'heft: this is. That law says
Page 47
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
EFT is by far the most immon offence with which the Drld of commercial motoring ust deal. So if you suffer from Baling, you need to know at set the basic legal rules. Here ey are.
"A person is guilty of theft," vs Section 1 of the Theft Act, 168, "if he dishonestly propriates property belonging another with the intention of wmanently depriving the other it". So there are three
Dments in theft: 1, there must be dishonesty; 2, someone else's property must be appropriated; and
3, there must be an intention permanently to deprive.
"It is immaterial" the section continues, "whether the appropriation is made with a view to gain, or is made for the thief's own benefit." So whether the thief intends to use the goods for his own pleasure and amusement or to sell them has no effect on his criminal status.
What, then, amounts to "dishonesty"? It is not dishonest to take goods if you genuinely believe them to be yours. The fact that you are entirely misguided is irrelevant. If, for instance, your mechanic honestly believes that he is entitled to take old tools as a perk of his job, then he may have earned himself the sack. But he is not a criminal.
Again: The taker is not dishonest if he genuinely believes that permission would be granted if it were sought.
Section 2 puts the rules like this: "A person's appropriation of property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it, on behalf of himself or of a third party; or if he appropriates the property in the belief that he would have the other's consent, if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstances of it" is "not to be regarded as dishonest".
An employee has no right to take spare parts, tools, stamps, accessories or any other goods belonging to his employer. But if . he does help himself and genuinely believes that he was entitled to do so, then he will have a good defence to a dishonesty charge.
Your neighbour borrows your van, car, typewriter or teamaking machine? You are furious when you discover its absence and you report the loss to the police? When they discover the whereabouts of your property, your neighbour says: "I borrowed it before .. . it never occurred to me that there would be any objection . . "He will be able to shelter behind the act. He has a good statutory defence.
Next: "Appropriation".
"Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner," says Section 3 of the Act, "amounts to an appropriation. This includes, where he has come by the property (innocently or not) without stealing it, a later assumption of a right to keep it by keeping or dealing with it as owner."
The "appropriation" is complete the moment that the goods are taken from their rightful place with the necessary criminal intent. And that is why you do not have to wait until the suspect leaves your premises before you pounce. Indeed, if you wait too long, the goods will have disappeared — perhaps in the briefcase or handbag or more likely the boot of a car.
Still, it is as well to wait if you reasonably can so as to leave the taker with as few excuses as possible.
Finally: The "intention permanently to deprive".
By definition, a person who borrows has no intention to keep the goods permanently. So in general, he is not guilty of any crime.
So those who borrowed motor vehicles might be charged with joy riding or even with stealing petrol — that is, unless they refilled the tank before dumping the vehicle. But to stop this sort of unneighbourly borrowing, the offence of "taking and driving away a motor vehicle without the owner's consent" was duly invented.
Maximum penalty for theft: Ten years' imprisonment.