You are reading a single comment by @Allthegearnoidea and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@Allthegearnoidea
Will have a look for Arthur v Anker. To be honest, I had no idea about case law and just went from first principles. I was aware however that the courts have taken a dim view of self-help for some time now. Often it is paint as taking the law into your own hands, hence the interest and feeling in this thread I imagine.
In all honesty, were a bike owner to issue proceedings against a remover, the remover would plead volenti and self-help in the alternative I imagine. Nothing like throwing the book at a problem (it also tends to reduce the chances of being sued for professional negligence)!
I am guessing you are a solicitor Carson?
Just to say in relation to whoever it was that mentioned costs. The likelihood is that the case would be a small claims case. As Carson mentions, civil claims up to £5k are dealt with in the small claims unless they involve defamation / some tenancies / Human rights points. In the small claims, costs are severely restricted. However the restrictions are valid as long as the parties acted reasonably. Testing the waters, so to speak, would likely raise arguments as to reasonableness.