Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to believe that this is a crime? The police say no

81 replies

powertoyourelbow · 03/05/2025 08:41

Name change for this as outing. Person A drives into person B’s driveway. Person B drives into drive some time later. Person B sees person A and tries to reverse out to leave as they are frightened of person A. Person A jumps out of their car and opens person B’s driver door. Turns off their engine and takes keys and returns to their own car. Person B is too scared to runaway . Person B Calls 999. Police treat this as an emergency and come as blue light. They negotiate with person A and get car keys back and give them to person b person B leaves . No charges brought against person A. Police say this is not a crime.

AIBU to believe that this must be a crime?

OP posts:
SafeguardingSocialWorker · 03/05/2025 08:53

Is it a domestic abuse situation?

Original poster
powertoyourelbow · 03/05/2025 08:56

Sort of… Person B is related to someone who was in a relationship with person A that had broken down

OP posts:
friendsonly · 03/05/2025 08:58

Depends on a lot of factors but considering the police came, sorted it out and have more information but considered it not a crime, I would say it must not be.
what do you think person a should be charged with?

Mooselooseinmyhoose · 03/05/2025 08:59

Former criminal barrister here. Context is missing and that is key. There's potentially a public order offence if the behaviour was threatening as it was carried out.

There's also potentially common assault fear of violence if the behaviour put person B in fear they would be hit.

It the car or keys were damaged there's a theoretical criminal damage. But it doesn't sound like they were.

It's not illegal to open someone's car door and remove their keys if you don't intend to keep the keys. If you intended to keep the keys you could have a theft charge.

If this is a person that Person B has had issues with before the incident could in theory be part of a harassment charge.

There needs to be more info before anyone could meaningful comment. But all the possibilities are low level charges unless there's an ongoing harassment situation and all are extremely context specific.

SapporoBaby · 03/05/2025 09:00

If they returned the keys and they didn’t take the car then it’s not theft. It’s also not taking a vehicle without consent because it was only the keys not the car.

Id say it was intimidation or harassment but it doesn’t fit the bill for theft, assault etc

ScaryM0nster · 03/05/2025 09:01

What crime do you think A committed?

Having someone else’s car keys for a short period of time?

The police aren’t there to sort out acrimonious break ups.

Original poster
powertoyourelbow · 03/05/2025 09:02

ScaryM0nster · 03/05/2025 09:01

What crime do you think A committed?

Having someone else’s car keys for a short period of time?

The police aren’t there to sort out acrimonious break ups.

Person A and B had not been in a relationship with.

person b is related to person a’s ex

OP posts:
Soontobe60 · 03/05/2025 09:03

Who does Person Bs car belong to, or who paid for it?

lljkk · 03/05/2025 09:03

It doesn't sound like an incident that meets the threshold for illegally intimidating behaviour, but history matters. A restraining order (or whatever they are called in UK) that prohibits contact from one to other, would make a huge difference, for instance.

Soontobe60 · 03/05/2025 09:04

I think person B is the child of Person As ex, and the Op is the ex.

TheHappyBug · 03/05/2025 09:05

I am not sure this was a 999 emergency call unless person A was threatening person B?

I think it’s a bit confusing without the actual relationships.

A could be an 80year old nanna and B a 26 year old 6 ft body builder for all we know. I am going to assume not but it would be easier to judge if we could understand why B was so scared of A

BlondiePortz · 03/05/2025 09:06

Op what law do you think has been broken?

Ponoka7 · 03/05/2025 09:06

Mooselooseinmyhoose · 03/05/2025 08:59

Former criminal barrister here. Context is missing and that is key. There's potentially a public order offence if the behaviour was threatening as it was carried out.

There's also potentially common assault fear of violence if the behaviour put person B in fear they would be hit.

It the car or keys were damaged there's a theoretical criminal damage. But it doesn't sound like they were.

It's not illegal to open someone's car door and remove their keys if you don't intend to keep the keys. If you intended to keep the keys you could have a theft charge.

If this is a person that Person B has had issues with before the incident could in theory be part of a harassment charge.

There needs to be more info before anyone could meaningful comment. But all the possibilities are low level charges unless there's an ongoing harassment situation and all are extremely context specific.

Wouldn't it be a section 4 offence? And come under causing alarm or distress?
@powertoyourelbow is the ex also experiencing similar behaviour? They need to jointly speak to the DV team.

ScaryM0nster · 03/05/2025 09:08

powertoyourelbow · 03/05/2025 09:02

Person A and B had not been in a relationship with.

person b is related to person a’s ex

Show quote history

And I’m assuming the only reason they were in the same place is related to the break up?

My point stands.

Enough4me · 03/05/2025 09:09

Why was person A on the drive and do they regularly block the drive to cause an issue? (Or do similar?)

IcyAzureMoose · 03/05/2025 09:10

Huge context issue here so hard to say. Nothing is standing out as an actual crime at the moment. Seems like the police handled it correctly at the time and the situation was resolved so I can’t see why criming it would be of benefit unless it’s part of an ongoing case.

thepariscrimefiles · 03/05/2025 09:11

ScaryM0nster · 03/05/2025 09:01

What crime do you think A committed?

Having someone else’s car keys for a short period of time?

The police aren’t there to sort out acrimonious break ups.

It sounds like threatening behaviour to me which is a crime. Persons A and B haven't been in a relationship.

JustMyView13 · 03/05/2025 09:23

You’ve been fairly vague, but it sounds as though the situation was resolved immediately.

You have to remember the threshold for getting a charge is pretty high. In a situation that’s a ‘he said, she said’, there’s really not much for them to go by. It wouldn’t be in the public interest to pursue it further. Based on what they’d seen, they didn’t believe a crime had been committed. If you have evidence that proves otherwise you could raise a complaint.

Original poster
powertoyourelbow · 03/05/2025 09:23

Thank you all. It is helpful at least to see that this is not cut and dried.

to me it seems so obvious it’s a crime. Person A is a 6ft male and person b is a woman in her 80’s.

there is ongoing abuse from person A to person b’s relative.

OP posts:
Original poster
powertoyourelbow · 03/05/2025 09:25

Enough4me · 03/05/2025 09:09

Why was person A on the drive and do they regularly block the drive to cause an issue? (Or do similar?)

Edited

They were there to try and het something they wanted

OP posts:
Chocolateisameal · 03/05/2025 09:25

This could technically fit within the definition of various offences (e.g. s39 assault, s5. Public Order Act). However, not everything needs to be charged. In this case, the police resolved the issue. What would the benefit be to treating it as a crime?

If the police had decided to charge it, they would need to:

  1. likely arrest the suspect. That would involve more officers to collect them, take them to custody, book them in, interview them and then release them.
  2. Taking a witness statement from the other person and, probably any other witnesses and/or obtaining doorbell footage.
  3. Considering all the evidence, preparing a court package and submitting it.
The case would then be listed for a hearing in about 6 weeks time. This would involve court time, a CPS lawyer, possibly a defence solicitor (if the defendant wanted one).

This would all use valuable resources and take a long time. The maximum penalty would likely be a fine, based on the description of events.

Alternatively, the police could do as they did and conserve their resources for more serious matters.

INeedAnotherName · 03/05/2025 09:25

More context is needed.

Person A could have thought Person B was under the influence of drink or drugs. The police ascertained they weren't and the keys were given back.

EDIT - there is ongoing abuse from person A to person b’s relative.
Is there a non mol in place? If they reside at that house then it would also be covered.

TheSilentSister · 03/05/2025 09:27

How is this not a crime?
Person A was on B's driveway, stole their keys. Person A felt threatened by this behaviour (who wouldn't!) and called the Police. Police attended.
There has to be more to this or the Police couldn't be bothered to do anything.
Does the car belong to Person A?

PussInBin20 · 03/05/2025 09:27

What crime do you think has been committed then?

It would help to know this, as others have said, there are endless possibilities.

Original poster
powertoyourelbow · 03/05/2025 09:28

Chocolateisameal · 03/05/2025 09:25

This could technically fit within the definition of various offences (e.g. s39 assault, s5. Public Order Act). However, not everything needs to be charged. In this case, the police resolved the issue. What would the benefit be to treating it as a crime?

If the police had decided to charge it, they would need to:

  1. likely arrest the suspect. That would involve more officers to collect them, take them to custody, book them in, interview them and then release them.
  2. Taking a witness statement from the other person and, probably any other witnesses and/or obtaining doorbell footage.
  3. Considering all the evidence, preparing a court package and submitting it.
The case would then be listed for a hearing in about 6 weeks time. This would involve court time, a CPS lawyer, possibly a defence solicitor (if the defendant wanted one).

This would all use valuable resources and take a long time. The maximum penalty would likely be a fine, based on the description of events.

Alternatively, the police could do as they did and conserve their resources for more serious matters.

They did arrest person A. Took statements . Released him on bail.

OP posts: