Bike held hostage! Any trained negotiators here?

[Jefferson Meriwether]

Under a patio in Gloucester with a lot of others.

Hopefully they're not still there; there's a footpath there now.

 

[Crankarm]

Doubt he does enough to reach the VAT threshold C.... but you never know.

Indeedy deedy, but he is offering a service so still has to provide an invoice with rate and amount of VAT levied. He has to keep proper records if he is trading. It might be that the OP themselves want to re-claim the VAT (unlikely, but possible).

 

[Crankarm]

I think you've skipped a few posts. The suggestion was that the rightful owner takes it, in the repairmans absence, then calls the repairman to say they'll be round in a few minutes to collect it. Thus denies all knowledge of having taken it and likely prompting repairman to report it stolen to cover their back/try for an insurance claim (if it had been an unknown perpetrator taking it, who's to contradict him if he said it was secured at the time without blowing their own cover - he'd prevaricated enough on returning it before, why not claim to lock it up 'by accident' to do so again) whilst at the same time the owner is now in posession of a reported stolen bike.
The ins and outs of the repair saga are irellevant at this point, No they are not, the owner has forced a false crime report to occur as some sort of revenge/joke and if particularly unlucky will be seen and arrested by cops who don't know the back story and won't be impressed when they find out it was all a hoax.
happily its all hypothetical tho.

It is not possible to steal something that you own (criminal law) ie the OP reclaiming her bike which she holds legal title to.

In civil law there is the tort of conversion which the guy supposedly servicing it may well have made himself liable to simply by the length of time he had the bike for, way beyond what could be considered reasonable, apparently leaving it outside his premises to deteriorate.

Any unauthorized act that deprives an owner of personal property without his or her consent.
The wrongdoer converts the goods to his or her own use and excludes the owner from use and enjoyment of them. The English Common Law early recognized such an act as wrongful and, by the middle of the fifteenth century, allowed an action in Trover to compensate the aggrieved owner.
The earliest cases allowing a lawsuit for conversion were based on claims that the plaintiff had possession of certain items of Personal Property, then casually lost them, and the defendant had found them and had not returned them but instead "converted them to his own use." This phrase was picked up, and it gave a name to a tort that originally was a kind of Action on the Case, a form of Trespass. As time passed, the plea that the plaintiff had lost his or her goods and the defendant had found them came to be considered a legal fiction (that is, a decision was made in the case as if the plea were true, and it did not have to be proved). The defendant was not allowed to dispute the allegations but could answer only the claim that the plaintiff had a right to possession of the goods and the defendant had refused to restore them to the plaintiff.
Today the word conversion is still applied to the unlawful taking or use of someone else's property. The type of property that can be converted is determined by the original nature of the Cause of Action. It must be personal property, because real property cannot be lost and then found. It must be tangible, such as money, an animal, furniture, tools, or receipts. Crops or timber can be subject to conversion after they are severed from the ground. The rights in a paper—such as a life insurance policy, a stock certificate, or a promissory note—can be converted by one who appropriates the paper itself.
A thief, a trespasser, or a bailee may be guilty of conversion because the action may be maintained whether or not the property was lawfully acquired at the outset. For example, a dry cleaner who mistakenly delivers a suit to the wrong customer has converted it. Moving some-one's property without his or her permission might constitute a conversion if the inconvenience is substantial: for example, having some-one's car towed away in order to take the parking place. Unauthorized use is a conversion—such as a mechanic who, without permission, borrows a sports car that he or she is supposed to repair. Misuse of property can also be a conversion. If a neighbor lends his or her hedge trimmer to a friend, it is a conversion for the friend to use the hedge trimmer to cut down a tree

The OP had lawful reason to visit the premises of the repair guy and every expectation to recover her property. She may have committed a trespass following her knock at the door which was not answered by looking around the premises for her bike. However owing to the length of time the repair guy had had it for and lack of contact from him, she had good reason to look for it.

 

[Radchenister]

OK, I give in, any one want to go halves with me to pay the bill and end this thread ?!

 

[Sara_H]

OK, I give in, any one want to go halves with me to pay the bill and end this thread ?!

Any one who wishes to contribute sign up here and I will PM you my paypal details!

 

[Radchenister]

A little too eager for charity there; I'm out.

 

[Archie_tect]

Indeedy deedy, but he is offering a service so still has to provide an invoice with rate and amount of VAT levied. He has to keep proper records if he is trading. It might be that the OP themselves want to re-claim the VAT (unlikely, but possible).

Just to clarify, someone can't charge VAT, and isn't allowed to account or show VAT on a bill if they aren't VAT registered, ie if their turnover hasn't reached the VAT threshold in the immediate previous rolling 12 months [unless they have registered for VAT for some other reason] - that's why small businesses have the edge on larger ones when selling to end user who can't reclaim VAT.

If an unregistered business shows VAT on an invoice and prints a VAT registration number on their invoice, they are effectively getting the 20% extra fraudulently, as they certainly won't be sending it to HMRC!

Good point... Sara, if your bill includes VAT on it, or you are asked to pay VAT, check his VAT registration number! If he isn't, inform the VAT office and refuse to pay it.

 

[phil_hg_uk]

Indeedy deedy, but he is offering a service so still has to provide an invoice with rate and amount of VAT levied. He has to keep proper records if he is trading. It might be that the OP themselves want to re-claim the VAT (unlikely, but possible).

How can he show an amount of VAT on his invoice if he isnt vat registered

 

[Archie_tect]

He types the numbers on his invoice and keeps the money if anyone doesn't check his registration. How many times do people check?

 

[Sara_H]

I have to say, I've never had an invoice or a bill from him . It never occurred to me to expect one, he's just the bloke round the corner who does bike repairs!

 

[Crankarm]

How can he show an amount of VAT on his invoice if he isnt vat registered

Whether HE is registered for VAT is irrelevant. He is offering a service so has to levy VAT which his customer pays. If he does not keep proper accounts and account to Customs and Excise for any sum he may owe then he is committing a fraud on the Revenue as may well the OP who if she knows or ought to know that the work is cash in hand will be free of VAT and therefore a fraud on the Revenue. If this were the case then I think may be you would have little come back if there was a problem with the work he had done if he refused to sort it out to your satisfaction.

 

[threebikesmcginty]

Just pay the guy for what he's done and don't use him again - I probably wouldn't worry too much about you or he being hauled before the beak on VAT fraud charges.

 

[Andy_R]

Whether HE is registered for VAT is irrelevant. He is offering a service so has to levy VAT which his customer pays. If he does not keep proper accounts and account to Customs and Excise for any sum he may owe then he is committing a fraud on the Revenue as may well the OP who if she knows or ought to know that the work is cash in hand will be free of VAT and therefore a fraud on the Revenue. If this were the case then I think may be you would have little come back if there was a problem with the work he had done if he refused to sort it out to your satisfaction.

Sorry Crankers, but he doesn't have to register for VAT if he has a turnover of less than £77,000 p.a. and was running a business (have a look on the HMRC website for their definition of a business), and as Archie has previously stated, he would be comitting a criminal offence if he did levy VAT and was unregistered.

 

[phil_hg_uk]

Whether HE is registered for VAT is irrelevant. He is offering a service so has to levy VAT which his customer pays. If he does not keep proper accounts and account to Customs and Excise for any sum he may owe then he is committing a fraud on the Revenue as may well the OP who if she knows or ought to know that the work is cash in hand will be free of VAT and therefore a fraud on the Revenue. If this were the case then I think may be you would have little come back if there was a problem with the work he had done if he refused to sort it out to your satisfaction.

He only has to account for VAT on his invoices if he charges it in the first place, and he only needs to charge it if the is over the VAT threshold which I doubt he will be fixing push bikes.

 

[Pale Rider]

... a tumbleweed roles past the boundary of taste; on the horizon there's the faint figure of a man, a shadow barely visible through the dust storm of insomnia - it's the one they call 'Pale Rider' .

Nicely put, I don't agree, but I like the prose.