Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
    • Oil and gold prices have jumped, while shares have fallen.View the full article
    • Thank you for your reply, DX! I was not under the impression that paying it off would remove it from my file. My file is already trashed so it would make very little difference to any credit score. I am not certain if I can claim compensation for a damaged credit score though. Or for them reporting incorrect information for over 10 years? The original debt has been reported since 2013 as an EE debt even though they had sold it in 2014. It appears to be a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 13 and this all should have come to a head when I paid the £69 in September 2022, or so I thought. The £69 was in addition to the original outstanding balance and not sent to a DCA. Even if I had paid the full balance demanded by the DCA back in 2014 then the £69 would still have been outstanding with EE. If it turns out I have no claim then so be it. Sometimes there's not always a claim if there's blame. The CRA's will not give any reason for not removing it. They simply say it is not their information and refer me to EE. More to the point EE had my updated details since 2022 yet failed to contact me. I have been present on the electoral roll since 2012 so was traceable and I think EE have been negligent in reporting an account as in payment arrangement when in fact it had been sold to a DCA. In my mind what should have happened was the account should have been defaulted before it was closed and sold to the DCA who would then have made a new entry on my credit file with the correct details. However, a further £69 of charges were applied AFTER it was sent to the DCA and it was left open on EE systems. The account was then being reported twice. Once with EE as open with a payment arrangement for the £69 balance which has continued since 2013 and once with the DCA who reported it as defaulted in 2014 and it subsequently dropped off and was written off by the DCA, LOWELL in 2021. I am quite happy for EE to place a closed account on my credit file, marked as satisfied. However, it is clear to me that them reporting an open account with payment arrangement when the balance is £0 and the original debt has been written off is incorrect? Am I wrong?
    • OMG! I Know! .... someone here with a chance to sue Highview for breach of GDPR with a very good chance of winning, I was excited reading it especially after all the work put in by site members and thinking he could hammer them for £££'s and then, the OP disappeared half way through. Although you never know the reason so all I can say is I hope the OP is alive and well regardless. I'd relish the chance to do them for that if they breached my GDPR.
  • 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

opps shoplifted from sainsbury's - Please help!!??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2318 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 I have just done the stupidest thing ever, amd now I'm having a full on panic...

Please don't judge or be nasty..

 

I shoplifted some things from Sainsburys,

the alarm went off but nobody came after me

 

I just walked off (I feel sick writing this)

what is going to happen to me now?

 

Will they check the cctv and send the police to my house??

 

I will never again do something so stupid,

I'm punishing myself to the point of throwing up!!

 

Will they check cctv and find my car reg and send the police??

Please can someone help /advise me?

What happens if security doesn't stop you?! :,(

 

Also considering dumping the items outside the store with an apology note I feel that guilty!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also considering dumping the items outside the store with an apology note I feel that guilty!

 

I think that this would be a very decent thing to do – and rather than leaving them outside, simply take them inside. Put them in a bag and take the bag – with the note inside. Give it to the security guy and then walk out while he is trying to look inside it.

 

I think if you leave them outside then there is a risk that somebody else might take them or they might get damaged.

 

If you've learned a lesson and returned the goods then I don't see that anyone has any basis for complaint

Link to post
Share on other sites

But what if this alerts them to look at me further when they hadn't in the first instance?

 

Would they not have come after me?!

 

Will they check cctv and send the police around to my home?

 

I am freaking out about this..

I think I will take the things back,

 

I don't want to have the police at my door..

 

how stupid am I :( Oh my God!

Link to post
Share on other sites

police wont be involved

 

doesn't work like that.

 

just hand them back and forget about it.

 

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

If you're scared to go back into the store with the items, you could perhaps donate them to your local food bank?

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just hand items you 'found in your bag when you got home, back to the Store Manager.

I doubt he will take any further action against you.

 

What is approx. total cost of items you half-inched?

 

 

Ell-en, unless items are returned to store asap, it would still be theft, - intent to to perm deprive the owner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ell-en, unless items are returned to store asap, it would still be theft, - intent to to perm deprive the owner.

 

It would still be theft even if now returned. It is the intent at the time that is considered, not if the thief later changes their mind. Of course, this does mean an offender can try and say "I meant to borrow it, and always intended to return it". This defence has been used for the taking of cars (which is why the offence of TWOC was created), but for shop goods I doubt it would introduce sufficient doubt to provide a defence for theft, only mitigation.

 

So, from an academic point of view, it would still be theft even if the goods were later returned, if (as seems likely) they can show the (dishonest) intent at the time the rights of the owner were appropriated was to permanently deprive.

 

However, from a practical / real world point of view, returning the goods may make the store less likely to follow it up, the police less likely to follow it up, or the CPS less likely to feel that any action remains in the public interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So will the police come after me at my home??

 

police wont be involved

 

doesn't work like that.

 

just hand them back and forget about it.

 

dx

 

 

Why doesn't it work like that? I don't understand how it all works :( I will be handing the things back tomorrow, I feel so awful

 

Just hand items you 'found in your bag when you got home, back to the Store Manager.

I doubt he will take any further action against you.

 

What is approx. total cost of items you half-inched?

 

 

Ell-en, unless items are returned to store asap, it would still be theft, - intent to to perm deprive the owner.

 

 

Around £50 :( :( I'm so scared and paranoid, every car I hear I think it's going to be a knock at the door :,( serves me right I shouldn't have done it. I will take the bits back tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would still be theft even if now returned. It is the intent at the time that is considered, not if the thief later changes their mind. Of course, this does mean an offender can try and say "I meant to borrow it, and always intended to return it". This defence has been used for the taking of cars (which is why the offence of TWOC was created), but for shop goods I doubt it would introduce sufficient doubt to provide a defence for theft, only mitigation.

 

So, from an academic point of view, it would still be theft even if the goods were later returned, if (as seems likely) they can show the (dishonest) intent at the time the rights of the owner were appropriated was to permanently deprive.

 

However, from a practical / real world point of view, returning the goods may make the store less likely to follow it up, the police less likely to follow it up, or the CPS less likely to feel that any action remains in the public interest.

 

So will the police come after me at my home??

 

Unlikely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

what is done is done. No coming back from it but you have realised how wrong you were. By all means take them back but if you hand them over to security, you will have to lie and that is also not a good thing. If this was me, I would state that I found the bag outside the store and hand it over. No note, no explanation, nothing and hope the store accept that rather than going through any CCTV they have from outside the store.

 

As security was not involved at the outset, the police would not get involved and the fact that shoplifting is now classed as 'low level crime' so for any theft below £100, they tend not to get involved.

 

What you must address is the reasons you decided to steal. Have you a close friend you can confide in? Your GP is also a good choice? Addressing the reasons will help with your stress levels and assist in not being tempted to do it again.

 

Another option is to send an anonymous letter to Sainsbury's head office and enclose a cheque or postal order to the value of what you stole.

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

Hi lauren, I agree with silver, you could post the goods back and simply print sorry. The good thing is you feel you have done wrong, No one has been hurt, you may wish to confide with a professional . Whatever you do, Move on with your life and put this behind you.

Please let us know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone said above, it would still be classed as "theft", you appropriate property from another with the intention to permanently deprive them of it, I believe the "loss" aspect and returning them are irrelevant as far as the classification of theft goes under the Theft Act 1968.

 

Section 176 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 changed how low value shop theft was dealt with, I'd presume by returning the items it'd just be dealt with at a store level, however it would probably depend upon what you actually stole.

 

It's good that you feel bad for doing what you did, maybe you need to address the underlying cause of this behaviour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sainsbury's don't prosecute on minor shop lifting.

 

just give the stuff back and forget about it.

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...