NOT MUCH JOY FOR OWNERS
Page 64
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Les Oldridge, T.Eng(CEI), MIMI, AMIRTE
FOR THE offence of theft to be complete there must be an intention by the thief to take the goods and permanently deprive the owner of them. Anyone who "borrows" a vehicle for a "joy-ride" has no such intention; he only wants the use of the vheicle for a short period.
He will abandon it when it has served his purpose. knowing that eventually it will be discovered and returned to its rightful owner. And as there is no intention of permanently depriving the owner, he cannot be prosecuted for stealing the vehicle.
Section 12 of the Theft Act 1968 deals with this problem by making it an offence, punishable by a maximum of three years imprisonment, for any person, without having the consent of the owner or other lawful authority, to take any conveyance for his own or another's use. Or, knowing that a conveyance has been taken without authority, drives it or allows himself to be carried in it.
Although most offences committed against this law will be with motor vehicles, it covers any conveyance constructed or adapted for the carriage of persons by land, water or air; so boats, aircraft and even hovercraft are protected by the Act. Pedal cycles are included but in this case there is a reduced maximum fine of £50. Very often when a vehicle is taken without authority, damage is done to it. The owner is put to a lot of inconvenience and, although he may gain some satisfaction if the offender is caught and prosecuted, this does not compensate him for his pecuniary loss.
Wilkinson, in Road Traffic Offences. discusses this problem at some length. He points out that an offender may be sued civilly for the damage caused and poses the question r "What is the criminal liability of such people?".
If the offender wrenches open a locked lorry door he is clearly guilty of wilful damage. The court may order compensation to be paid in addition to the fine or imprisonment, the maximum amount of the compensation payable depending on which Act the offender is charged under.
Wilkinson suggests that compensation could be awarded for damage to the conveyance itself — broken locks, used fuel and engine damage caused by bad driving — but not for damage caused by involvement in an accident.
Unfortunately, the type of person usually involved in taking motor vehicles for a "joy-ride", or for crime, is often in no position to pay compensation to the owner of the vehicle, even if he is ordered to do so. He may be penniless and even have difficultly in paying the fine itself.
Most insurance policies state that the vehicle insured is covered while being driven "with the owner's permission". Obviously, if this is a condition of the policy, damage done during a "joy-ride" will not be paid for. It may be wise to discuss this point with one's' insurance brokers to see if this particular risk can be covered.
The position of a lorry driver who takes his employer's vehicle was discussed in R v Wibberley (1965) 3 All E.R. 718.
In this case a lorry driver had been instructed to leave his vehicle at one of his employer's triio yards after the day's work, although the employer would not have objected if the driver had left it outside his own house after work and taken it back the next morning.
The driver parked the vehicle outside his house when he finished work at about 5 p.m. At 7 p.m. he used it for his own purpose. It was held that he had no authority to do this and the conviction was upheld.
The distinction between working hours and when a driver is off duty is also illustrated in Mowe v Parraton (1952) 1 All E.R. 423, where it was held that a driver who was in lawful possession of his employer's vehicle and used it for an unauthorised journey during his tour of duty, was not guilty of an offence.
The reason for this decision was that an employee in lawful possession of his employer's vehicle while on duty cannot take what he already has. There is no reason, of course, why the employee should not be disciplined as a matter of company policy.