Police arrest customer to allow Buy As You View to seize goods

[steved271]

I have read this with great interest, How lucky am i that i live in a high rise flat with key pad access that they wouldnt allow me to be one of their customers....

 

Keep up the good work lefty and i hope that u help OP to a satisfactory conclusion....

[Hacked_Off]

sub

[Lefty]

This thread has now been here for one month. During that time it has had 4,224 views from unique IP addresses (that's 4,224 different people). It has remained at the top of the leaderboard on the Rent to Own and Hire Purchase stores forum. It now runs into 6 pages. It has had over 100 replies.

 

There has been just ONE contribution from a senior director at Buy As You View, who lists his corporate responsibilities as:

 

Assist in compliance to the company's legal and regulative obligations in all trading and operating activities

 

Organise and implement customer relationship/retention improvement programmes including:

Customer research programmes

Community support events within trading areas

Effective customer touchpoints including; welcome packs, anniversary cards

Customer statements

Effective retention offerings to existing customers

 

Develop Customer Value Management process for optimum profitability

 

Oversee all external communications including assisting in the management of

External communications and systems

PR initiatives

External partners and Agencies

 

Ensure the company is positively surveyed in the media, proactively building strong relationships with the press and reacting constructively to negative coverage

 

 

All I can say is, you're doing a GREAT job!

 

Lefty

[unclebulgaria67]

Something smells about the behaviour of the Police. With all the Police cuts, why are three officers sent around for what is a private dispute, with no court order, no previous issues of public disorder at the address.

 

Normally I am very pro Police and have generally good experience of the rare occasions I have had dealings with them. But since the recent allegations of Police officers taking money from newspapers, which even some officers have admitted is endemic, I have started to question what motivates their actions in certain situations. I will leave it at that. It is not unknown for ex Police officers to take up careers in the security and debt recovery world.

 

The OP should make sure that a formal complaint to the IPCC is made and they should also make their local MP aware of what happened.

[theghost]

Something smells about the behaviour of the Police. With all the Police cuts, why are three officers sent around for what is a private dispute, with no court order, no previous issues of public disorder at the address.

 

Normally I am very pro Police and have generally good experience of the rare occasions I have had dealings with them. But since the recent allegations of Police officers taking money from newspapers, which even some officers have admitted is endemic, I have started to question what motivates their actions in certain situations. I will leave it at that. It is not unknown for ex Police officers to take up careers in the security and debt recovery world.

 

The OP should make sure that a formal complaint to the IPCC is made and they should also make their local MP aware of what happened.

 

The Police will help many organisations, if they ask for it. Therefore if the company informed the Police they are going to someones house to reposses property and it MAY kick off, then the Police can attend to prevent breach of the peace. Their sole job shoudl be to sort out anyone who commits a criminal offence and not get involved in civil disputes (which is what the repossesion is).

 

Its a bit early to be alleging outright corruption of a copper - and any copper would have to be stupid or desperate to put themselves into a position where corruption would be so easily traceable back to them.

 

So there is nothing, in theory, wrong with the company taking the Police to the persons home - what clearly has gone wrong is if the Police has assisted the company in doing something that is not within the law.

[unclebulgaria67]

theghost

 

I was not alleging anything. Simply pointing out something is a bit odd, if they send three Police officers when they are facing 14% + plus cuts to their budgets. The Police force involved should look into the OP's case and I would say more widely. If they send out three Police officers to every situation where Bayview or similar companies want to take back items, then I would say that was not a good use of resources. They should check whether there is a court order or any history of disorder at the address, before they send any officers to an address. If there is no court order or any issues for them to worry about, then they should not be dispatching any officers.

 

I only mention the recent Newspaper/Police relationship allegations, as before this was all revealed, most people would not have questioned the Met Police. If a cosy relationship between Police and private companies has brought about standard practice of attending an address for respossession of goods without a court order, then I am not sure that is in the public interest.

[raydetinu]

The OP did make a complaint to the police and wonder what has happened with that!

have they responded at all and where is the investigation at; OP should chase, not right at all!

[theghost]

I suppose it all depends on what the Police know about situations such as this - if there is a high chance of someone kicking off they will probably attend because it is better to go before it all kicks off.

 

With regards to resources, it is never a case of you only deal with serious crime first and only (that would be silly anyway as you would have lots of minor crime not being dealt with).

 

Resources have to be used as and when they are available on the day. I am sure BAYV would have had to have taken a copper when a copper was available, not the other way around.

 

I know of a situation where a public authority (a few years abck in the boom period!) needed Police assistance with a job and they had to beg the Police to attend but the Police wouldnt commit resources without the public authority paying for it (we are talking 10 officers or so). On other occasions they would send 1 or 2 coppers if the authority was willing to go on a date and time to suit them.

 

Resource issues are something of a black art, i daresay. A copper might be better palced to answer.

[watchinginvestigation2011]

What happened to innocent until proven guilty, how can it be said, the situation is likely to kick off, if that customer or householder has never done so........Unfair.

 

What did they say to the police to warrant three officers turning up, would be interesting to know?

[theghost]

Well lets say you owed someone £500 and hadnt paid for 6 months.

 

You thought they were quite aggresive and likely to beat the crap out of you. However they didnt have any previous for it. They said they were coming around at 8pm tonight.

 

So do you think the Police would be entitled to not come and out possibly protect you because the person had no official criminal record of assault - even though you thought there was a real chance they might 'do you' because you thought they were an aggresive person?

 

I am going to speculate and guess that at a lot of repossesions things do get heated. The Police being there isn't an assumption of guilt on the householder - even though it may seem that way.

[Lefty]

I am going to speculate and guess that at a lot of repossesions things do get heated. The Police being there isn't an assumption of guilt on the householder - even though it may seem that way.

 

That is without doubt. I'm sure many repossessions get very heated.

 

BUT

 

THIS WAS NOT A REPOSSESSION. There had been no default notice. There had been no court hearing, and the BAYV employee had no court order. (Even if he HAD, it would STILL have not given him the right to enter the property without the customer's consent. (A court return order orders the customer to RETURN THE GOODS or to MAKE THEM AVAILABLE FOR COLLECTION. It does NOT give automatic right of entry to the owner of the goods.)

 

At this point we can only speculate as to the events that led to the "arrest" of the customer. The OP has told us the police had said "his voice was raised" and had decided to act and prevent a possible breach of the peace.

 

Most probably, up until this point, the police had acted correctly.

 

However, to then permit a member of the public (and that is all the Buy As You View employee was - just a member of the public) to unlawfully enter the property and remove goods is where things went very, very wrong. The Buy As You View employee had no court order, no court implied rights, no authority. Nothing. Why did the police allow this to happen?

 

And let's not forget, the Buy As You View employee had left a handwritten note earlier WARNING that if the goods weren't returned, or payment wasn't made that day (in cash) then the police would come. The note didn't say "the goods will be repossessed". The note implied that the situation would then become a police matter. It will take a flippin lot of convincing to make me see it any other way.

 

Lefty

 

 

 

 

I

[theghost]

I am guessing most of the problems are stemming from the Polices ignorance of the civil issues and the ins and outs of what the BAYV people coul do.

 

Is it ever possible for the BAYV person to enter the house? (i.e get a warrant) - shoudl the Polcie have checked all this? Or should they have just allowed the BAYV to commit possible criminal offences and then have to deal with the later (i.e as they might have to now).

 

I dunno.

 

I guess if the Police were going JUST to prevent a BOTP and the OP kicked off then they were right to arrest him. Whether they shoudl have known to stop the BAYV person entering is another matter - I guess they probably followed the BAYV perons lead because they had all the paperwork and probably implied they coudl do what they were going to do.

 

The BAYV person will prob be in the **** for enterting a house without permission and implying it might ebcome a criminal matter as per your attached picture.

[locutus]

The paperwork they'd need would be a court order. Even then they'd have no right to enter the property.

 

So, in summery regarding the police,either by accident or by being misled by the BAYV, they have acted wrongly. Ignorance of the law is no defense for breaking it!

[unclebulgaria67]

theghost.

 

I cannot really believe that you think the Police do not understand civil matters. Of course they do. The probably deal with similar situations on a weekly if not daily basis.

 

I understand that you are giving them the benefit of the doubt, but three Police Officers turning up for a civil matter where no court order is held, they arrest the houseowner, allow strangers into their house and then they act like nothing wrong has been done, is bizarrre.

 

That is why I have questioned there actions in the way I have done above. Perhaps there is more to the story ?

Edited July 17, 2011 by unclebulgaria67

[ajax95]

In the meantime, is there any more news?

[Lefty]

As regards to the recent discussions on this thread (all good points, and very well made) I would just remind you that OP told me on the telephone he was to attend an meeting at the police station last friday. As he still has no access to the internet I will give him a call tomorrow (Monday) to see how it went. I will relay it back here if the OP is happy for me to do so.

 

Also, don't forget that Buy As You View are now into week three of their "thorough investigation" regarding this case. The last I heard from them was that they were waiting on a statement from the police. I have been given a few "snippets" of feedback from Buy As You View from their employee's point of view, but rather than to simply rely on hearsay, I think it is in everyone's best interest to wait for an official statement.

 

But this whole thing really needs to come to a conclusion very soon.

 

Lefty

[MamaMoo]

theghost.

 

I cannot really believe that you think the Police do not understand civil matters. Of course they do. The probably deal with similar situations on a weekly if not daily basis.

 

I understand that you are giving them the benefit of the doubt, but three Police Officers turning up for a civil matter where no court order is held, they arrest the houseowner, allow strangers into their house and then they act like nothing wrong has been done, is bizarrre.

 

That is why I have questioned there actions in the way I have done above. Perhaps there is more to the story ?

 

If you see my earlier post, you'll see that the police are fairly clueless with regards to civil matters of repossession, after an officer tried to get me to allow a member of staff from Perfect Homes into my house with no court order etc.

Said officer then told me that said PH employee could break into my house when I was out, take items othe than my HP item (the officer said they could take my son's cot and pram) and not be breaking any laws

[theghost]

Whilst the Police may (in general) have a handle on civil matters I very much doubt they are well versed in things like the Consumer Credit Act and what can be done with a court order etc. I imagine generally they will not wnat to get involved in civil matters, therefore they will back off until they see something criminal - such as a householder kicking off - whether they should have prevented the BAYV person entering the house is a slightly different question.

 

When assisting a company they should really know what they are doing - but by the same token they are only there to enforce the criminal law - perhaps the BAYV staff misled them as to what rights he had - therefore the Police allowed him to do what he did.

[dx100uk]

what puzzles me is this previous letter that says they have arranged the police, prob knows them from the golf course!

 

something smells here

 

dx

[unclebulgaria67]

what puzzles me is this previous letter that says they have arranged the police, prob knows them from the golf course!

 

something smells here

 

dx

 

Companies can book the Police. I am not sure that the Police would be happy with that being put in letters.

[locutus]

I think comments on CAG are the least of the polices "reputation" problems at the moment .

 

 

Still, you cannot book the police to guard the house whilst you're taking someone's possesions without the legal documentation.

[raydetinu]

so what; I think they are accused of a lot more than that when they accept money off NOTW etc.

I am afraid the Police, jouranalists and Politicians respect and reputation are all in absolute tatters now, and the public will be suspicious of anything and rightly so.

[Lefty]

Just a quick update for all who are watching this thread:

 

Things are moving along behind the scenes.

 

Lefty

[raydetinu]

Very Slowly!

[brassnecked]

a snail would be quicker...