Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4534 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Sorry this is quite a long post.

 

A few weeks ago i was in Superdrug with my 2 year old daughter in her buggy. I placed one packet of non branded sanitary towels (worth less than £1) on the hood of the buggy with full intention to pay. I became distracted looking at other items in store and dealing with my daughter's pestering for crisps and totally forgot the item was there. I left the store and was swiftly brought back by security.

 

To my horror not only had I left the shop having forgotten about the item, but the packet of sanitary towels was unconcealed on top of my buggy for the whole high street to see; extremely embarrassing on all fronts.

 

I was then shocked when 3 police officers turned up to question me. Having seen the situation one officer asked the security guard if it was a joke and the security guard even apologised to the officers for calling them out. On more than one occasion I offered all parties the opportunity to search my bags, i had about £80 of receipted goods on me from other shops, plus cash and debit cards in my purse, but this offer was ignored. Needless to say the police left without any action, however Superdrug have branded me guilty without investigation and banned me from all their shops. I’m sure you have all already guessed this part too, but my details were also passed to the RLP.

 

The SD manager kept away from the “action”, i had to ask to see him. As i asked he happened to be passing through, so i told him what happened. He just shrugged and walked off. A credit to Superdrug i’m sure you’ll agree.

 

I contact SD, who told me they would investigate the issue with their security company. I also wrote to their security company to complain. The upshot of several letters back and forth to both companies is that neither want to get involved, and they have now referred me to the RLP. I have received a £87 fine from RLP, to which i have replied to them strongly denying the allegations and requesting they remove my details from their system.

 

During correspondence with Superdrug they advised me the stories of their manager and security guard do not tally up (i.e. one of them is telling lies) yet they don’t see a need to get to the bottom of that and continue with their allegations. I have requested a meeting or call with all involved but this has been ignored. SD also maintain that the store manager is not prepared to revoke the store ban either, no doubt because this highlights the mistakes he made in this case.

 

Superdrug do not want to engage in discussions about this, and blindly refer me to the RLP. This is obviously a downward spiral. I’m not worried about the threats of being taken to court – i’d welcome the opportunity to discuss this in front of an impartial judge, but i’m not happy about making an appearance of their “dishonesty” database. I’m a professional contractor, so change job frequently. Having my details on this database could ruin my career and source of income. I’m toying with the idea of initiating court proceedings against Superdrug for making these false allegations available to anyone who cares to pay the RLP subsidiary for it, is this not libel?

 

Has anyone got any advice or recommendations of where i go from here? As i said before i am fully prepared to take this as far as i have to, not only for me but to stop them doing this to other people.

 

 

Thanks for reading my story of woe and thanks in advance for any advice you may be able to give

Link to post
Share on other sites

RLP can't fine anyone - only a court can do that. RLP's business model is speculative invoicing; they send you a bill which they hope you will be scared into paying.

 

You have two options:

 

1. Ignore them. They may send a few more letters, but they are extremely unlikely to take the court action they threaten.

 

2. Send them a simple, short letter explaining that you have not been convicted of any crime, and therefore will neither pay them any money or enter into any correspondence with them. Then ignore them.

 

The database to which RLP refer is something of a damp squib. They say that employers refer to it, but we've never heard of one that has. Paying RLP does not affect whether or not they put your details on the database.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your comments, much appreciated. I have no intention of paying them anything and have already told them so (no reply yet), my only slight concern is if the address i live at gets black listed from the bailiffs.

 

This entire incident is ruining my life, i can't sleep properly, it's affecting my work and i don't like going out with my friends because it's always in my mind and i can't relax. I haven't told anyone about this except for my partner. I haven't even done anything wrong but they've made me feel ashamed!

 

Does anyone know if there is any way i can sue Superdrug for instigating this libel against me. Depending on the cost and practicalities it would be worth it to make these stores think twice in future.

 

I was interviewed by the police whilst in tears in front of my toddler because the store manger hasn't got the common sense to see a mistake. What shop lifter walks out with an unconcealed packet of economy sanitary towels, surely a first! I don't want to have to sit back and be threatened for months until it eventually fizzles out.

 

I have also written to the CAB today so they can add this to their campaign and am planning to contact my MP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be brutally honest I'm not sure that trying to sue Superdrug will do any more than prolong what you're going through. Slander (libel is printed or otherwise published) is notoriously difficult to bring an action on; most barristers want a minimum £100k up front, such are the risks.

 

I suggest that in a fairly short time you will see this incident in a different perspective. You made a mistake, and then Superdrug made a bigger one. You were exonerated, however, and the reality is that everyone else involved has almost certainly forgotten about it. I don't doubt that it made you feel dreadful, but it'll pass.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all, your point is taken.

 

It just riles me that they are allowed to say whatever they want without providing proof. Real criminals actually get a hearing. I still have a couple of avenues to investigate to clean up this mess, if they come to anything useful i'll re-post to hopefully help anyone else who falls foul of this.

 

Thanks for your time

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 1 month later...

Please note, i lost my login so have created a new acc to update my original post.

 

Sorry i should have sent an update earlier, but to be honest it's been nice not thinking about this for a while, it hasn't been one of my highlights.

 

I engaged in communications with Superdrug customer services and the security co - Stealth Security, but seemed to be going around in circles with each referring me to the other or RLP. The store manager and security guard had discrepancies in their stories which made it even more difficult to resolve this. I then emailed the Superdrug CEO, to his credit he requested a further investigation and i was put in contact with their legal department. The case was then dropped and customer services sent me a £50 gift voucher. I also gave details of this case to the CAB, who have were very supportive. Richard Dunstan recommended asking for all the info they held relating to my case which i did. I eventually received a large folder of emails, plus the forms which were sent to the RLP. I found some discrepancies on the RLP form sent by Stealth Security, it said i'd admitted guilt and i'd concealed items within my pushchair. Both are untrue. The biggest shock i got was were the guard and manager had both said the police had told them someone of my name and the same situation has been caught earlier that week and they wanted to see me to confirm if it was me or not. For the record, it most certainly was not me, and the coincidence is pretty high that i question if this comment is true (especially as other lies had been written about me). The strange thing is they made a big deal about this comment in their correspondence to each other (there was a note there not to tell me this information), yet no-one bothered to confirm the police response when they did see me. I emailed Stealth Security to try and have this clarified in writing but the manager there is no longer replying to my emails. Hmmm

 

Anyway, i hope this information is useful to anyone else out there in a similar position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be worth a last letter to RLP to tell them that superdrug have appologised for their actions and withdrawn their allegations and that you expect all data that RLP hold about you to be removed from their systems and a certificate of destruction sent to you ...It might not achieve much, but it might make them squirm a little

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
Might be worth a last letter to RLP to tell them that superdrug have appologised for their actions and withdrawn their allegations and that you expect all data that RLP hold about you to be removed from their systems and a certificate of destruction sent to you ...It might not achieve much, but it might make them squirm a little

 

Ignore them; they cannot enforce the fine as you have not been convicted of any crime. Why not go to a no win, no fee solicitor and have them write to them and demand that they clear your name, remove you from all of these database things and apologise with compensation? They may not listen to you, but solicitors know of ways of speaking to these people to sort things out. Your local law society should be able to advise of a good local solicitor in the area of law that you need. And there is no such thing as a black list; bailiffs make false claims in this matter and they do not have any powers if you do not owe the money. Do not let them in and ignore them as well. These people try all sorts of tricks, but most of them are illegal. I am sure that you will get it sorted, but it is really worrying and you must be very anxious. Make sure you get a lot of damages for this: these idiots have damaged your reputation and hurt your professional name and slandered you needlessly. They have also caused you a lot of time and inconvenience and they deserve everything that your solicitor can think to throw at them. For the humiliation alone; they deserve to be taken down an peg or two. Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore them; they cannot enforce the fine as you have not been convicted of any crime.

 

-

 

They're not enforcing a fine, nor do they threaten to.

 

What a retail loss preventer does is offer the option of settling out of court, an option that the vast majority of individuals accused of shoplifting are glad enough to accept because a xxxxxxxxx is not the sort of person with the courage to stand up before a judge to defend himself and expect to win.

 

If you rather expect the Court to see it from your point of view, the thing to do is raise the stakes, from the start. Tell them to put up or shut up, to lay their information before a Magistrate in order to try the case if they get so far as that.

 

Once you have done as much as that, the advice to take no notice of what you hope is an empty threat would be that much more appropriate. Otherwise, if they did eventually proceed to act, you would not have helped yourself by talking no notice.

 

That is not the sort of conduct to win the sympathy of a judge.

Edited by Legislation
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...