Stolen Bicycle Now Found

[Spymaster]

ok Spymaster would you maybe, if it's not too much bother, take a little time out, to consider the ethics and possible consequencies of not informing your insurer about a returned bycycle. I have tried to raise the matter with your esteemed colleague, but you know....., anyway, I'll leave it with you.

I reckon if the whole board hadn't jumped down my partner's throat as quickly as they did, a couple of genuine, well judged posts, would have got him to re-evaluate the situation and tell the pigs and insco what had happened.

As it happened, the young man was backed into a corner that he found difficult to exit.

 

[Pickman's model]

I reckon if the whole board hadn't jumped down my partner's throat as quickly as they did, a couple of genuine, well judged posts, would have got him to re-evaluate the situation and tell the pigs and insco what had happened.

As it happened, the young man was backed into a corner that he found difficult to exit.

he painted himself into that corner.

 

[DaveCinzano]

My Name Is Dave Cinzano, And I Approve These Tags

 

[friedaweed]

I'm on Diamond 's side now too.

So bezzy mate you know this bike you've got going spare....

 

[machine cat]

pls can i have the crime ref. no.

Any advance on this Diamond ?

 

[Spymaster]

Any advance on this Diamond ?

I'm advising against that.

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm advising against that.

i am sure Diamond's already taken legal advice prior to offering the number out.

 

[Spymaster]

he painted himself into that corner.

He did, but not that difficult to do when half the boards are baying for blood.

Frustration, anger, and fear, can be positive AND negative.

 

[Pickman's model]

He did, but not that difficult to do when half the boards are baying for blood.

Frustration, anger, and fear, can be positive AND negative.

only half? note to self: must try harder.

 

[Diamond]

Anyways - can I just sign off from this one by, perhaps counter-intuitively, saying how much I respect all of your opinions (although that doesn't seem to come out usually in the wash!) and that, even in totally ignoring them, I am grateful for them.

 

[Pickman's model]

Anyways - can I just sign off from this one by, perhaps counter-intuitively, saying how much I respect all of your opinions (although that doesn't seem to come out usually in the wash!) and that, even in totally ignoring them, I am grateful for them.

running away with your tail between your legs, i see.

 

[The Boy]

Anyways - can I just sign off from this one by, perhaps counter-intuitively, saying how much I respect all of your opinions (although that doesn't seem to come out usually in the wash!) and that, even in totally ignoring them, I am grateful for them.

You can, yes. Whether you may or not is a different question.

 

[Geri]

... And of course Geri is a claims adjuster. I'm sure she'll back me on this too.

Yes (although I adjust liability claims).

As you say it is one of the basic insurance principles.

 

[machine cat]

Anyways - can I just sign off from this one by, perhaps counter-intuitively, saying how much I respect all of your opinions (although that doesn't seem to come out usually in the wash!) and that, even in totally ignoring them, I am grateful for them.

Thanks for the lulz m8

 

[Spymaster]

running away with your tail between your legs, i see.

A perfectly reasonable, tactical withdrawal.

 

[kabbes]

A perfectly reasonable, tactical withdrawal.

But he never told us the name of his incompetent insurers.

 

[Athos]

Where does the actus reus and mens rea combine "at the same time" to constitute a criminal offence?

For s.3 Fraud Act 2006, they coincide at the point someone dishonestly fails to disclose information in respect of which there is a legal duty of disclosure (which duty may have arisen as a result of a contract of insurance), with the intention of making a gain e.g. keeping recovered property notwithstanding that ownership of which has passed to the insurer.

 

[Cid]

Anyways - can I just sign off from this one by, perhaps counter-intuitively, saying how much I respect all of your opinions (although that doesn't seem to come out usually in the wash!) and that, even in totally ignoring them, I am grateful for them.

Much as I usually disagree with you I think I'd be highly unlikely to report a recovered bike to my insurance company.

n.b. I do not endorse, promote or in any way condone insurance fraud and would, in reality, obviously report any recovery of items claimed for. I would suggest that all people do the same and humbly state that this post is mere insincerity and bluff.

 

[MAD-T-REX]

Why do you do this to yourself Diamond ?

I honestly think he needs help. A narcissist will take negative narcissistic supply if he can't have anything positive because that at least provides fuel for the fire. There could be something else at work here, but there is no healthy explanation for why someone would want (knowingly or not) to provoke so much criticism.

 

[Athos]

For anyone interested in the relevant law, the CPS website is useful in what it says about Fraud Act 2006.

...
Fraud by failing to disclose information (Section 3)

The defendant:

• failed to disclose information to another person
• when he was under a legal duty to disclose that information
• dishonestly intending, by that failure, to make a gain or cause a loss.

Like Section 2 (and Section 4) this offence is entirely offender focussed. It is complete as soon as the Defendant fails to disclose information provided he was under a legal duty to do so, and that it was done with the necessary dishonest intent. It differs from the deception offences in that it is immaterial whether or not any one is deceived or any property actually gained or lost.


Drafting the charge

The focus will be on:

• the prosecution assertion that there was a legal duty to disclose information;
• the precise relationship that gave rise to that duty;
• the information that it is alleged that the defendant failed to disclose;

Whether the facts as alleged are capable of giving rise to a legal duty will be a matter for the judge; whether on the facts alleged, the relationship giving rise to that duty existed will be a matter for the jury. For example, was there a solicitor/client relationship or an agent/ principal relationship?


It will be necessary to recite all three elements in the particulars of the charge or indictment which must be very precisely drawn.


Any gain or loss that occurred should not appear in the charge or on the indictment. The matter will, however, be relevant to sentence, compensation and confiscation.
...

The Elements of the Offences

...
Dishonestly

The definition in R v Ghosh [1982] 1QB 1053 applies:

• was what was done dishonest by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people?
• must the defendant have realised that what he/she was doing was, by those standards, dishonest?

The question of dishonesty' is one for the jury and submissions of no case to answer should not be acceded to based only on the issue of dishonesty.


Gain or loss

"Gain "and "loss" are defined in section 5 of the Act. The definition is essentially the same as in Section 34 of the Theft Act.

Gain and loss extends only to gain and loss in money or other property (Section 5 (2) (a)), whether temporary or permanent (Section 5 (2) (b)) and means any property whether real or personal including things in action and other intangible property (Section 5 (2) (b)).

"Gain" includes a gain by keeping what one has, as well as a gain by getting what one does not have (Section 5 (3)).

"Loss" includes a loss by not getting what one might get as well as a loss by parting with what one has (Section 5 (4)).

The Defendant must intend to make the gain or cause the loss by means of the false representation.

The breadth of conduct to which Section 2 applies is much wider than the old Theft Act deception offences because no gain or loss need actually be made. It is the Defendant's ultimate intention that matters. If the Defendant gets information by making a false representation, intending ultimately to make a gain or cause a loss within the meaning of Section 5 by doing so, he will have committed a Section 2 offence.


Failure to disclose information

There is no requirement that the failure to disclose must relate to "material" or "relevant "information, nor is there any de minimis provision. If a Defendant disclosed 90% of what he was under a legal duty to disclose but failed to disclose the (possibly unimportant) remaining 10%, the actus reus of the offence could be complete. Under such circumstances the Defendant would have to rely on the absence of dishonesty. Such cases can be prosecuted under the Act if the public interest requires it, though such cases will be unusual.

It is no defence that the Defendant was ignorant of the existence of the duty, neither is it a defence in itself to claim inadvertence or incompetence. In that respect, the offence is one of strict liability. The defence must rely on an absence of dishonesty and the burden, of course, lies with the prosecutor.

Prosecutors must be acutely aware of the public interest in such cases, bear in mind the relative standing of the parties and pay particular regard to any explanation for the failure given by the Defendant.

A legal duty to disclose information can arise as a result of a contract between two parties or because of the existence of a particular type of professional relationship between them; for example, a solicitor/client relationship. In its report on fraud (No. 276 Cm 5560 2002) the Law Commission made the following comments about the circumstances in which a legal duty might arise:

7.28 ... Such a duty may derive from statute (such as the provisions governing company prospectuses), from the fact that the transaction in question is one of the utmost good faith (such as a contract of insurance), from the express or implied terms of a contract, from the custom of a particular trade or market, or from the existence of a fiduciary relationship between the parties (such as that of agent and principal).

7.29 For this purpose there is a legal duty to disclose information not only if the defendant's failure to disclose it gives the victim a cause of action for damages, but also if the law gives the victim a right to set aside any change in his or her legal position to which he or she may consent as a result of the non- disclosure. For example, a person in a fiduciary position has a duty to disclose material information when entering into a contract with his or her beneficiary, in the sense that a failure to make such disclosure will entitle the beneficiary to rescind the contract and to reclaim any property transferred under it.


Establishing a legal duty

There are three considerations:

• Whether the facts as alleged are capable of creating a legal duty is a matter for the judge;
• Whether the relationship that would create any legal duty exists on the facts alleged is a matter for the jury directed by the judge;
• Where the matter is not in issue the judge may direct the jury that a legal duty exists.

The Explanatory Notes to the Fraud Act provide the following examples of a breach of a legal duty:

• The failure of a solicitor to share vital information with a client in order to perpetrate a fraud upon that client;
• A person who intentionally failed to disclose information relating to his heart condition when making an application for life insurance.
• ....

 

[Pickman's model]

*dusts off black cap*

 

[tim]

I reckon if the whole board hadn't jumped down my partner's throat as quickly as they did, a couple of genuine, well judged posts, would have got him to re-evaluate the situation and tell the pigs and insco what had happened.

As it happened, the young man was backed into a corner that he found difficult to exit.

There's always an exit

 

[Pickman's model]

There's always an exit

yeh. but he'd probably miss.

 

[machine cat]

 

[Artaxerxes]

You know I'd never expect a bunch of leftie anarchists to make such a fuss over informing an insurance company of all things.

 

[machine cat]

You know I'd never expect a bunch of leftie anarchists to make such a fuss over informing an insurance company of all things.

This is Diamond we're talking about.

 

[kabbes]

You know I'd never expect a bunch of leftie anarchists to make such a fuss over informing an insurance company of all things.

It's his point-blank refusal to accept that this is his obligation that causes the ruckus, not the reality of whether or not he fulfils that obligation.

 

[ViolentPanda]

My thought was purely that, if you can get 6 months in the UK for stealing £3 bottles of water, then it's worth declaring something like this. Particularly since the insurance company is likely to just write it off. If anyone wants to see that as malice that says more about them I think.

Diamond is a public school chap. His type get community service for fraud.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Diamond is a public school chap. His type get community service for fraud.

Brocket was Eton, Diamond went to the same loser factory that Nick Clegg went to. Insurance fraud is ripping off yer own; looked down on and harshly punished.

 

[DaveCinzano]

Diamond is a public school chap. His type get community service for fraud.

Pretty sure it's a required section on the CE