unit 5 law AQA arghhh!!!

Scroll to see replies

rach.x

Ah that's ok then :smile:

I still missed some bits out but it should be ok

For A I put Obtaining Services Dishonestly because he intended not to pay in part

S.11 is defined as ''dishonestly obtains a sevice without paying as expected or required where payment is required" [or something like that].

S.2 is intent to avoid payment either in part or in full...so i thought that section applied better...but i think you could of tried both of them and yu'd get the marks for looking at s.11 or s.2 FA 2006.

Reply 81

PAPAdawg

Pezza18

Yeh, i put duress by threats would be very unlikely to be successful :biggrin:

Some people put s.11 and s.2 for the fraud part...but i didn't have time to explain both so i just wen for s.2 as he had intent to avoid payment in part.

lol i dont get how anyone could have time for this. weirdos :yep:

better get off tsr and get revising or unit 6 now i reckon. havent even opened my textbook for it yet

Reply 82

rach.x

Pezza18

I've been taught that the elements of the actus reus of Obtaining Services Dishonestly are 'obtains services which require payment' and 'fails to pay in whole or part' :s-smilie:

but yeah, I think either would work :smile:

Reply 83

J35sica

That was awful... completely missed out S.2 FA False Representation and went for S.11 obtaining services dishonestly instead
I had no idea what the actus reus or mens rea were for it, so I just rambled on for ages :frown:

Not good.

Reply 84

chigz32

Any Question One-ers out there?

For A) I got theft, abuse of position, and fraud by false rep
B) Criminal damage (basic offence), burglary s9.1.b, intox and self defence
C) I did theft

it went better then I thought it would :smile:

Reply 85

Pezza18

rach.x

I've been taught that the elements of the actus reus of Obtaining Services Dishonestly are 'obtains services which require payment' and 'fails to pay in whole or part' :s-smilie:

but yeah, I think either would work :smile:

LOL. I've been taught it the opposite way around :p:

Oh well...i'm sure they'll be marks for either.

Reply 86

Azori

chigz32

same, although I didn't mention abuse of position, just did theft and fraud by false rep in loads of detail for a)

Reply 87

thewait

chigz32

Yep finally found someone who done q1). Wrote the same as you for part a) but also included failure to disclose as he didn't tell claire he used her money to gamble. Missed out burglary though seeing as how i couldn't find any element of it as he went into a shop so not being a trespasser and as far as i read he didn't go anywhere he wasn't supposed to go. But don't know might have missed something. Also did theft aswell.

Suprisingly it went well considering i hardly knew criminal damage and fraud when i left my house this morning. Also unit 4 went well aswell 1st time actually finished the paper.

Reply 88

ElleWest123

Did anyone do tort? Qu 4??

Reply 89

Pezza18

ElleWest123

Did anyone do tort? Qu 4??

Not that i know of. :p:

Reply 90

chigz32

thewait

Score! I thought about failure to disclose info, but because of theft, I just didnt have time!

Reply 91

90kz11

ElleWest123

Did anyone do tort? Qu 4??

Yes I did. :smile:

Reply 92

ElleWest123

90kz11

Yes I did. :smile:

Did u put part a as private nuisance? I didn't know whether cos they were neighbours (plural) whether they would be classed as a 'class' of people and so public nuisance.

Reply 93

90kz11

ElleWest123

Did u put part a as private nuisance? I didn't know whether cos they were neighbours (plural) whether they would be classed as a 'class' of people and so public nuisance.

Well we were always told to mention all the criteria for Private Nuisance, and then I said it would be public nuisance, as it affected neighbours plural, but it would depend how the court saw this, ie whether it was a reasonable class.
And then I mentioned Rylands v Fletcher!

I didn't have time to finish 4b though! It was rushed!

Reply 94

ElleWest123

90kz11

Good good, that's what I did, I wrote at the end, that they may be classed as a 'class' of people sohopefully that'll be good.

I know 4b there was so much going on, should there have been a contirbutory negligence? I forgot all defences :s