On Dec 28, 2:28*pm, D1039 wrote:
On Dec 28, 2:18*pm, Denis McMahon wrote:





On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 03:11:34 -0800, furnessvale wrote:
Indeed! *Now all we need is government prepared to bring the law on
scrap metal out of the days of Dickens and into the 21st century and
courts prepared to believe the offence is worth more than the miniscule
scrap value the thief gets........but don't hold your breath.

Maybe it's about time BT and Network Rail started taking civil actions
against the thieves and the scrapyards for the consequential costs caused
by their actions.

A civil judgement for the compensation costs incurred by NR for a 6 hour
shutdown on the ECML would probably be enough to close the scrapyard that
paid for the signalling cable involved.

Rgds

Denis McMahon

Consequential losses are seldom recoverable in civil actions, as being
too remote.

Compensation costs are contractual penalties between NR and TOCs and
are irrecoverable in tort from a third party

Indeed it might not be possible to prove that the scrapyards 'knew or
ought to have known' the cable was stolen

I would have thought that Restitution Orders or Proceeds of Crime
orders against the proven perpetrators would be more likely to be
successful (in the later their assets are seized and they have to
demonstrate what proportion they can retain as coming from legitiate
means).

That assumes the proven perpetrators have any meaningful assets

Patrick- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Excuse me replying to my own post, but a good example of Proceeds of
Crime seizures is shown (in the below link) by Holyhead border
officials (and so tenuously on thread for uk.railway!)

http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/nort...5578-30026703/

Patrick