Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Default Amount £9237.88, all this started in 2006 Admitted debt £9075.65 Weightmans added £1515.01 immediately they became involved, no explanation The Statement shows when Marlin bought debt in May 2011 £10439.25 Their statements, not received until the SAR, are based on this. Cabot deducted £1515.01on their statements in January 2019, again did not find this out until SAR. Weightmans added in  2007 after the CH1 etc was confirmed by the court £741.50, made up of Process server fees, Court Fee (they tried for bankruptcy), Solicitors fee and Land Registry fee. Unspecfied Legal costs were added by Marlin in March 2015, again I did not know this until statements received with SAR I had been paying monthly, without exception until December 2018. I am minded to take the property charge, CH1 amount ,deduct all my payments and the subsequent fees, and request/demand a refund on the final payment made? I consistently disputed Weightmans balances, but they never responded. I also told Mortimer Clarke/Cabot that I disputed their amounts.  
    • Just follow this link and have read of some threads so your familiar with the process https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/347310-legal-n180-directions-questionnaire-small-claims-track/#comment-5178739
    • Sorry,  I'm not familiar with terminology.  Direction questionnaire is what I've seen online as next step. Witness statement: I haven't gone that far, that's why I put the question marks.
    • 2. Is correct disregard 1. You must attend ad per the order 
    • Confirmed with Central Contact Centre that the hearing is 24th, disappointed I can't speak directly with the local county court I have to email the local court apparently is the only way. The agent couldn't explain the discrepancy between the two letters, she sounded very confused. If they were identical letters in wording but only dates were different I would feel ok, slightly worried the wording differs...
  • 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 3198 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

Hi, today I did a very silly thing a took 4 tops from primark which totaled to £15.00

I had the money to pay however the line was long so I put them in my bag and walked out.

 

 

The security guard caught me and took me to the detention room.

Here they took my details such as my name, address and date of birth.

 

 

As i am 17, they explained that I will be receiving a letter soon which will have a fine on it

maybe triple the amount of the items or even more and that i am banned from the shopping centre.

 

 

I am not sure if any police were involved as only the main security guards were there.

They also took a picture of me for the CCTV camera and said that if i enter the shopping centre they will be able to detect my face.

I will be allowed back in the shopping centre in 3 months time.

 

I am confused and scared as I havent told my parents and dont want the fine to be large

and then failure to pay the fine will result in a criminal record.

 

The security guards stated that if i do not pay, they can contact me (come to my house) and arrest me

or take away all my items and result in a criminal record and could possibly lead to courts being involved.

 

I am aware that theft is wrong and will never do this again, but i am also confused and dont know whether to pay or not.

 

Please reply, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See, starting a new thread wasn't hard.

 

OK Now I can say welcome to CAG.

 

You did what you did so let's put that to rest. No blame here.

 

Primark security guards will tell you anything to get you scared. They, in fact cannot do a thing to you, let alone coming to arrest you. Idiots!

 

The 'fine' they talk about is nothing of the sort. It will be a fixed price invoice which Retail Loss Prevention will send you. RLP cannot demand a penny from you. They certainly cannot fine you nor give you a criminal record. Only the police can do that (via the criminal courts).

 

You will need to understand the difference between civil and criminal matters. RLP rely on civil law, not criminal law so they can't do a thing except send the begging letters.

 

I do have to say that there is likely to be one fly in the ointment. I have seen one envelope from RLP who have used their name in the postage franking machine so it may be that is what 'may' happen with you.

 

Do you have a supportive family? If so, I do recommend talking to them because you can then direct them here and I will direct them to the FAQ's about what RLP really mean in the letters.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

No it wasnt haha :)

 

The security guards were quite intimating and made me feel as if i had committed a far more worse crime!

However now i feel more at ease knowing I don't need to pay a ridiculously high fine.

 

I am sure to be expecting a letter soon, and yes my parents are supportive but a topic like this is embarrassing to discuss and honestly,

im not sure if i want to say it. Unfortunately i think i may have to as I dont think i'll be able to hide the letters if multiple ones keep arriving as it will rise suspicion.

 

Thanks for your help, it means a lot!

I have definitely learned my lesson!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

RLP send between 4 and 6 letters before passing this 'liability' on to a debt collector. Whichever one they use have even less power that RLP (and they have none)

All they can do is plague you with letters. The ONLY people that can take court action are Primark and to my knowledge, they don't.

 

Stay strong and you will see this through.

 

Some reading for you.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448994-RLP-FAQ-s.-What-do-they-mean&p=4762870&viewfull=1#post4762870

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

How often would they send each letter? (Just so i can be prepared)

Also, do i reply with anything or just trash them?

 

Thanks for the info! it was really reliable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could use the letters for their intended purpose. I hear they are quite absorbent :wink:

 

RLP have (on one occasion-to my knowledge) sent a letter to the 'alleged' shoplifters parents, I feel it would be wise to send ONE (and only one) letter stating:

 

" Any liability to you or any company you represent is denied."

and

" I refuse you permission to contact any other party without my express permission."

 

That should stop them writing to your parents even though I hope they will know by then.

 

They should send the first letter within a couple of weeks. After that, it is as often as the feel like so it could be a month or more or less. We haven't managed to work out their thought processes as yet.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

can I just point out that I don't think the security guard

would have used the word fine, nor, said they could come to your door

nor said they could arrest you.

 

 

you heard it wrong.

 

 

prob implying that's what 'could' happen 'if' it went to court

and you lose the case.

 

 

and ofcourse it would never be anyone from their security service but the courts and bailiff s from the court.

 

 

if he did say those things

then you need to complain to the retailer very strongly

 

 

but as the retailer nor the security guard would everget any financial 'reward' for going thru court

I severely doubt it.

 

 

in the confusion..you prob heard it wrongly.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay great, however if I do pay the invoice, does that mean they will stop contacting me?

I don't think I will, but I am just curious as the security guards stated failure to pay the invoice will lead to the bailiffs being involved; is that true?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do NOT PAY IT. there is no reason to at all. Simply ignore them and after a few months and a few letters they'll leave you alone

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay great, however if I do pay the invoice, does that mean they will stop contacting me?

I don't think I will, but I am just curious as the security guards stated failure to pay the invoice will lead to the bailiffs being involved; is that true?

 

Lets put this straight. The security guards were lying for the simple reason:

 

Primark don't do court!

 

The only time a bailiff could ever get involved is if Primark sued you through the county court system (notice I say county not criminal court) Primark don't do court!

I you lost the case, you would then end up with a county court judgement. Primark don't do court.

 

IF you did not pay the judgement then and ONLY a bailiff 'may' become involved however as I have stated quite a few times now, Primark don't do court

 

We will always answer your worries wherever possible.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also like to add. Primark don't do court.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

and you pay it

they'll comeback for more as they'd have found a mug

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. Dx is correct. We've had a few reports on cag about them doing that

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...