Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've looked through all our old NPE threads, and as far as we know they have never had the bottle to do court. There are no guarantees of course, but when it comes to put or shut up they definitely tend towards shut up. How about something like -   Dear Jonathan and Julie, Re: PCN no.XXXXX cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea that you actually expected me to take this tripe seriously and cough up. I'll write to you not some uninterested third party, thanks all the same, because you have are the ones trying to threaten me about this non-existent "debt". Go and look up Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd, saddos.  Oh, while you're at it, go and look up your Subject Access Request obligations - we all know how you ballsed that up way back in January to March. Dear, dear, dear - you couldn't resist adding your £70 Unicorn Food Tax, you greedy gets.  Judges don't like these made-up charges, do they? You can either drop this foolishness now or get a hell of a hammering in court.  Both are fine with me.  Summer is coming up and I would love a holiday at your expense after claiming an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). I look forward to your deafening silence.   That should show them you're not afraid of them and draw their attention to their having legal problems of their own with the SAR.  If they have any sense they'll crawl back under their stone and leave you in peace.  Over the next couple of days invest in a 2nd class stamp (all they are worth) and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
    • In anticipation of lodging my court claim next Weds 1 May (14 days after advising P2G that was my deadline for them to settle my claim) I have completed my first draft POC as below: Claim Claim number: xxxxx Reference: P2G MAY 2024   Claimant xxxxx   Defendant Parcel2Go 1A Parklands Lostock Bolton BL6 4SD  Particulars of Claim The defendant has failed to arrange for the safe delivery of the claimant's parcel containing a 8 secondhand golf clubs (valued at £265) that was sent to a UK address using their delivery service (P2G Reference xxxxx). The defendant contracted Evri to deliver the parcel (Evri Reference xxxxx) and refuses to reimburse the claimant on the grounds that the claimant did not purchase their secondary insurance contract. The defendant seeks to exclude their liability in breach of section 57 Consumer Rights Act. The secondary insurance contract is in breach of section 72. The claimant seeks reimbursement of £265, plus P2G fees of £9.10, plus postage costs for two first class letters to P2G of £2.70, plus court fees, plus interest. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from xxxxx to xxxxxx on £276.80 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx   Details of claim Amount claimed £276.80 I look forward to your thoughts and comments guys! As ever, many thanks - G59    
  • 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

RLP, teenager, shoplifting....what do I do? desperate for some up to date advice


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2766 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

Help....worried sick mum here....and a newbie to this site, please tell me if I've forgotten anything on this post.....

 

My daughter (age 16) was really stupid in July and tried to shoplift from Boots,

she was stopped (thankfully - believe me lesson learnt

- why does it always have to be the hard way?),

 

 

the police were called who in turn called us.

They had a 'discussion' with my very distraught daughter in front of me

but said they wouldn't charge her and that this would be the end of the matter

(before I got there they had already tried to calm her down telling here there would be no further action as she was falling to pieces)....

 

As soon as the police left the security guard said that RLP would be making a claim

(he didn't mention this once when the police were saying that there would be no further action taken and waited for them to leave),

 

 

he pulled out a piece of paperwork and worked out what the amount would be (the goods taken were under 19.99, undamaged and recovered), so it was about £130.00.

That evening I looked on your site and discovered the delights of RLP's reputation and waited for the letter.

It has now arrived....

 

The amount they claim she attempted to take is way more than reality therefore the compensation cost has gone up

(I believe they are set in brackets of value?).

 

They have written a letter in a very 'you need to take responsibility for what you did' naughty girl way

(believe me the police and we have utterly made sure she has taken responsibility)

 

The letter is very much worded aimed at a juvenile,

my guess is they got rapped on the knuckles for sending out scary letters to minors???

 

Otherwise the rest of it is pretty much what others have said in the past that they got from RLP,

 

 

the problem though is that I can't find any recent threads.

. is the advice still the same as in,

write to them and say 'any liability to you or any company that you represent is denied' or have things changed?

 

 

She would pay it off (slowly - she earns a pittance), I

n fact she says that's what she deserves for being so stupid and disrespectful

but I am worried that if she does it could show on a DBS check which she needs for work as well as me really being disgusted with the underhand way in which they dealt with this..

.(make no mistake I am totally disgusted at what my daughter did in the first place - just felt I needed to clarify that)

Link to post
Share on other sites

moved to the RLP forum.

 

 

you IGNORE RLP TOTALLY

and never waiver from that.

would like to see the letter for our records though.

 

 

can you scan it up to PDF please

once any identifiers are removed please

 

 

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

DO not respond to them. Jackie is a very crafty person and will say and do anything to get money.

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

dk100uk please excuse the rubbish photos of the letter, my scanner was playing up.....

 

Getting a very clear picture here that the only change is to completely ignore them and not engage with them even with a one liner.......

 

Going to have to sit tight then :!:

 

Thank you for helping, guessing this won't come up in any future DBS checks then?

 

Any further reassurance welcome :roll: I'm a real stress bucket....

 

Thank you....will update

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sorted the letter

and popped it on your earlier post

very useful

 

 

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

Ignore RLP totally, they got tolchocked in the Oxford case so are unlikely to try court, as the items were returned and saleable, ther is no crredible basis for RLP to ground any claim.

 

As to DBS if police didn't caution should be no effect, as to RLP's "Dishonesty database" it probably breaches the Data Protection Act, so is a crock of wombat excrement.

 

That letter is a complete crock, they are just like any powerless Debt Collection Agenct.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to CAG and my favourite company. Can I firstly say thank you for posting that letter up as I hadn't seen that one before. It does seem to be aimed at 10 year olds doesn't it!

 

The advice IS still the same. You, as the parent are in a good position with this as RLP have in the past written to a juveniles parents without fully considering the consequences. How do RLP know what the family situation is like? If they did the same to other juveniles and that was a 'broken' home, what would happen to that person?

 

I haven't seen this happen for a while as the majority of the teenagers involved lived away from home so this is another opportunity for RLP to show their true colours and also an opportunity to take them to task. Even though your daughter is under 18, she still has protection under the Data Protection Act so if RLP write to you instead of her, I would be wanting to put them through the wringer.

 

You have already had the advice to ignore and I share that. As more letters turn up, please post them up so I can add them to my own database.

 

I could go into detail over the 'costs' but if you read my sticky on this forum, that should answer most of your questions

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

Thank you all so much for your replies and advice.

Silverfox1961 I will post any new letters (I hope she doesn't hide them from me as she did with this one until I asked if anything had arrived...)

 

Thank you all for the help, a donation to this site very worth while...keep up the great work x

Link to post
Share on other sites

A sticky is just a thread which always stays at the top of the forum. Normally threads are ordered by time of the last post, so the more recently active threads will be at the top. A sticky is "pinned" to the top. You can spot them because they are coloured a sort of unpleasant shade of yellowy-green :madgrin:

 

I think that this is the thread Silverfox1961 is referring to.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING. EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

The idea that all politicians lie is music to the ears of the most egregious liars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As she is under 18 she cannot be taken to court for a civil debt by anyone let alone RLP, their bill has no legal standing with no compulsion or need to pay. Neither can they go after you they said so in that letter.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

A sticky is just a thread which always stays at the top of the forum. Normally threads are ordered by time of the last post, so the more recently active threads will be at the top. A sticky is "pinned" to the top. You can spot them because they are coloured a sort of unpleasant shade of yellowy-green :madgrin:

 

I think that this is the thread Silverfox1961 is referring to.

 

Thank you for that.

 

As she is under 18 she cannot be taken to court for a civil debt by anyone let alone RLP, their bill has no legal standing with no compulsion or need to pay. Neither can they go after you they said so in that letter.

 

Absolutely correct but RLP are well known to sit on these things until the juvenile turns 18 then go for it again. Even then the advice is still the same. What would be the icing on the cake (for me) is for RLP to pass this on to some equally powerless debt collector to chase. That would be grounds for harassment.

 

I love it when DCA's state that they 'Understand the amount is not in dispute' How do they know? If it wasn't in dispute, why would they have it. Laughable!

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

Ok, so with all of the replies I am now calmer about the whole thing and able to think through logically........

 

RLP's demands are a bit like someone saying she's had goods or services and just sending an invoice for what they believe she owes, if there is nothing to invoice (which in this case there is not, no goods lost and security were there anyway?) the onus is on them to prove differently and they would have to go to court, which they would have to win and she would have to then not pay.....surely only then they could send it to bailiffs, why would they send it to bailiffs before that?

 

And I do get that if there were no shoplifters there would be no need for security but I'm sure that by now this is just an included cost that we pay for each time we shop.

 

Re DBS (were CRB checks) guessing they do not affect these checks if these people have no authority, but would like to be sure, could anyone just let me know about that.......promise not to keep asking questions!!

 

Thank you silverfox1961....that was one of my questions, I wondered if when she hits 18 they would try again.

 

And thank you antone for the post about where to find the stickies.....makes perfect sense now as in they stick to the top of the threads........you must all despair...:|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again.

 

I think you're getting the idea now. There may be other letters, but as you've spotted we're talking about speculative invoices.

 

One comment, RLP can't take court action themselves, they would have to persuade the retailer to do that. We have another sticky on the Oxford court case where the defendants were backed by the CAB and where the retailer [we can't name them] lost badly. I'll find it for you, it's a revelation.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailiffs only get involved if there is a court or judgement, so not relevant.

 

Shops employ security for several reasons, including keeping an eye on staff.

 

DBS checks only relate to criminal convictions and Police cautions for offences.

 

RLP invoices work on the basis that enough people pay them, that it is not worth going beyond sending a few letters.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the post you made, it seems you have read my sticky. You are absolutely correct. One thing I didn't mention on this thread is the fact NO retailer has taken court action since 2012 after the failed attempt by a retailer, with the assistance of RLP and a barrage of lawyers to get their claim paid.

 

As the two teenage girls were allowed to be anonymous in the case, the retailer (probably knowing they were on a hiding to nowhere) wanted their name redacted. I wonder if the retailer would have wanted to be anonymous had they won the case??

 

Let RLP waste their time and money chasing this case. You are wiser now to their tactics and all this BS about each case costing between £300-500.

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

From the post you made, it seems you have read my sticky. You are absolutely correct. One thing I didn't mention on this thread is the fact NO retailer has taken court action since 2012 after the failed attempt by a retailer, with the assistance of RLP and a barrage of lawyers to get their claim paid.

 

As the two teenage girls were allowed to be anonymous in the case, the retailer (probably knowing they were on a hiding to nowhere) wanted their name redacted. I wonder if the retailer would have wanted to be anonymous had they won the case??

 

Let RLP waste their time and money chasing this case. You are wiser now to their tactics and all this BS about each case costing between £300-500.

 

Hi Silverfox1961

I was just reading another thread from a 17 years caught shoplifting and I saw your reply, you mentioned that the letter I referred to was sent to us as parents, I apologise if I have caused any confusion by not staring that the letter was addressed to our 16 year old. Should she reply as you have suggested to the other case?

Many thanks in advance (again huge thanks to everyone who has helped / sorted letters etc :-) )

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont reply in any case. AS people have repeated over and over, RLP cannot touch you or your child in any way. Jackie knows this very well but she still sends out letters lying through her teeth to get people to pay.

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

They are toothless ignore them, they would send a letter to someone who had not shoplifted, as in tag not removed at checkout, customer stooped by security taken to back room details of name and address taken, and receipt shown. Jackie would bill that customer just as surely as she would a shoplifter.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...