Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder why the police got involved?

67 replies

Lifegoeson · 06/06/2011 15:41

My brother and sister-in-law ordered an Indian meal from a local take away a few weeks ago and paid by cheque, unfortunately it bounced. Member of staff called from take away, bro said he would drop cash in, sadly his mother in law died unexpectedly the next day, so he forgot.

Fast forward to this morning, a police office arrived at their door in a marked car with a copy of the cheque and wanting the cash, £27.50. This seems to me to be an outrageous waste of police resources, I know of people who haven't even had the police call when they have been burgled!

So, are the police now debt collectors now too?!

OP posts:
VivaLeBeaver · 06/06/2011 16:36

Someone I work with forgot to pay for petrol, just got distraced by their toddler and thought they'd done pay at the pump when they hadn't. The police turned up at her house the next day.

pink4ever · 06/06/2011 16:43

Sorry but this story is a load of shite. Police dont turn up at peoples door because they havent paid a takeaway bill-dont make me laugh. It is a civil matter and restaurant would have to take bil to small claims court. NO takewaways nowadays take cheques for payment-try harderHmm.

katvond · 06/06/2011 16:45

I agree pink had to take mine to small claims to recover the monies owed

OldMacEIEIO · 06/06/2011 16:51

are you sure it was the MIL that died and not the naan

katvond · 06/06/2011 16:53

:) :) :) :)

oldMaceieio

MuthaHubbard · 06/06/2011 16:53

mctemp - it does become a police matter....can be classed as bilking - ie obtaining services by deception. i've just prepared a file for court for this and fraud for a gentleman who has done this on several occasions.....

MuthaHubbard · 06/06/2011 16:55

pink - believe me, police DO get involved in these cases! obtaining services by deception/fraud - ie making the owner believe the goods will be paid for upon receipt of said goods.

katvond · 06/06/2011 17:01

Now I know thanks Mutha
It won't happen again I won't accept cheques anymore

SharonGless · 06/06/2011 17:03

Yep, bilking, making off without payment are matters of law and are an offence.
However it is a bit of grey area if people have made a payment. If the cheque had bounced and the person who wrote did so knowing there was no money in the account then fraud has occurred. The only way of knowing this though would be to interview the person involved to establish their "mens rea" (sorry that still makes me chuckle after all these years! mens rear - get it!)
Anyway sorry for the waffle, if the owners believe the fraud/theft has occurred then the police would have to treat it like any other investigation. I have to say there is a fine line here between a criminal offence and a civil one. If an agreement has been reached and the person has just failed to pay then this would be civil debt.

However if someone was going round kiting cheques left right and centre committing fraud you would all want the police to do something about it then.

The police aren't debt collectors though and there is a old new scheme called restorative justice where they try and resolve matters without having to take people to court and all the papework that goes with it.

skrumle · 06/06/2011 17:12

i know that in terms of taxis, the police do get involved if the driver takes someone who tries to not pay to the station - it's viewed as fraud to have taken the taxi without having the means to pay for it.

in general i have noticed the police doing much more of this kind of immediate intervention though - e.g. someone lost an expensive phone in a taxi a few weeks ago, the police spoke to the driver who said he thought it might have been a subsequent customer who lifted it from the back of the car, the police went to see that customer and the proper owner had their phone back within 4 hours of losing it. a couple of years ago i just don't think that would have happened.

SnuffleTurtle153 · 06/06/2011 18:36

I totally disagree with niijinksy. Because they're totally wrong.

Of course its not just a civil matter. There is an intention to permanently deprive - the first payment fell through and the second payment also fell through.' - Payments falling through does not in any way demonstrate an intention to permanantly deprive. There could be any number of reasons for payment to fail.

Offering to pay for something you have stolen does not turn a criminal matter into a civil one - He did not steal the meal. He did not enter the restaurant and steal food. He ordered the food in exchange for monies which in itself is a civil contract. He was not able to honour his part of the contract. The restaurant agreed to give him another opportunity to pay. If you filled up your car then realised you'd left your wallet at home, and you gave the station your details and told them you would return with the cash, would you seriously expect them to accuse you of theft and phone the police? Of course not. You have not 'stolen' the fuel simply because you are unable to pay for it at that moment. Your intention upon filling up was not to steal it.

While it might be convenient for police to tell people that some trivial matters are civil matters, they do not make the law but only enforce it, and the definition of the Theft Act does appear to have been met here. The Theft Act outlines the need to intend to permanantly deprive, as already explained (several times). The police not only need to act according to these sorts of Acts, but must also comply at all times with the Home Office Counting Rules. HOCR outlines this sort of senario and makes plain that this is not a recordable offence. It is a civil matter. Police officers are trained in law as are the people responsible for overseeing and auditing recordable offences.

I am pretty confident that you haven't been, however.

Bathsheba · 06/06/2011 18:41

I run our local NCT sales. A couple of times we have had cheques being stopped on us after the buyer has taken away the goods and the buyer has been untraceable by us.

We have contacted the banks but they are unhelpful as they are not able to give out contact details etc.

In these cases we have to contact the police - a cheque has been deliberately stopped by a buyer who now has the goods - its theft.

diabolo · 06/06/2011 18:47

agree with niijinksy.

Imagine if all the take-away's customers did this - they'd be out of business in a week. I don't know many places that accept cheques any longer, cash or card - that's it, presumably for this very reason.

Sorry OP - I know it's not what you want to hear, but I'm glad the police were involved and I think this is is a good use of our Council Tax, it might not be a lot of money but your BIL and SIL are in the wrong - whatever their reasons.

cecinestpasunepipe · 06/06/2011 18:55

Years ago a friend of my DH offered to buy him a curry as a thank you for a favour. When it came to pay the bill, the friend said he had no money, and neither did my DH. They left without paying. My DH was arrested and charged. In court, he argued that he was a guest of his friend, and had had no intention to permanently deprive. He got off. But my point is that the police did get involved, and he was charged. I don't know what happened to the friend.

VivaLeBeaver · 06/06/2011 18:56

I only ever had a cheque once that payment was refused on. I'd lost the cheque book and reported it as missing, found it and forgot I'd reported it. Wrote my cheque out for a speeding ticket to the police!!!! Who posted it back to me saying can you send us another one, this one's stolen. Hmm

wotnochocs · 06/06/2011 18:59

OOOOKKKAAAAYY Police came to the door demanding you hand over to them £27 cash due to arestaurant for a bounced cheque.
I think you DB & SIL are not being honest with you, OP

BluddyMoFo · 06/06/2011 19:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MadamDeathstare · 06/06/2011 19:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

pigletmania · 06/06/2011 19:21

YABU at all, if this happened regularly with customers, the Restaurant would be out of business. A cheque was written, it bounced (there should have been sufficient funds in the account first), then they were promised the money the next day and it did not come (they were not aware of his circumstances). As far as they are concerned it is theft, they are not aware of your brothers intentions to pay it back.

takethisonehereforastart · 06/06/2011 21:02

bluddyMoFo I was thinking the same thing Grin

And OP, if this was weeks ago but your brother is a regular customer surely they would have reminded him when he placed another order? He must not be that regular if this has been going on for weeks.

The takeaway people shouldn't have to be writing polite reminder letters when they had already done a lot to chase this up and been forgotten about, especially as I doubt your brother is not the only person not to pay them properly.

And better (for your family) that the police acted as debt collectors, allowing your brother and his wife to pay what they owe, rather than the takeaway dragged then through the courts to recover the unpaid debt and costs etc. They got away with a brief exchange ("Pay up what you owe." "Oops, sorry, here you are.") rather than a lengthy...well, whatever you get when you have to go to court for not paying a bill you owe. What do you get? Either way, I'm sure what happened was quicker and easier.

FabbyChic · 06/06/2011 21:03

Your family committed fraud, that is what it is to issue a cheque that bounces.

It is no little commited crime, fraud is a big crime. Issuing a cheque for goods is theiving too.

takethisonehereforastart · 06/06/2011 21:03

I am amazed that the takeaway accept cheques though. I didn't think any of them did that anymore because of situations like this.

FabbyChic · 06/06/2011 21:04

Sorry a cheque that bounces.

psiloveyou · 06/06/2011 21:12

Years ago I worked in a restaurant. We had two girls leave without paying. There was a taxi rank outside so we asked the drivers if anyone had picked the girls up. They had and had taken them to a club. The police came and picked me up then we went to the club where I identified the girls and they were arrested. Went to court a few months later.

op the restaurant had already called and given your db a chance to pay. How were they to know mil had died?. I think they were quite right to involve the police.

nijinsky · 06/06/2011 21:46

SmartTurtle153 LLB DipLP and 5 years PQE so yes, I am. Will you be one of those "done law as part of my day release and now I know it all" people then?

It certainly meets the definition of theft. If the meal is not paid for, there is an intention to permanently deprive the other of their property. As long as the mens rea can be proved - the actus reus is definatey present. However proving matters is not the job of the police - their job, inter alia, is to collect evidence and follow up matters. Often the police will not act in such matters, but this does not change the law on theft. The definition of theft is statutory and relatively unambiguous.

Presumably the lengthy time between presentation of the cheque is why the police acted. It may be that in that time, the takeaway owner contacted the BIL several times without joy.

This sort of thing is why a lot of businesses no longer accept cheques.