Taking Without Owners Consent (TWOC) Flashcards
Before we can examine the definition of Taking a Conveyance without Consent (TWOC) we first must understand what a conveyance is…?
A conveyance is any equipment constructed or adapted for the carriage of a person or persons whether by land, water or air.
Bikes are excluded from this part of the act and are covered by their own offence.
Taking Without Owners Consent (TWOC) is covered by what legislation?
Section 12 of the Theft Act 1968.
Taking Without Owners Consent (TWOC) definition
A person commits an offence if without having the consent of the owner….
- Not under duress
- Doesn’t apply if offender genuinely believes they have consent
…or other lawful authority…
- Bailiffs, the police, DVLA, fire and rescue service and council.
…he/she takes any conveyance for his/her own or another use, or…
- Must be a degree of movement of the conveyance for the offence to be complete.
…knowing that any conveyance has been taken without such authority…
- For example someone with a company car to use for work purposes only, decides to drive to meet a relative on a weekend. They have exceeded the authority given and so would be guilty of the offence.
…drives it or allows him or herself to be carried in or on it.
To meet the conditions of the second part of this definition the person must know…
That the conveyance has been taken without consent.
There could be cases where someone gets into a vehicle not knowing it has been taken without consent.
As soon as it comes to light they must make efforts to safely leave the vehicle, or the offence will be complete. As you can see, this part of the definition covers cases where people are carried in a car that has been taken.
Practically though you will find it is often difficult to prove their knowledge around whether the car had been taken without consent or not.
What is Aggravated TWOC?
s12A of the Theft Act 1968
As with other offences, there can often be aggravating factors that affect the sentencing outcomes of offences. These are put in place to allow the sentences handed down by the courts to reflect when the circumstances of the offence warrant a more severe punishment.
You must have all the elements of the basic TWOC offence, outlined above before the aggravated offence can be complete. In essence, if injury or damage is caused during a TWOC then it becomes aggravated.
For aggravated TWOC, the damage caused can be to anything and the injury can be to anyone and includes things like shock.
The key aspect here is that the injury or damage occurred in one of these circumstances:
When the vehicle was being driven dangerously on a road or other public place. It will be up to the court to decide if these elements are met.
When an accident occurred due to the driving of the vehicle which caused injury to any person or damage to something other than the vehicle. An accident in relation to this offence is a much looser term than is used in the usual legal definition. If “an ordinary person” would call it an accident then for this offence, it is.
When the vehicle suffers damage AFTER being taken. This could be from colliding with something. This can be caused by a person other than the person who took the vehicle and can include the vehicle being damaged whilst it is parked up, before it is recovered.
Taking a Pedal Cycle Without Consent
What is the specific legislation that covers this?
The offence of ‘Taking a Pedal Cycle without Consent’, was created (S.12(5) Theft Act).
What is the offence of ‘Taking a Pedal Cycle without Consent’, created in (S.12(5) Theft Act)?
This is a fairly simple offence and it covers the same principals as TWOC, but only includes pedal cycles. It also captures people who ride a pedal cycle knowing that it has been taken by another person without consent or lawful authority.
The penalty is 6 months imprisonment and/or a fine.
What would you do if someone was trying to take a vehicle and caught in the act?
Consider: would you be able to arrest them for an attempted TWOC? Unfortunately not.
As it’s a summary only offence, the Criminal Attempts Act doesn’t cover it. A solution has been thought of, and this comes in the form of a separate offence called Vehicle Interference.
The definition for Vehicle Interference comes under what legislation?
Section 9(1) of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981.
What is the definition for Vehicle Interference?
Section 9(1) of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981.
It states that it is an offence for a person to interfere with a motor vehicle or trailer, or with anything carried in or on a motor vehicle or trailer with the intention of committing:
- Theft of the motor vehicle or part of it
- Theft of anything carried in or on the motor vehicle or trailer
- The offence of taking a conveyance (TWOC)
We don’t have to prove which of the three offences the suspect had the intent of carrying out. What we need to do is prove they had the intent to commit one of them.
The act also needs to be more than preparatory, so they have to actually attempt to do something, stopping them just before they do it won’t be enough to prosecute them.
What needs to happen for the offence of Vehicle Interference?
- Theft of the motor vehicle or part of it
- Theft of anything carried in or on the motor vehicle or trailer
- The offence of taking a conveyance (TWOC)
We don’t have to prove which of the three offences the suspect had the intent of carrying out. What we need to do is prove they had the intent to commit one of them.
The act also needs to be more than preparatory, so they have to actually attempt to do something, stopping them just before they do it won’t be enough to prosecute them.
Sharon asks her friend Kevin if she can borrow his van for the weekend to take some belongings to her mothers in Scotland. Kevin agrees however, Sharon has actually lied to Kevin and uses the van to drive to France for the weekend to collect some cheap food and drink. She returns the van when agreed and there is no damage caused.
Has Sharon committed the offence of TWOC under section 12 of the Theft Act?
No, the deception does not negate the consent she obtained from the owner
Surprised? This is where case law comes in. In the case of R v Peart from 1970 the defendant was convicted of TWOC after borrowing a friend’s car with an agreement it was to drive from one town to another. Instead he drove to a totally different town. He was initially convicted but on appeal the sentence was quashed. Why? Well they found that there was no general principal of law that fraud vitiates consent. So if consent is obtained by Fraud, it is still consent in the eyes of the law.
Case law provides a number of clarifications in relation to this offence
For a floating conveyance the movement can be casuse by a sail but cannot be ny natural movement created by waves or water currents.
A conveyance much be taken for the purpose of being used as such and not just for mischief.
A vehicle ceases to be taken once it has been recovered by the victim, police or insurance company.
The legislation allows the who have lawful authors to relocate a conveyance, for example:
Bailiffs can remove a vehicle where loan repayments are overdue.
The police or the DVLA can remove a vehicle that appears to have been abandoned; and
The Fire and Rescue Services or the local council can remove an inappropriately parked vehicle.
