unless the police have sufficient grounds, they should not be removing property especially when it is being used for work/getting to work.

I accept that Police do have to think on their feet and they may have felt seizing the bike would diffuse a conflictive situation in this occasion, but not by trampling all over someone's right to ride their own bike down the road. If the bike had been stolen in the vicinty 5 minutes earlier by someone matching the OP's description or if the OP had previous for burglary or handling stolen property, then there would be more grounds for action.

Anyway, I would recommend www.immobilise.com to register anything of value with a serial number or even without serials as you can use identifying features.