Theft

[Realitea]

If a neighbour takes your deliveries, how long must it be before it’s classed as theft? The police have asked them twice to give the deliveries to me but heard nothing since. It’s been nearly a week

Theft is the appropriation of property belonging to another, dishonestly, with the intention of permanently depriving [you of it]. If the police spoke to the neighbour why didn’t they just get the parcel and hand it to you? Extremely odd for police to speak to neighbour but then leave it with them.

I battled for several weeks to get a delivery from my neighbour and only succeeded when I got other neighbours involved (basically shamed them). I didn't know it could be termed as theft.

You need to call the police back. This is theft and they've ignored police instructions to hand them back. Def theft

At the moment the problem you have is that you don't have proof that these items were delivered to your neighbour. A card from the courier saying that is where they were delivered is not proof. In any event, assuming these are items you purchased, even if your neighbour has stolen them, they have stolen them from the seller, not from you unless you gave specific permission for them to be left with your neighbour. The seller is responsible for ensuring your goods are safely delivered to you. Until the goods are safely delivered, they still belong to the sellers, so contact them and demand a replacement. Before doing that, you could, of course, have a word with your neighbour and tell them you will be taking non-delivery up with the seller who may be able to get evidence from the courier as to where they were delivered, e.g. a delivery photo. This may prompt your neighbour to "find" the missing items.

@prh47bridge its irrelevant who they belong to for theft. Even abandoned goods can be stolen. You seem to be confusing contract and sale of goods laws. The Theft Act only requires dishonest appropriation as I set out above. Doesn’t matter if seller still owns the goods or the purchaser. Police can intervene now.

Read my post again and point out where I said it isn't theft.

However, to correct your post, abandoned goods cannot be stolen. If an item is truly abandoned, it has no owner so cannot be stolen. The issue is that most apparently abandoned items are not truly abandoned - there is still someone with a proprietary interest.

And it is relevant who the items belong to. Unless the owner of the goods is willing to stand up in court and say they belong to them and the defendant stole them, there is no prospect of getting a conviction. However, more significant in this case is that the OP cannot prove the items are with the neighbour. The courier may have proof, in which case they can provide it to the seller.

@prh47bridge I didn’t say you didn’t say it was theft. I was simply pointing out your comment was irrelevant to the question from OP as to what amounts to theft and that you’re doing the classic lawyer thing of not knowing your subject so bringing it round to one you presumably do know - sale of goods? No need to be aggressive.

@prh47bridge cross posted. Why don’t you have a look at Archbold? Abandoned goods can be stolen. That is law degree week one. When did you last do any criminal law?

No, I do know the subject and I was therefore answering OP's real question, which is what she needs to do to get her goods. The direct answer to her question is that there is no specified time where it becomes theft. All it needs is an intent to deprive. However, that doesn't immediately help her get her goods. Switching from criminal law to consumer legislation may well be a better route for her to get what she wants.

Go back to the police, tell them that the neighbour has still not passed the goods to you, and see what they say.

Have you informed the sender? They need to contact the courier and clarify the exact position.

"Where it is accepted in proceedings for theft that ownership of the goods allegedly stolen had been abandoned at the time they were taken, criminal courts must make determinations about the possibility of any other prior title to those goods. If a conviction for theft of abandoned goods is to be safe, the court must find a proprietary right or interest in some person other than the relinquishing owner or the defendant." - Robin Hickey, currently Dean of Education at the Queen's University Belfast School of Law. You may find his writings on the subject interesting.

Thanks everyone. I do have proof from the courier that they were left on the neighbours doorstep. I then noticed that they were taken inside shortly after as another delivery of theirs was left there. It’s all on the neighbours cctv. I’ll have to follow it up with the police, I suspect they forgot. 🙄

I prefer to go with the actual law and how it works in reality rather than random internet articles from academics from a different jurisdiction. It’s clear you’re not a criminal lawyer. You’re certainly bringing the profession into disrepute with your unnecessary aggression. Mumsnet used to be a great source of information but now polite discussion or acceptance of other’s ideas is absent and it’s a race to the bottom.

Since you insist on Archbold, this is what Archbold has to say - "Property that has been abandoned cannot be stolen."

Apologies if you think I've been aggressive. I am happy to discuss politely.

It is true that, in most situations, the courts will find that property that is apparently abandoned still has an owner, e.g. the case some years ago where the courts ruled that lost golf balls had been abandoned by their original owners but were now owned by the golf course. However, it is a fundamental requirement of the Theft Act that, for an offence to be committed, the offender must appropriate property belonging to another. If goods have been truly abandoned, i.e. they don't belong to anyone, they cannot be stolen. Indeed, the Court of Appeal in the golf ball case stated, "It is said... that the golf balls, having been abandoned by their original owners, as it was accepted they had been, the removal of them by the appellants could not amount to the offence of theft. If no one other than the two appellants had any claim to possession to them at the time, that proposition must be right."

If the goods were delivered to the neighbour, would the police see this as theft? There’s no dishonest appropriation if they take in stuff that was left on their own doorstep is there?

Wouldn’t this be civil?