I have rearranged the quotes with our names against them as this were missing, in order to make it clearer.
…
At what point does the matter change from civil to criminal? From contract to provides goods or a service, to theft? This is quite important as I think you will find the insurance company will be looking into the detail of this being theft or not. They stand to loose £15k+ so quite important. Police will only investigate crime. They don't do civil matters.
Re-read your post (was on a long lunch yesterday with some good wine)and that point you made is correct when and where did it change from civil to theft I would suggest if there was contact with the lowlife scum after they picked the vehicle up and took it to England then the theft was there. The insurance company would not be interested in a theft report and cctv from Scottish Police due to the fact that it would be irrelevant as they know who stole the vehicle and where it went.
In the first instance the OP talked to the “garage” about repairing his car. This we assume includes a discussion on what was wrong, the likely cause, and what they could offer to help him, and the price. The result being: collection, repair, supply of parts and delivery back to him for an agreed price which had to be paid up front.
At no point in the above paragraph have I mentioned or hinted the “garage” are doing anything other than what I wrote.
The OP agrees to the above. Vehicle is collected. Photo’s are supplied of his vehicle (or another) being repaired. At some point after this the “garage” stops entering into communication with the OP. The OP struggles to contact them. The OP panics, searches the web and he realises this may have been a scam.
As you are struggling with this I will give you another eggsample which I hope will make things more clear.
A thief is looking to pinch a car. He has stolen them before and lives off the proceeds. He’s eyeing up a target vehicle at the local main dealer. He has to work out how to pinch said vehicle, be it with a key he takes from them or tow it away. It won’t tow so he knows he will have to pick it up with a hiab. The place is locked up at night with camera’s and security watching. It would be too obvious to pop round with a recovery truck in the day time and pick it up. He doesn’t know where the key is so he can’t drive it away.
While pondering the above his phone rings. The caller tells him his car needs repaired. It’s a 4x4 based in Scotland with what he believes to be a broken engine. They discuss this for a bit. The thief then see’s his opportunity to take advantage of the caller. He offers to collect, repair and return back to him his car for a fixed price of many thousands of English pounds. The caller agrees to this. The phone calls ends with them agreeing the collection will take place in a few days and the money will be paid up front. IT IS AT THIS POINT THE DEAL CHANGES FROM CIVIL TO THEFT BY DECEPTION (ORGANISED CRIME). The call terminates and the thief shouts across the office “Ere that 4x4 at the local dealer… ferget about it. Another fool has just been on the phone and has agreed we can collect his 4x4 and loads of money if we repair it. Bring yer passport to work tomorrow… yer got work to do”. The thief then calls one of his own customers who recently asked about buying an engine from him. The thief tells said customer he has just got wind of a suitable engine and will be able to sell it to him in a few days. He’s also got a set of low mileage alloys due in soon if he’s interested.
If the above hasn’t made this obvious enough then the following might.
The OP believed he was entering into a civil contract for collection, repair and return of his car. The thief knew this and agreed to do it but also knew he had no intension to collect, repair and return said car. His real intention was to collect the car under the disguise of a civil contract to repair said car, but keep said car for himself. He would then take out the engine and sells it to one of his own customers. He then disposes of the rest of the vehicle and keeps the “loads of money” paid by the OP for what the OP thought was payment to repair his car.
Do you seriously not understand what’s happened to the OP? A disco 4 was taken by deception from Scotland under the promise of repair and has disappeared. The “garage” is well dodgy and known to have “stolen” other peoples cars in the past by pretending to take them away to be repaired and not giving them back. Are you still having problems with this as a concept?
The change from civil to criminal is important as it means the police will go from not interested to interested if it becomes a criminal matter. Providing evidence he was tricked into having his car “stolen” under the promise of it being repaired, is key to weather is was stolen by “deception” or not. One would suggest from what we know, this is what has happened.
I should at this point say the “garage” who may well be reading this are welcome to join LZ and put forward their side of the story. Tis only fair we allow them to defend the allegations put against them. It could well have been a simple misunderstanding like the OP wasn’t at home when they delivered the car back to Scotland so they left it with a neighbour. The neighbour hasn’t cut his grass for 15 years so didn’t know the car was there.
It is NOT an arrestable o’fence to steal a car by deception or other method. It is an investigable o’fence which may lead to an arrest if evidence suggests a crime has been committed and the perpetrator thought to have been identified.
I put it to you that the “garage” had every intention to collect the vehicle and not give it back. It was their intended plan all along and they took advantage of the OP not realising until it was too late.
Re-read your post (was on a long lunch yesterday with some good wine)and that point you made is correct when and where did it change from civil to theft I would suggest if there was contact with the lowlife scum after they picked the vehicle up and took it to England then the theft was there. The insurance company would not be interested in a theft report and cctv from Scottish Police due to the fact that it would be irrelevant as they know who stole the vehicle and where it went.
To be more specific on the above quote:
The theft took place when they took possession of the vehicle in Scotland. We believe it was always their intention to take the vehicle and not give it back. The theft occurred at the point of collection because it was their intention to nick it all along. It was stolen by deception.
ANPR will provide evidence where the merc reg plate was snapped that day. Hopefully the disco still had it’s plate fitted anorl and will also have been snapped. This is vital information to prove where it went that day because WE DON’T KNOW. Proof it was collected by the merc which is connected to the business the OP was dealing with when agreeing with them to get his car repaired. Proof they took it will be needed. Do you really think the insurance will hand over £15k+ without proof it’s been stolen by deception?
