From: hex@unseen.ac.am 
  
 On 27/08/2025 16:05, Mark Goodge wrote: 
 > On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 19:40:34 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk 
 >  wrote: 
 > 
 >> I note that S132 part 1 of the Highways Act 1991 makes it an offence to 
 >> attach things (posters and presumably flags) to the road or structures 
 >> thereof which includes lampposts. 
 >> 
 >> This being the case, would someone removing such artefacts be guilty of 
 >> an offence (e.g. criminal damage) ? Would the initial unlawful placement 
 >> of the item have any bearing. 
 > 
 > Removing the attached item from the property to which it is unlawfully 
 > attached would not be an offence. 
  
 Correct. 
  
 > But the item remains the property of its 
 > owner, and does not become the property of the person removing it. 
  
 If it is not theft, it does.  And it's not theft if the owner cannot be 
 discovered by taking reasonable steps. 
  
 > There's 
 > an argument that those attaching the items have voluntarily abandoned them 
 > into the possession of the highway authority, 
  
 No, it doesn't belong to the highway authority unless it appropriates 
 it, ie takes it down and into its possession or does something else to 
 it or with it. 
  
 > but that doesn't give carte 
 > blanche to third parties to appropriate them. 
  
 If it's not theft, which it isn't, anyone can take it and it becomes theirs. 
  
 >> I notice one enterprising chappie is removing flags from lampposts and 
 >> then selling them on eBay to people to put back on lampposts ... 
 > 
 > That would be theft. 
  
 No it wouldn't.  Do tell us why you think Section 2 of the Theft Act 
 does not apply. 
 > There are already cases analogous to this, for example where an event 
 > promoter has removed a fly-posted sign promoting a rival event and replaced 
 > it with one of their own 
  
 In that case, both have committed an offence under Section 132 of the 
 Highways Act 1980 (not 1991) if they have been attached to any highway 
 structure.  The second may well have committed criminal damage to the 
 first sign too wherever it was. 
  
 > or where someone has removed a political poster that they disasgree with. 
  
 Do you have a reference please? 
  
 It could be deemed theft because the owner, ie the political party, is 
 clear.  It could also be criminal damage if removing it damages it. 
  
 > Two wrongs, as the saying goes, do not make a right. 
  
 The two wrongs are the two people each *attaching* them to street 
 furniture.  Removing them may not be any offence at all. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)