We have discovered that RLP are writing to people and asking for either full payment OR written agreement that they will enter into Civil arbitration.

Please be aware,that although the Civil Procedure Rules dictate that parties should engage in dialogue and try to settle issues ammicably before issuing Court action,there is NO REQUIREMENT for a party to agree to arbitration,it is a matter of choice for the individuals or parties to decide upon.

In order to give users here an insight into arbitration and what it entails,we will give some information which hopefully will allow an informed choice to be made.

edit - Work in progress-more to follow on this soon.

We have discovered that RLP are writing to people and asking for either full payment OR written agreement that they will enter into Civil arbitration.

Please be aware,that although the Civil Procedure Rules dictate that parties should engage in dialogue and try to settle issues ammicably before issuing Court action,there is NO REQUIREMENT for a party to agree to arbitration,it is a matter of choice for the individuals or parties to decide upon.

Martin, as far as I am aware my friend has not had a reply let alone offer of arbitration. I think it would be better if anyone who received this approach were to say that they ignore it if they have said previously that they dispute the claim and that as they have failed to provide evidence etc as relevant to their correspondence that they await the issuance of court proceedings. The small claims court will then itself proceed to offer arbitration before passing to a judge.

This I think would be far more prudent as it puts further onus on RLP to move to issuing proceedings which they know they have no chance of winning. I think arbitration before that is more bluff and bluster and their way of trying to get money more easily. My experience of arbitration is they are more interested in getting a settlement than anything else. They are not in a position to judge the merits of the facts being presented as this is the Judges role.

Completely agree-Its a choice for the individual.I trust RLP will acknowledge that its not something that we dismiss full stop-I would not give them the benefit of citing this in Court.Hence the discussion.

rlp have recently given me that threat and i am just waiting to see what thier next step is as "they do not wish to further corrospond with me". what do you think thier next step will be?

Will be very interesting....I dont suppose you will lose any sleep if they dont send you any more of their letters tho will you ?

rlp have recently given me that threat and i am just waiting to see what thier next step is as "they do not wish to further corrospond with me". what do you think thier next step will be?

I think if you have asked them to provide proof etc and dispute what they assert and have told them that you will not entertain further correspondence until such is provided and or consider further communication as harassment then I would ignore it.

I also think ignoring it in general does not mean you would not arbitrate but that until you have information that you have asked for to arbitrate with then there seems little point in further correspondence.

I guess that if you do not reply, at some point they will then use a debt collection agency to recover the debt (which you still dispute) because you failed to positively choose arbitration. At which point you dispute the debt with the debt collector and refer them to harassment protection law.

At which point RLP are back where they started.

I think it goes to prove that they haven't a cats hell in getting anywhere but are trying any and all tactics to get a payment without grounds.

1. RLP sends out letter for payment citing this that and the other.

2. RlP engages in communication with alledged wrong doer threatening various courses of action and providing evasive answers.

3. A stalemate situation occurs.

4. RLP plays poker with it's buddies and comes up with various wheezes to keep the claim alive.

4.1. RLP offers arbitration

4.2 RLP offers???

4. ... ??

5. RLP threatens Debt collection but no grounds alledged amount is disputed.

6. RLP goes back to 4.

possibly never

7. RLP instigates small claims proceeding

8. Small claims offer arbitration first before presenting to a Judge as this is their preffered solution.

8.1 Decide what to do at this point.

MY personal view.

If they fail to provide evidence to allow you to properly prepare a defence,then they have not exhausted pre action protocols.

So if we assume they are unlikely to go down that route-as has been said it is an alleged debt in dispute.

RLP try to say that it is not a debt but a damages request.

Either way you will find protection under the OFT guidelines on debt collection.

If RLP are not having to comply there-then any DCA certainly is.So any third party should be told of their responsibilities.

as soon as i get the next letter i will post it:Dcan't wait

i have had yet another sleepless night over this.

as soon as i get the next letter i will post it:Dcan't wait

to right bw!!!!! cag made grow a backbone. after reading everyone elses stories and all the help from everyone on cag i decided to fight it to the bitter end."dont get mad,get even";)

if you haven't been found guilty or made an admission (to a police officer not a store detective) and accepted a caution- you are not a thief and there is nothing to arbitrate over

Well we have come along way since this thread was started-in fact going on for 2 years.

During this time,RLP have changed tacs,changed/edited their website,and had to answer to many people.

The recent statement by ACPO is the icing on the cake.

Assistant Chief Constable Allyn Thomas, of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), says: "Some retailers feel frustrated by the courts and the police who see shoplifting at the lower end of offending, and we support their efforts to remedy that, but the problem comes when some companies respond disproportionately.

"It would be wholly inappropriate if individuals were being brow beaten into an admission of guilt."

ACC Thomas says anyone subjected to continued and inappropriate approaches from civil recovery organisations should report the matter to the police.