|
|
Question Title: Police raid
| Question: 388 |
| I have just been advised by our Liverpool office that a tenant of one of my landlords was physically raided fairly heavily yesterday in a major drugs raid and considerable damage was done to the front door and frame and, I believe, in some other parts of the property following entry. I think basically the Boys in Blue were a little heavy handed!! Anyway the officer in charge of the raid has advised our office that the Police are never liable for any damages or costs that result from the enforcement of a warrant. He has quoted section 6 of the Constables Protection Act 1750 as the authority for this immunity!! Now obviously this can in equity surely only be if the person residing at the damaged property is the owner and their criminal activity in effect has brought it on themselves? But of course in this case the occupier and the one charged now with the drugs offences (very substantial sums involved) was a tenant and the owner, our landlord, is an innocent party. The police officer has advised our office to tell the Landlord to write to the Police solicitors pointing all this out and seeking compensation, but he is not sure he will get anywhere given even these circumstances. I find this fascinating - my first thought was that the Landlord's building cover would take care of it, but given exclusions for riot, terrorism, criminal activity etc. in policies these days I'm not so sure. Obviously if the insurer does pay out then presumably they could take up the claim against the Police. Care to comment?
|
| Answer: |
| There is no legal liability upon the force for damage caused by police officers executing a warrant, unless, of course, they cause unnecessary damage, accidentally or otherwise (Constables Protection Act 1750 et al). Where entry is made under statutory authority the police would usually want to defend any claim and the position is broadly the same as for an entry under warrant. However, in either case the police will usually have to pay for accidental damage and for damage that cannot be justified, particularly, where they have entered the wrong premises. The police will normally consider paying if the result of the search is negative and the occupier or the owner of the premises did not have the opportunity to allow the police entry without the need for force. Costs of re-securing are covered under Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, and Code B of the Codes of Practice. The code requires the officer in charge of an operation to "satisfy himself that the premises are secure either by arranging for the occupier, or his agent to be present or by any other appropriate means". The landlord in this case would be well advised to contact the police with a breakdown of the costs involved and proof that his own insurance cover would not deal with this situation.
|
|
References:
|
Pages:
|
Hyperlinks:
|
For more information, discuss on the Forum
|
|
