Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Is this the beginning of state sanctioned theft?

Discussion in 'The Pub' started by Sir Ride Alot, Jun 13, 2012.

  1. An innocent person’s car was impounded. Does it get any lower than this?

    Late for exam: mate's car impounded for speeding
    Brittany Shanahan June 13, 2012 - 1:52PM

    A man caught speeding through streets in Melbourne's busy inner east this morning told police he was running late for an exam.

    Police said the 21-year-old man was speeding along Swan Street in Richmond, ran a red light at Lennox Street and went through a pedestrian crossing before attempting to avoid police near Docker Street around 9.30am.

    The Altona Meadows man was picked up travelling more than 100km/h in a 40 zone.

    Police said the man, who had borrowed a friend's red and black Holden Commodore, told them he was late for an exam.

    His friend's car will be impounded for 30 days and he will also need to pay $689 towing and storage costs.

    The man is expected to be charged on summons for driving in a manner dangerous, speed dangerous and evade police.

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/l...or-speeding-20120613-209m8.html#ixzz1xex4adFa
  2. We have a civil court for a reason.
  3. I think the theory is that will make people not lend cars to dickheads.

    One guy I met a few times lent his V8 Calais to a friend of his. Friend did a burnout (not a small one), cop spotted it. Car got impounded, I laughed at them. Not the first impounded car for either of them.
  4. yeah you can't really whinge about the car being impounded. It's not like being late for an exam is a valid excuse for doing 100 in a 40 zone
  5. The offender was caught.

    Why is an innocent person being penalised? This person has not committed any offence.
  6. being late for an exam is pretty important i would say its a more jusitifed reason to speed then what most people say.

    Missing an exam could have far reaching conqeunces for the guy, he could fail his course at uni, have to retake it at large expense, it will look bad on his academic record for life, may prevent him getting a graduate position on completion.

    Yeah 100 in a 40 is pretty intense. Personally i try not to do more then double the speed limit and fair enough the coppers dont give a shit what your excuse is if your 60 over and fair enough.

    but anyway i still think its a decent excuse. Doesnt matter now, im sure the kid is ****ed and going to end up losing his license and all this shit, he probably missed his exam as well.
  7. I think a few of you are missing the point here. Nobody gives a shit if this guy was speeding or what for. The point of the post had nothing to do with the offender or the crime or the excuse.
  8. It's not the friend that has to pay its the offender.
  9. Bus fares ??
  10. Lilley I hear ya. It's that the owners car is taken for 30 days.
  11. Speaking as a small business owner with company vehicles I find myself sympathizing with the owner.

    If one of my employees ended up getting one of (for example) our work utes impounded then I'd be the one lumbered with the impound fees.

    Sure I could fire the person, except that then I'd be up for unfair dismissal (3 warnings and all that and yeah they union would go for that they have in the past).

    I could attempt to sue the person, except that the legal fees would be more than what the fine would be and getting costs as a business against an employee is almost impossible in court.

    I honestly don't think this legislation is fair to owners and it will without doubt cause innocent people problems.
  12. hence,
    I don't particularly agree with vehicle impounding at all, be it my car or a friends. That doesn't change the fact that the law doesn't specify who car it has to be. Maybe there is room for people to force it to change - a high court ruling or something, I dunno.
  13. god you people are scraping the bottom of the conspiracy barrel; this idiot has a friend who's stupid enough to lend him his car, and he rewards his friend's trust by speeding and running a red light

    you can bet this dope has driven like this before, so the friend is as big a dope

    state sanctioned theft? You fools would be carrying on like pork chops and calling for blood in the streets if this idiot had hit a rider as he ran the red light......
  14. it doesn't constitue Theft

    Crimes Act 1958 - SECT 72
    Basic definition of theft

    72. Basic definition of theft

    (1) A person steals if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to
    another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
  15. An Employee undertaking an illegal act with company equipment would be a dismissable act would it not??

    Why cant you simply deduct the costs from said employees wages over the next few pay packets??
  16. Lending a car to another person is a lawful activity and the road laws apply to all licence holders.

    The owner of the vehicle is not a policeman.
  17. cars which are used for hooning, breaking the law and running red lights can be impounded, irrespective of who owns them
  18. Why not just deny giving him permission to drive the car and report it as stolen?

    Late for an exam is not that good an excuse. Once you finish uni, your academic record becomes nothing more than expensive toilet paper. Worst case scenario is that he sits a sup anyway.
  19. Lending of a registered firearm from one licenced person to another licenced person is lawful too.

    But if the person who took the firearm went on a yipyar shooting into the air up the local shops do you think they would return the firearm to who it is registered to immediately?
  20. A car does not need to cause loss to anyone to be impounded. Sure items need to be used as evidence in certain cases but this has nothing to do with evidence.