Hi All

I have been accused of shoplifting even tho I made a genuine mistake.

I was playing around in primark in may and totally didn't acknowledge putting a pair of eyelashes into a bag I had when I was trying on a dress in front of the mirrors (on the shop floor not changing rooms)

I proceed to pay for around £40 worth of clothing and left the shop.

upon leaving a security guard came up behind me a demanded me to follow him with no explanation.

When we was walking to the investigation room I couldn't gather what I had done wrong,

until we got back to the room and I looked in my Zara bag to see the eyelashes ( still boxed not tampered )

I apologised to the guard and explained what must have happened,

he did not even acknowledge that I was speaking to him and demanded my driving license and to complete a form.

I was left sitting in the room for around 15 mins until the guard returned with my license and handed me a bit of paper and said I will receive a fine in the post ….

I asked how much and why when it was a mistake and he said I don't know and don't care.

2 months went by and I heard nothing until

the other day I received a letter from RLP saying I owe them £95 for losses.

Can anyone please give me some advice?

Thank you!

losses = no losses use that letter in emergency and flush down toilet after

Ignore them entirely!

If you're the type to be taken in by these sorts of letters, then I'd advise NOT opening them and throwing them straight in the bin.

There is ZERO they can do, they will NOT take you to court, they will NOT take your first born, they will NOT sell your granny and they most certainly will NOT con you into paying them a single penny!

Hi and welcome to CAG. I have moved your posts to a tread of its own so that people can assist better. Carry on posting as normal.

Primark and RLP never consider a genuine mistake as if they did, they would be out of pocket. Simple as that. If the police got involved, they would see that you had spent money there so why steal and would likely come to the conclusion that no offence happened.

Theft must include intent to make it a crime. From what you say, I don't see that so the advice to ignore is correct. RLP will send a few letters then a few more from their pet debt collection agency (if they can find one) and then it all goes quiet.

You will get threats of court action but this will not happen. In the past, shoplifters who were caught were just ejected from the shops and told not to come back. Then came civil recovery who promised the stores that they would get some pocket money from the thief. For those that are prolific offenders, this means nothing as they will continue doing it anyway.

For first time offenders or those that make errors, the shock of being caught is enough to stop them. Chasing them for a fixed sum is just adding insult to injury as there is still no basis in civil law for this to happen.

it is not a FINE and I hope he DIDNT use that word ever.

totally ignore them

If the police got involved, they would see that you had spent money there so why steal and would likely come to the conclusion that no offence happened.

The police must have experienced lots of occasions where a shoplifter steals some goods but pays for others. If that was the consensus for police enquiries, shoplifters would buy some items but steal the rest.

The police must have experienced lots of occasions where a shoplifter steals some goods but pays for others. If that was the consensus for police enquiries, shoplifters would buy some items but steal the rest.

I'm sure they have, however they have the use of discretion whereas most sy staff wouldn't know how to spell it least of all use it.