Sabotage

AllForIt

Someone in my apartment block removed the brakes from my bicycle.

Would such an act be considered more serious than say simply stealing a wheel.

My thinking is i could have gone out on it and not noticed which could have caused a serious accident.

Peregrinus

There's a offence of interfering with the mechanism of a mechanically propelled vehicle while it is stationary in a public place" under RTA 1961 s. 113, but a bicycle is not a mechanically-propelled vehicle. (Plus, the incident may not have occurred in a public place; you don't say.)

So I don't think it's a separate offence from stealing a wheel. But it might well attract a sentence at the higher end of what is possible because of the danger created, and the evident malice in the act.

Another possiblity is a charge of endangerment under the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997 s. 13 ("intentionally or recklessly engaging in conduct which creates a substantial risk of death or serious harm to another").

Victor

There is the matter of criminal damage, that might attract a more serious sentence than theft.

AllForIt

@Peregrinus, the bike was kept in the stairwell of an apartment block, so i'm not sure if that would qualify as a public space or not, i'd say it would.

Caranica

AllForIt wrote: »

@Peregrinus, the bike was kept in the stairwell of an apartment block, so i'm not sure if that would qualify as a public space or not, i'd say it would.

Are bikes permitted there? They're not in our development as they pose health and safety hazards. Doesn't excuse the vandalism but if it's not meant to be there in the first place that will work against you.

AllForIt

Caranica wrote: »

Are bikes permitted there? They're not in our development as they pose health and safety hazards. Doesn't excuse the vandalism but if it's not meant to be there in the first place that will work against you.

I'm not going to answer that as I'm sure it's completely irrelevant.

Peregrinus

The question of whether the stairwell of an apartment block is a public place is also completely irrelevant since, as noted, a bicycle is not a mechanically-propelled vehicle, so interfering with a bicycle cannot constitute the s. 113 offence.

But, FWIW, the common areas in an apartment block would not be a public place. "Public place" is defined in s.3 as "any street, road or other place to which the public have access with vehicles whether as of right or by permission and whether subject to or free of charge".

A bicycle is a vehicle, although not a mechanically propelled vehicle. But a stairwell or hallway, while a "place", is not really a place that belongs in a list with streets and roads. Plus, if you're not supposed to bring your bike in, then you don't have "access with vehicle whether as of right or by permission" even if, in practice, you can get your bike in. Plus plus, assuming you need a key to get in, and to get a key you need to be a resident, I don't think the class of people with a right of entry is "the public".

AllForIt

I would question those legal definitions on 2 points.

1. A pedal bike is a mechanically propelled device. I don't see the difference between pressing your foot on on a pedal or pressing your foot on the accelerator.

2. The stairwell of an apt block is open to not only the occupants but friends that visit and in my case the security key seems to be known by almost everyone in the area. This stairwell has been frequented by members of the public that don't live there.

Not that I'm questioning your legal definitions which I'm sure are correct.

SmartinMartin

A bicycle is not a mechanically propelled vehicle.
The definition of a public place given above only applies to road traffic matters, not theft or damage etc.

Victor

Peregrinus wrote: »

But, FWIW, the common areas in an apartment block would not be a public place. "Public place" is defined in s.3 as "any street, road or other place to which the public have access with vehicles whether as of right or by permission and whether subject to or free of charge".

That definition has been expanded to include roads in the charge of councils.

Peregrinus

AllForIt wrote: »

I would question those legal definitions on 2 points.

1. A pedal bike is a mechanically propelled device. I don't see the difference between pressing your foot on on a pedal or pressing your foot on the accelerator.

The difference is that, with the bicycle, the propulsion comes from your foot; with the car, it comes from the engine.

A bicycle has mechanical transmission of propulsion - the chain mechanism - but not mechanical propulsion. A car has both mechanical transmission - the gearing - and mechanical propulsion - the engine. So a car is mechanically propelled, whereas with a bicycle you have to do the work of propulsion yourself.

AllForIt wrote: »

2. The stairwell of an apt block is open to not only the occupants but friends that visit and in my case the security key seems to be known by almost everyone in the area. This stairwell has been frequented by members of the public that don't live there.

Not that I'm questioning your legal definitions which I'm sure are correct.

"Residents and their guests" is probably not "the public". Though you can argue the point.

But there are two other problems. In an expression like "road, street or other place", the courts will tend to interpret "place" as meaning "a place similar to a road or street". If the legislation was meant to apply in any place at all, it would just say "any place"; "road, street or other place" is taken to indicate the kind of place intended.

The second problem is that the legislation specifies a place to which the public has "access with vehicles, whether as of right or by permission". And if there is a rule that says "no bikes in the stairwell", then you have neither the right to bring your bike in, nor permission to do so.

Peregrinus

SmartinMartin wrote: »

A bicycle is not a mechanically propelled vehicle.
The definition of a public place given above only applies to road traffic matters, not theft or damage etc.

The "interfering with a mechanically propelled vehicle" offence is created by Road Traffic Act 1961 s. 113, and the definition of "public place" in Road Traffic Act 1961 s.3 applies to the interpretation of s. 113.

Peregrinus

Victor wrote: »

That definition has been expanded to include roads in the charge of councils.

True, but doesn't really change matters in this instance, where the place is the stairwell of an apartment block.

SmartinMartin

Peregrinus wrote: »

The "interfering with a mechanically propelled vehicle" offence is created by Road Traffic Act 1961 s. 113, and the definition of "public place" in Road Traffic Act 1961 s.3 applies to the interpretation of s. 113.

Which has absolutely no relevance in this case.

Peregrinus

SmartinMartin wrote: »

Which has absolutely no relevance in this case.

Read post 2. The only relevance that "public place" has in this discussion is that it's an element of the s. 113 offence. And, in the s. 113 offence, "public place" has the meaning given in s. 3.

Are you suggesting there's another offence that is relevant here, in which "public place" is an element, and to which a different definition of "public place" applies? If so, can you identify the offence you are thinking of?

Mjolnir

AllForIt wrote: »

I would question those legal definitions on 2 points.

1. A pedal bike is a mechanically propelled device. I don't see the difference between pressing your foot on on a pedal or pressing your foot on the accelerator.

2. The stairwell of an apt block is open to not only the occupants but friends that visit and in my case the security key seems to be known by almost everyone in the area. This stairwell has been frequented by members of the public that don't live there.

Not that I'm questioning your legal definitions which I'm sure are correct.

1. You're completely incorrect, bicycles are most certainly not classified as mechanically propelled vehicles by the definition of mechanically propelled vehicles.

2. As it is only intended for the occupants and any guest under them and is understood the general public at large do not have consent, be it given or implied it is not considered a public place in the traditional sense or meaning. Actually gets very interesting when you delve into the needs for warrants and rights of search / inviolablity of the dwelling.

SmartinMartin

I don't know what your point is, but you are the one who suggested a road traffic offence which couldn't possibly apply, and therefore the rta definition of a public place also couldn't apply. Any of the other suggested charges don't require the act to have occurred in a public place.

Peregrinus

SmartinMartin wrote: »

I don't know what your point is, but you are the one who suggested a road traffic offence which couldn't possibly apply, and therefore the rta definition of a public place also couldn't apply. Any of the other suggested charges don't require the act to have occurred in a public place.

That's my point. The only offence we have looked at here in which "public place" is an element is the RTA offence, and for that offence, we have looked at the correct definition of "public place", which is the RTA definition. As it happens, that offence has not been committed, for several reasons, one of which is that that the site of the incident is not a "public place" within that definiton. So we are looking at the correct and relevant definition of "public place".

Other definitions are irrelevant, unless you are considering some other offence that might have been committed here, in which "public place" is an element. But so far nobody has identified such a possible offence.

SmartinMartin

"we" have not looked at an rta offence, only you, and frankly I was surprised to see it erroneously introduced.

Peregrinus

SmartinMartin wrote: »

"we" have not looked at an rta offence, only you, and frankly I was surprised to see it erroneously introduced.

Can you point to the error in my post on the subject? I said the offence had not been committed; are you saying that I am wrong?

As for me being the only person who has looked at at, four other posters (including you) have discussed it. I was merely the first person to mention it, not the only person.

SmartinMartin

The error was mentioning s. 113 in the first place when it couldn't possibly have any relevance to the OP's query. What was your point in bringing it up?

MrMusician18

Don't put your bike in the stairwell and no one will interfere with your brakes.

Peregrinus

SmartinMartin wrote: »

The error was mentioning s. 113 in the first place when it couldn't possibly have any relevance to the OP's query. What was your point in bringing it up?

To consider the OP's question of whether stealing mechanical parts, with consequent creation of a significant and possibly hidden danger, was a more serious offence than simple stealing. It seemed to me relevant to point out that such an offence does indeed exist, and quite possible on account of that very rationale, but that it doesn't extend to bicycles. I don't think that's a conclusion we could have arrived at without mentioning the existence of the offence and considering its elements.

You, on the other hand, came into the thread to say that a bicycle is not an MPV, which had already been said, and to say that the RTA definition of "public place" "applies only to road traffic matters not theft or damage etc", suggesting that you hadn't quite grasped the possibility that facts which constitute theft or damage might also give rise to an RTA matter.

SmartinMartin

Ah you're waffling now . I'm not going to waste any more time on someone who can't even admit to an obvious mistake, so I'll bow out of this and leave the OP's original question for discussion. Goodnight.

Mod
SMartin
Peregrinus is a frequent poster here. Have always found his/her posts helpful, accurate and legally correct. Not a waffler.
Pls apologise to Peregrinus

Peregrinus

That's twice you've accused me of an error, but you have failed or refused to identify any actual error. Now, I wonder why that might be, and whether it might in any way be connected to your belated decision to stop digging?