Login Register

Car is stolen from Gainsborough while being defrosted

By PWhitelam_LE  |  Posted: January 20, 2013

Comments (0)

A second car left unattended with the engine running has been stolen, this time in Gainsborough.

The vehicle was driven off from Asquith Street on Saturday morning.    The first defrosting theft happened in Waterfront Court, Cherry Willingham, on January 17.  

Police are reiterating their advice to drivers to to stay with their cars while they are defrosting them.

They are also reminding people that leaving cars unattended with the engine running, or "quitting" a vehicle, is a criminal offence.

Read more from Lincolnshire Echo

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters
  • MrGRH  |  January 22 2013, 12:04AM

    by nigelsparky......I do not think the driver was being negligent at all. Sorry but I totally disagree with you, of cause the driver was negligent by leaving a key in the car with the engine running unattended which is against the law. So you saying it's not ok for the theif to break the law but it's ok for the said driver to break the law. There is a very good reason why leaving your car running unttended is against the law. Think of it this way what if a child or a person who is not qualified to drive saw that car and took it and go and cause a bad accident or run straight into pedestrians causing death. Is it not the said driver fault in the first place for being so negligent by giving the thief the chance of doing it. The said driver was very foolish and should be charged with negligent and not be able to claim on his / her insurance. No I don't condone thiefs they are pure scum but you can't condone the said driver for what he / she did pure has.

  • eatmygoal  |  January 21 2013, 11:25AM

    Sold my car the other day. Got 5k in cash for it. Left it lying on a park bench while I went to the toilet, came back and it had gone. Would that be negligent of me? I think so. The person who took it has commited theft by finding but probably not the best move in the world to leave it sat there. Completely sympathise with your point Nigel that it does seem that the blame lies with the person who has had something stollen and it shouldn't. However this could all have been avoided by not leaving the car unattended as crime is sadly a part of life and always has been

  • VictorToo  |  January 21 2013, 10:51AM

    Or give you another example. You're on a roundabout, it's your right of way but a car pulls out in front of you. Would you carry on and drive into him, possibly ending up in hospital, or would you brake and try to avoid the accident ? Hopefully you'd do the latter. Now, you shouldn't have to, it's your right of way and the other driver shouldn't have done what he did, but irrespective of the rights or wrongs of the situation, most people would do what they could to avoid the accident. That's what we're saying. Totally agree, this shouldn't happen, but at the end of the day, we know it does. Irrespective of the rights or wrongs, most people would do what they can to avoid the situation. As to people breaking into houses while you're outside talking, well you only have to read the Echo to see that happens as well. Maybe it's time to go back to cutting thieves hands off and making their families responsible for them. The thief that is, not his hand.

    |   3
  • VictorToo  |  January 21 2013, 10:44AM

    Ok, lets ask the question, would you start your car and then go back inside your house and leave the engine running and the car unattended ? I'm not unsympathetic to the car owner in this case, but it isn't something I would do.

    |   1
  • nigelsparky  |  January 21 2013, 10:31AM

    VictorToo and GSX, I know you think what happened is not acceptable. However I do not think the driver was being negligent at all. Firstly we don't know how long the car was left unattended, for all we know, the person could have been sat in the car, and maybe forgot something, like a mobile phone, and just quickly nipped back indoors to retrieve it. Like I say how many people sit in their gardens, taking the rubbish out, doing the gardening etc. leaving the house unlocked and unattended, even with windows open, yet I suspect you wouldn't call these people naive or negligent if the "opportunist thief" struck, or would you? My point to all this, is the fact that the focus of attention is upon the victim rather than the perpatrator, and it is this that I find appalling. It is almost as though you guys are saying "well what did you expect" and he "deserved" it, which like I say I find quite abhorrent.

    |   2
  • VictorToo  |  January 21 2013, 9:05AM

    @nigelsparky "No this person in my opinion was not negligent at all....." Sorry , I'm with gsx1100 on this one. Neither of us are saying what happened is acceptable or that we should put up with it, but it's a sad fact of live that there are scumbags out there who only aim in life is to steal from people and make other peoples lives a misery. What normal people have to do is make their lives as difficult as possible. Of course this guy is negligent. If you think you can start your car up, walk away from it with the engine running, and leave it for five or ten minutes to defrost and it'll still be there when you decide you want to leave for work, then you're naive at best, stupid at worst.

    |   -2
  • nigelsparky  |  January 21 2013, 8:44AM

    Yes we no doubt read different local papers as the evening one in my area certainly quite regularly publish drunk driver images, often on the front page. I here what you say regarding store detectives and tagging of items, however Tescos for instance don't tag every item they have on their shelves and don't have cameras all over their stores either, have yet to see a newsagent with tags on their items such as chocolate bars etc. No this person in my opinion was not negligent at all, he or she was purely demonstrating common sense in "de-frosting" their vehicle instead of driving off like so many people, attempting to peer through a small "hole" in the windscreen. Not exactly leaving the car "all day" eh. Tell me GSX, how often do you walk out of your house to maybe chat with a neighbour or put the rubbish out? leaving it unlocked for a few minutes or even the door open.I assume you lock your house up every time then, close all the windows,and set your alarm etc.? If you don't surely you are showing negligence! For me it seems like you and one or two others are bordering on saying that it was their fault that the vehicle was stolen, rather than focusing on the "thief" that simply cannot keep his or her hands to themselves by stealing someone else's property. Thieving is thieving GSX pure and simple and it's about time the law took a tougher stance on it.

    |   2
  • screenman  |  January 21 2013, 8:27AM

    Maybe they should do like the stupid women in the red car that just drove past my drive, all she had clear was a quick sweep with the wipers. Total muppet.

  • gsx1100  |  January 21 2013, 3:45AM

    See it how you want nigelsparky, but you wouldn't go out for the day and leave your house door wide open, so why would anyone leave their car unlocked, unattended, with the engine running? Negligence pure and simple. Our insurance premiums won't go up because of cases like this.The simple reason being, the insurance companies don't pay out because people, like this car owner, haven't taken sufficient precautions to thwart a thief. That is why modern vehicles are fitted with deadlocks, alarms, and immobilisers. Thieves have been in all societies, whether rich or poor, from time immemorial. After all, if you believe in the bible, wasn't the people crucified at the same time as Jesus common thieves? 2000 odd years later, and we still have the same situation, albeit crucifixion is now sociallly unacceptable. Shops have their wares on view for the intent of sale. They also have anti theft solutions such as CCTV, tagged goods or store detectives. Much the same reason, I suppose, cars have locks, alarms etc. I think you must read a different local paper to me nigelsparky, as I can't recall looking at many drunk drivers images. Sadly, unless some dies, this becoming an acceptable crime. As abohorrent as animal cruelty is, I would prefer an image of the people who are abusing our children, elderly or the more vulnerable in our society.

    |   3
  • nigelsparky  |  January 20 2013, 9:18PM

    That is where we differ. I don't see it as "negligence" and I don't see it as this guys fault for our insurance premiums going up as a result of theft. Our insurance premiums go up in this particular case because of a "thief" pure and simple. Had the "thief" not taken the car, then there would be no attempt of an insurance claim. So what about shopkeepers then, they have their stock readily accessible for the "thief" don't they, is that not being negligent too? On the subject of publicising "thieves", I don't see their photo's published in my local paper like I see drink drivers. Every time I see an article about a thief, if there is an image, it appears to be pixelated, but images of drunk drivers aren't, or indeed anyone connected with animal cruelty, which quite rightly, show them for all to see.

    |   1