Where's your evidence beyond your own assumption?
As for the threatening behaviour - you fucking deserved it. If you hadn't have been such an arrogant little arsehole, then you wouldn't have had trouble.
( Wicca'd Witch needs ideas for a new sig on..., Thu 27 May 2010, 16:37, 1 reply)

your assumptions too
now you're the one making assumptions.

The threatening behaviour was long before I said anything, it was prolonged and throughout the day.

As for other evidence, well you're right the truck might not have been stolen. I've just never hot wired my own vehicle, smashed it's windscreen and left motorway maintenance stickers with another companies name on the back for fun.

The condition on the vehicle made it unroadworthy, you don't need evidence for that it was obvious. That's illegal on it's own.

The home owner was clearly never going to be paying for the work with a cheque which would also imply (but granted not prove) the Pikey wasn't paying tax on it. (Just for the record, as I was 16 at the time and in full time education I was tax exempt for my £10 of earnings).

The stuff in the truck was dumped on top of the previous days load, so there was the evidence he'd already been fly tipping.

Now how about you get over it and just accept that as described the "pikey" mentioned in the OP clearly was a criminal through the masses of evidence I was privy to of varying broken laws.
(golddust QOTW now revolves around being a cunt, Thu 27 May 2010, 17:03, closed)