Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the 02/01/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the 19/05/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, 02/06/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

Caught shoplifting at Primark - Police involved but no action


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2590 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

Hello.

 

Today I got caught shoplifting from Primark as I was making my way out.

The RLP sent me to a small room in which they told me to put everything I stole on the chair next to me (total was about 44€ - I'm from Portugal).

 

I did as I was told and then police came up after 20min. Then we went to the police office, they checked if I had any record of previous thefts, debts, etc (which I didn't).

 

Then they told me I was free to go but I'd probably receive a letter from Primark to go to court.

My questions are: what's more likely to happen - not receive a letter at all, receive a letter to go to court and/or pay a fine?

 

Thank you so much for your attention

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

you'll get silly letters from a lot called RLP

you TOTALLY ignore them

they have no legal powers.

 

 

simply read a few threads in this forum and all will be revealed..

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

Thank you for the quick response!!

 

I've been reading a few threads in here, but most don't involve the police... I figured it would make a difference, perhaps?

What if it's a letter from Primark telling me to go to court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

think you must of heard them wrong ...

 

you weren't charged

 

you weren't cautioned

 

end of their involvement.

primark don't do court.

 

they pass it onto the rent a dogs RLP.

 

end of your issue

you simply ignore them totally

 

now be a good person and don't do it again..!!

 

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

For sure I won't do such thing again... It was really dumb and stupid of me.

The police can't prosecute me if I ignore the letters? I'm asking this because I gave my real address, number and I suppose they could track me down?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

Let me dispel the myth. Although the police were involved, no CRIMINAL action will be taken as you got a warning. This warning will be held by the police should you be silly enough to try it again.

 

Primark will not send you any letters.Period.

 

You will get begging letters from RLP but you can totally ignore them as they have no lawful standing. The letters will state they are acting on behalf of Primark and say that each case costs between £300 and £500. This is also a myth as they have never backed this up with evidence.

 

All Primark could claim from you IF they did decide to take you to a CIVIL court is the costs of any lost goods, a small admin fee and the court costs so they would look at around £100 tops.

 

As it is, I have heard of no court cases taken by any retailer in the last five years. The reason being that they cannot prove the losses they are claiming for which is why RLP send the begging letters.

 

It would be worth scanning them when you get them and post on CAG to see if they have changed recently. Please ensure that if you do, you erase all identifiable details.

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 so much!

 

If I do get any letter I'll post it in here.

 

So it's still possible that I receive a letter in order for me to go to a civil court and pay a small amount, from Primark? If so, it is likely that I receive such thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no ignore

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

Thank you so much!

 

If I do get any letter I'll post it in here.

 

So it's still possible that I receive a letter in order for me to go to a civil court and pay a small amount, from Primark? If so, it is likely that I receive such thing?

 

NOPE!

In 2012 a retailer with the egging on from RLP took a case to court which was fully defended. the retailer lost and RLP lost all credibility. This is the reason Primark will not take any action so don't even worry about that.

Concentrate on the letters from RLP as they are worded in such a way to make you believe they have more power than they really have (which is none) Read them and read them again but with a suspicious mind. Remember, RLP say words like 'may' or 'if' which mean nothing.

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

"All Primark could claim from you IF they did decide to take you to a CIVIL court is the costs of any lost goods, a small adminicon fee and the court costs so they would look at around £100 tops."

 

What about this that you stated?

Also, is there any chance that the whole process is different in Portugal?

 

I'm sorry for asking so many questions, but I'm a little worried (and ashamed as well).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah! You said you were from Portugal which we assumed to mean that you were in the UK from Portugal. All advice here (apart from one section) is based on UK civil law.

 

As most of Portugal is now governed by EU law, there may be differences.

 

As it stands, I still don't feel that RLP can do much to you. I therefore suspect they won't even write to you as you are not in the UK. It all depends on what laws are in place in Portugal for loss recovery. I suspect it is basically the same as the UK

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

even less chance then

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

If they don't have a UK address for you less than zero they can do.

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

so this was a primark store in Portugal then I assume.

 

 

nothing to do with 'RLP'

you just used that name for their staff that caught you.

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

Whilst this is on overseas issue, it would be good if we could see any letters that arrive. This would give us some idea of what they can do and we can investigate any company as well.

 

Most countries in the EU have a common set of laws and others to suit their own country. I haven't yet found any civil laws on restorative justice for shops to use but I will keep looking.

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

if it goes to court than that may well happen. However, they are unlikely to want to do that as it will cost them a small fortune to prepare a case and they wil get nothing back ant the end. More likey they will use a debt collector to ask you to pay them but the money goes to the debt collector, not Primark so again all a waste for the store company

I think Primark operates differently in Portugal. From what I've read, I'll receive a letter saying to go to court and then I'll probably have to pay a fine.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've contacted Primark about the issue and I was told that it would only go to court (in aprox 6 months) if the RLP from Primark receive a police report from the incident (which they hadn't received, so it was probably archived).

Later I called the police office and the officer basically told me to "forget about the incident and move on".

 

So what I conclude is that if you have no criminal record, debts, etc, thus being your first time shoplifting AND if it's a small amount, the police in here will very likely archive the incident and no action will be taken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ta da!!

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

I've contacted Primark about the issue and I was told that it would only go to court (in aprox 6 months) if the RLP from Primark receive a police report from the incident (which they hadn't received, so it was probably archived).

Later I called the police office and the officer basically told me to "forget about the incident and move on".

 

So what I conclude is that if you have no criminal record, debts, etc, thus being your first time shoplifting AND if it's a small amount, the police in here will very likely archive the incident and no action will be taken.

 

Well done for chasing this up and updating us. Just goes to show how shady RLPand Primark security are

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

Primark are wrong about RLP's involvement in anything, you go to court if the police pass a file on to the CPS and they decide if there is enough evidence for a likely conviction and if prosecution is in the public interest.

 

The only private bodies who can instigate criminal proceedings are the RSPCA and the TV licence people

Perhaps Primark think that RLP sue people. they cant as they have no locus standi.- bit like an estate agent cant force you to sell your house just because they have found a potential purchaser.

Edited by honeybee13
Paras.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...