What constitutes false imprisonment?

goz83

I know a girl who was in a minor RTA a couple of days ago. She was hit from behind and her car tapped the vehicle in front of her, causing no visible damage. As she put it, "a couple of italian mafia looking men got out of the car" in front of hers and confronted her. In the mean time the other car disappeared and nobody had any details.

So, the girl was on her way to work when this happened. One of the men asked to see her license, which she refused, believing he had no right to ask. She suggested taking photos and exchanging insurance details and moving on. As there were no injuries, that sounded about right. She tried to leave after this and the same guy told her she had to stay and wait for the police. She says he was very aggressive and intimidating. She waited a few more minutes and said she had clients to see, but the guy once again told her she could not leave. This happened at least three times and she says she felt like she was in prison, which made me think "false imprisonment".

Eventually AGS arrived and gave the guy a bit of a scorning for calling them for what was a very minor tip. The girl did not mention that the guy would not let her leave, but she was shaken up and lost business as a result of being held against her will. She was afraid the expired nct would land her in trouble, so just wanted to leave and go to work. Does this constitute false imprisonment? It was a good 40 minutes from the time of accident to AGS arriving.

Tombo2001

Ask the police.

Kimbot

No it doesnt constitute false imprisonment. She wasnt really imprissoned she was only told to stay around and wait for the guards which is the correct procedure in an RTA especially when 1 car had already left the scene.

FreudianSlippers

I believe the most current legislation is still the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997.

Section 15:

(1) A person shall be guilty of the offence of false imprisonment who intentionally or recklessly—

(a) takes or detains, or

(b) causes to be taken or detained, or

(c) otherwise restricts the personal liberty of,

another without that other's consent.

(2) For the purposes of this section, a person acts without the consent of another if the person obtains the other's consent by force or threat of force, or by deception causing the other to believe that he or she is under legal compulsion to consent.

Gatling

So the other car drove off and its passenger's question her and more or less detain her,
Something's not right there at all

Greenmachine

Doesn't sound like false imprisonment.

hullaballoo

There is also a civil standard that's applicable - this is usually the arm of law under which these cases lead to compensation. Don't know why I said "usually" either...

Dullaghan v Hillen [1957] Ir Jur Rep 10
Per Judge Fawsitt: "The unlawful and total restraint of the personal liberty of another whether by constraining him or compelling him to go to a particular place or confining him in a prison or police station or private place or by detaining him against his will in a public place."

Edit: that's obviously not all there is too it but google has a lot to offer and I don't have time for copy pasta right now.

goz83

jonny24ie wrote: »

No it doesnt constitute false imprisonment. She wasnt really imprissoned she was only told to stay around and wait for the guards which is the correct procedure in an RTA especially when 1 car had already left the scene.

She was intimidated and told she could not leave until the police arrived. There is no requirement to involve the Gardai of an rta where there are no injuries. As I said in the OP, the garda was peed off about being called to the incident, as there was no need to involve them.

Gatling wrote: »

So the other car drove off and its passenger's question her and more or less detain her,
Something's not right there at all

The car that hit her car drove off when the people in the lead car got out and started accusing the girl of rear ending them. Nobody saw the car that drove off. The only evidence of it was the damage to the rear of the girls car.

Greenmachine wrote: »

Doesn't sound like false imprisonment.

It does to me. She was told she could not leave and tried to three times, but was responded to by aggressive behaviour. How is it not, if she was being held against her will. She might have been afraid that she would have been attacked had she tried leaving, but that's just me guessing, as i did not get anymore details than i have already mentioned.


Edit: actually one other detail was that her husband contacted the local station while the girl was being held and the garda told him that his wife did not have to stay at the scene if there were no injuries and insurance details etc were given.

Beano

Gatling wrote: »

So the other car drove off and its passenger's question her and more or less detain her,
Something's not right there at all

sounds like an insurance scam to me.

godtabh

His wife might not have wanted to stay but the other driver was was rear ended what her to stay so the guards could arrive. She wanted to drive off without reporting the crash (where she claims she was rear ended)

She had no nct.

Sounds dodgy to me.

goz83

godtabh wrote: »

His wife might not have wanted to stay but the other driver was was rear ended what her to stay so the guards could arrive. She wanted to drive off without reporting the crash (where she claims she was rear ended)

She had no nct.

Sounds dodgy to me.

No. The crash was reported. All details were shared. I've been in a few minor and 2 more serious RTA's. I know the gardai dont like to attend them unless there are serious injuries, but there is no need for garda presence if there are no injuries. There was no reason for her to be held there against her will. She said the guy kept demanding her to show her license, which she refused to do, because she knew he had no right to ask for her license.

The damage to her rear bumper was noted, so she had been rear ended. I've no reason disbelieve that.

FreudianSlippers

goz83 wrote: »

No. The crash was reported. All details were shared. I've been in a few minor and 2 more serious RTA's. I know the gardai dont like to attend them unless there are serious injuries, but there is no need for garda presence if there are no injuries. There was no reason for her to be held there against her will. She said the guy kept demanding her to show her license, which she refused to do, because she knew he had no right to ask for her license.

The damage to her rear bumper was noted, so she had been rear ended. I've no reason disbelieve that.

But AFAIK you do need to ring AGS is there is a hit-and-run as you say there was in the car that hit her.

Kimbot

goz83 wrote: »

She was intimidated and told she could not leave until the police arrived. There is no requirement to involve the Gardai of an rta where there are no injuries. As I said in the OP, the garda was peed off about being called to the incident, as there was no need to involve them.



The car that hit her car drove off when the people in the lead car got out and started accusing the girl of rear ending them. Nobody saw the car that drove off. The only evidence of it was the damage to the rear of the girls car.



It does to me. She was told she could not leave and tried to three times, but was responded to by aggressive behaviour. How is it not, if she was being held against her will. She might have been afraid that she would have been attacked had she tried leaving, but that's just me guessing, as i did not get anymore details than i have already mentioned.


Edit: actually one other detail was that her husband contacted the local station while the girl was being held and the garda told him that his wife did not have to stay at the scene if there were no injuries and insurance details etc were given.

Sorry but the man infront had his car damaged and may have wanted to get it sorted and its his right to make sure his car is as it was before the accident, one car left the scene already so now that first car is actually classed as a Hit and Run and faces serious charges so it was right to contact the guards. I have already been in the exact same circumstance before and trust me its far easier to get the guards there if one car has already left with out sharing any of their details.

The OP's friend was "told" not to leave, they could have left but they didnt so no it still is not false imprisonment.

goz83

jonny24ie wrote: »

.

The OP's friend was "told" not to leave, they could have left but they didnt so no it still is not false imprisonment.

It's all about context.

Had the man said she shouldn't leave until the gardai arrived, then that would be fine.

But, according to her, he was aggressive and she felt like she would not have been able to leave safely, had she tried. That's unacceptable imo. You don't need to be physically restrained for false imprisonment to be a reality. She will be reporting it later.


In relation to the unidentified car. Any suggestions on how to track it. I am unsure if the girl has any details aside from the colour of the car :rolleyes:

If it cannot be identified, would she need to claim via MIBI? Also, would the lead car need to claim through MIBI if there was any damage to his car. She said there, wasn't any damage, but of course, there could be unseen damage behind the bumper.

FreudianSlippers

goz83 wrote: »

It's all about context.

Had the man said she shouldn't leave until the gardai arrived, then that would be fine.

But, according to her, he was aggressive and she felt like she would not have been able to leave safely, had she tried. That's unacceptable imo. You don't need to be physically restrained for false imprisonment to be a reality. She will be reporting it later.

I love it. OP goes from knowing nothing about false imprisonment to being an expert in 3 hours and 34 minutes. :rolleyes:

goz83

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I love it. OP goes from knowing nothing about false imprisonment to being an expert in 3 hours and 34 minutes. :rolleyes:

Hahaha. In my opinion i meant.

I know nothing of the legality of it. Again, context. Nice post though

234

goz83 wrote: »

Hahaha. In my opinion i meant.

I know nothing of the legality of it. Again, context. Nice post though

The civil standard is quite high. You need to be actually prevented from leaving the area. This would need to involve physical force or the threat of force.

Merely feeling threatened is not enough. Especially if your friend was in a car and could have conceivably just backed up and driven off.

Kimbot

goz83 wrote: »

It's all about context.

Had the man said she shouldn't leave until the gardai arrived, then that would be fine.

But, according to her, he was aggressive and she felt like she would not have been able to leave safely, had she tried. That's unacceptable imo. You don't need to be physically restrained for false imprisonment to be a reality. She will be reporting it later.


In relation to the unidentified car. Any suggestions on how to track it. I am unsure if the girl has any details aside from the colour of the car :rolleyes:

If it cannot be identified, would she need to claim via MIBI? Also, would the lead car need to claim through MIBI if there was any damage to his car. She said there, wasn't any damage, but of course, there could be unseen damage behind the bumper.

She could have gotten into her car locked the doors and drove off if she so wished.

Strangely enough I got a partial reg, someone else at the scene got a partial reg aswell and both were able to piece out the year county and 4 of the 5 digits in correct order and gave it to the guards which couldn't find them. 6 months later I was crossing the road and first car at the red was the car so took the full reg and got them then

Mibi can take a long time to pay out. I'm not sure who pays for the first car tbh because in my scenario it was fine as I only cracked their number plate so they weren't taking it any further.

But best way for you to look for details of the other car is cameras in the area and hope they pick up a reg number.

Bongalongherb

He could probably get away with it if he said it was a citizens arrest ?.

He could just say that the other driver left the scene of an accident and he was afraid that this second person was going to leave the scene. Maybe.

Manach

Offhand and remembering vaguely from previous threads on shoplifters being detained by store staff till police arrive, would not the people in the third car given the potential seriousness of even minor RTAs (eg soft injury damage) have some justification for strongly suggestion the OP's friend not leave?

goz83

234 wrote: »

The civil standard is quite high. You need to be actually prevented from leaving the area. This would need to involve physical force or the threat of force.

Merely feeling threatened is not enough. Especially if your friend was in a car and could have conceivably just backed up and driven off.

I would agree. Feeling theeatened is not enough. I can only convey what I have been told and she said she was afraid to leave, because of how aggressive the guy was when she tried to leave.

Little CuChulainn

Bongalongherb wrote: »

He could probably get away with it if he said it was a citizens arrest ?.

He could just say that the other driver left the scene of an accident and he was afraid that this second person was going to leave the scene. Maybe.

You can only make a citizens arrest for an arrestable offence.

Victor

Beano wrote: »

sounds like an insurance scam to me.

Do they normally call the Garda and insist people wait for them?

goz83 wrote: »

But, according to her, he was aggressive and she felt like she would not have been able to leave safely, had she tried.

Get into vehicle, lock doors, drive off...

Beano

Victor wrote: »

Do they normally call the Garda and insist people wait for them?

Get into vehicle, lock doors, drive off...

The guys in the first car have no reason not to want the guards there.
The OP can expect some whiplash claims in the near future.

Bepolite

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I love it. OP goes from knowing nothing about false imprisonment to being an expert in 3 hours and 34 minutes. :rolleyes:

Thats 3 housr and 4 minutes more than the average law student spends on it :pac:

hullaballoo

Bepolite wrote: »

Thats 3 housr and 4 minutes more than the average law student spends on it :pac:

Spends on what?

Five Lamps

jonny24ie wrote: »

She could have gotten into her car locked the doors and drove off if she so wished.

Strangely enough I got a partial reg, someone else at the scene got a partial reg aswell and both were able to piece out the year county and 4 of the 5 digits in correct order and gave it to the guards which couldn't find them. 6 months later I was crossing the road and first car at the red was the car so took the full reg and got them then

Good stuff - we're you able to process a claim and how did the Gardai react?

Kimbot

Five Lamps wrote: »

Good stuff - we're you able to process a claim and how did the Gardai react?

Yeah the guards went and had a word and told them to pay up for all the damages

Bepolite

hullaballoo wrote: »

Spends on what?

I was lamenting my lack of attention span to any particular area of law, when not being instructed by a barrister that looks like Famke Janssen.

goz83

Bepolite wrote: »

I was lamenting my lack of attention span to any particular area of law, when not being instructed by a barrister that looks like Famke Janssen.

Yum. She can imprison me anytime she likes