Rob G Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 A very good friend of mine owns my local gunshop.A so called friend of the his family asked him to get a new gun in for him,a remmington 243 t8 mod scope and ammo.When it arrived the so called friend was contacted to come and pick his gun up.Thats when the problem started,he came in the shop to pick it up.The owner filled all the details out on his fac.Then the so called friend said he hadn't got the money on him.Could he drop it in the next day.Which the owner agreed to as this has happened before and he had always came back as promised.This was approx 5 monthes ago after trying to contact him many times they have wrote and tried to ring he has made no effort to reply.Does anybody know if they have a leg to stand on trying to claim there money back through the courts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myuserid Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Doubt it, thats why you should always ask for a deposit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pin Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Yes, this is theft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazza Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 I agree with pin if he didn't come back to pay for it it's theft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kip270 Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Get in touch with the Police and get his ticket revoked :o He has all the guy's details B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob G Posted January 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 The problem is it is all on his fac so it looks like he owns it on paper,but they have all the accounts and till rolls to prove he didn't pay.They are seeking legal advice asap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markbivvy Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 straight forward theft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kip270 Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 The problem is it is all on his fac so it looks like he owns it on paper,but they have all the accounts and till rolls to prove he didn't pay.They are seeking legal advice asap I would still get in touch with the Police, they will look down on this sort of action and he should be dealt the heavy hand of the law, we do not need people like this being FAC holders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob G Posted January 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Thanks for the replys so if it is theft he is illegally holding a firearm that could mean 5yrs of porridge SHAME i think he would also loose his job as a fireman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trakker01 Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 A very good friend of mine owns my local gunshop.A so called friend of the his family asked him to get a new gun in for him,a remmington 243 t8 mod scope and ammo.When it arrived the so called friend was contacted to come and pick his gun up.Thats when the problem started,he came in the shop to pick it up.The owner filled all the details out on his fac.Then the so called friend said he hadn't got the money on him.Could he drop it in the next day.Which the owner agreed to as this has happened before and he had always came back as promised.This was approx 5 monthes ago after trying to contact him many times they have wrote and tried to ring he has made no effort to reply.Does anybody know if they have a leg to stand on trying to claim there money back through the courts The days of gentlemanly honor have....poo poo'd.... so the guy in the shop is obviously 'old school' & one of the good guys. But,it is theft , plain & simple & as its registered on a ticket ,he shouldnt take much finding, so he need to be nice & amicable first, & have it returned...then kick his a88 !! :o easy........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catamong Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 I wouldn't bank on swift action by the police, they will probably say it's a civil matter, not criminal, as this guy will undoubtably claim he paid in full in cash at the time he collected the gun, and his dog's since eaten the receipt. No, the police nowadays are far too busy chasing real criminals, by investing millions in space age mobile speed cameras, ruthlessly hunting down miscreants like your local vicars wife who happens to be doing 34mph through the deserted village at 6am on Sunday morning. Sad, isn't it..?? Cat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
death from below Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 I wouldn't bank on swift action by the police, they will probably say it's a civil matter, not criminal, as this guy will undoubtably claim he paid in full in cash at the time he collected the gun, and his dog's since eaten the receipt. No, the police nowadays are far too busy chasing real criminals, by investing millions in space age mobile speed cameras, ruthlessly hunting down miscreants like your local vicars wife who happens to be doing 34mph through the deserted village at 6am on Sunday morning. Sad, isn't it..?? Cat I see where you are coming from but under these circumstances you are wrong....any theft of a firearm(even under a criminal deception as in this case) will be acted upon immediately.......civil actions will not be an overiding factor because if they drop the ball on this one and something goes badly wrong down the line then heads would roll. At worst you could report him to the fire service (as you state he is a Trumpton). They have a similarly rigorous discipline code as the other 999 services and he would be in the poo that way as well.....he sounds like a scummy who needs to be taught a lesson.....whether that be in prison or on the dole who cares Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CARBINE Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 FIREMAN FIREMAN what sad person he is must have fingers of asbestos the pi------ck, get on the net to your local county courts and do it online and its £10 cheaper and nail him, how much was the gun anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nildes Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Go to the small claims court. If he doesn't pay, he'll get a CCJ against his name and this may well count against him when he tries to renew his FAC as well as making it difficult for him to get credit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webber Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 I am not sure that this is theft. The transaction has been correctly recorded, but not paid for. I would have had him in the County Court before now! webber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob G Posted January 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Thanks again for all the replys gents,like i said he WAS a friend of the shop owner they didn't want it to go to court if possible but it looks like it is going that way.He was even given the chance to pay in installments but declined to answer there letters offering it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pin Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 (edited) I am not sure that this is theft. The transaction has been correctly recorded, but not paid for. I would have had him in the County Court before now! webber The Theft Act 1968 Section1 (1) states that a person is guilty of theft if: he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. Last Updated: 21/12/2006 My guess is that he'd suddenly "remember" about not having paid if you could persuade old bill to make enquiries involving an interview regards suspected theft :o Edited January 13, 2008 by pin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taz24 Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Thanks again for all the replys gents,like i said he WAS a friend of the shop owner they didn't want it to go to court if possible but it looks like it is going that way.He was even given the chance to pay in installments but declined to answer there letters offering it. Can The sale be proved. If the guy did pay for it a reciept would of been issued. If there is no proof then it may come down to the word of the shop owner over the word of his mate. We can't possibly know the whole story here and there are always two side's to an argument, but ifit was straight forward then it would be simple to fix. If he is a mate why was he not visited by the shop keeper for an explanation? Who talks to a mate by letter? One thing for sure I think the friendship is over :o taz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webber Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Pin I think that I understand where you are coming from, but feel that your argument at this stage may be flawed. If chummy has now sold the rifle, and not paid the vendor then clearly it is then theft. However, the vendor freely allowed chummy to walk out of the shop with the goods, on the promise of payment to be made later, therefore not theft. I am an engineer, not a solicitor, but with a business career of over 30 years I have made extensive use of the County Court system, which is far from perfect. I have lost 6 figures over the years thanks to bad debtors. I am now mercyless. The only cheques that I accept are from long standing verified customers. Otherwise it is cash on delivery, no cash = no gas. Prepayment via credit card over the telephone, or account settled by monthly direct debit. True, direct debits can be and are stopped or rejected, but our exposure is limited. webber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pin Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 However, the vendor freely allowed chummy to walk out of the shop with the goods, on the promise of payment to be made later, therefore not theft. I see your point and it would likely come down to proving the intent to never pay. Since the agreement was to pay the next day and that has been broken, added to multiple attempts to contact demanding payment etc, it could be argued that his intentions are somewhat more permanent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cranfield Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 I think it is theft, or obtaining goods by deception. The "buyer" will also have to be prepared to prove he has paid for the weapon (if thats what he claims), usually by Bank cheque, or cash withdrawal/loan evidence, or something similar. I agree with the suggestion that if he gets a visit from the police on the matter, he will suddenly remember he hasn't paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Outlaw Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 If the shop have used common sense they will have sent all corespondance by recorded/ reg post so he or someone at his address has to sign for the letters, this would be of help to thier claim for thier money back. Tbh it is a bit irresponsible imo to let anyone, even a long standing customer leave without paying these days. His local police and the fire service would love to know about this I'm sure as it is obtaining goods by deception and I would stich the ****** up for it big time. Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webber Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Outlaw I am tempted to agree with your comments, but fail to see where the Fire Service are involved in this one? webber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Outlaw Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Outlaw I am tempted to agree with your comments, but fail to see where the Fire Service are involved in this one? webber The scamer is a firefighter and this wont look gook if it went to his HQ, would you trust a scammer not to fill his boots if a jewllers were to be the victim of a fire? Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webber Posted January 13, 2008 Report Share Posted January 13, 2008 Outlaw My error, I missed the post about chummy being a fireman. However I feel that his employers could only take any action subsequent to a satisfactory prosecution for theft. webber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.