Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • deed?  you mean consent order you and her signed? concluding the case as long as you nor she break it's conditions signed upto? dx  
    • Well tbh that’s good news and something she can find out for herself.  She has no intention of peace.  I’m going to ask the thread stays open a little longer.   It seems she had not learned that I am just not the one!!!!  plus I have received new medical info from my vet today.   To remain within agreement, I need to generally ask for advice re:  If new medical information for the pup became apparent now - post agreement signing, that added proof a second genetic disease (tested for in those initial tests in the first case but relayed incorrectly to me then ), does it give me grounds for asking a court to unseal the deed so I can pursue this new info….. if she persists in being a pain ? If generally speaking, a first case was a cardiac issue that can be argued as both genetic and congenital until a genetic test is done and then a second absolute genetic only disease was then discovered, is that deemed a new case or grounds for unsealing? Make sense ?   This disease is only ever genetic!!!!   Rather more damning and indisputable proof of genetic disease breeding with no screening yk prevent.   The vet report showing this was uploaded in the original N1 pack.   Somehow rekeyed as normal when I was called with the results.   A vet visit today shows they were not normal and every symptom he has had reported in all reports uploaded from day one are related to the disease. 
    • Hi Roberto, Read some of the other threads here about S Sixes - they all follow the same routine of threats, threats, then nothing. When you do this, you'll see how many have been in exactly the same situation as you are. Keep us updated as necessary .............
    • Nationwide's takeover of Virgin Money is hitting the headlines as thousands of customers protest that they will not get a vote on whether it should happen.View the full article
    • unrelated to the agreement then, could have come from Lowells filing cabinet (who lowells - they dont do that - oh yes they do!! just look at a few lowell paypal EU court claim threads) no name and address for time of take out either which they MUST contain. just like the rest of the agreement then..utter bogroll that proves nothing toward you ... slippery lowells as usual it's only a case management discussion on 26 April 2024 at 10:00am by WebEx. thats good simply refer to the responses you made on your 4a form response only. pleanty of SPC thread here to read before the 26th i suggest you read at least one a day. dx  
  • 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 1974 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

Good morning!

 

This is going to be a different sort of post than what is usually in this sub-forum as no shop lifting took place. However later in the post there is some content relating to a medical condition which might put people off eating so please don't read if you've just eaten, are eating or just about to...

 

Yesterday I went to do a network cable installation for a friend and needed to get the train home. I was thinking the train refreshments trolley was likely going to be a no-show so decided to nip into Tesco for a sandwich and coffee.

 

As I entered the store the Tag Alarm sounded, this is something that happens to me frequently so I didn't react. I selected my sandwich, some Pringles and a Costa Latte. Walked to the till, Clubcard Accepted and payment made. The till offered me a receipt and for some reason one of my voices (I have Schizophrenia) told me to press Yes. For sandwiches I don't normally bother as it's a waste of paper.

 

Went to the exit and a security guard offered a farewell, I responded in kind and exited the store, again the alarm sounded. I proceeded to use the Cash Point right outside and as I was doing so the security guard approached me about the alarm.

 

They asked to see my receipt which I turned over without argument and to search my backpack which I declined for good reason. I also explained the alarm sounded when I walked in to which they responded "I didn't hear it because I was on my break" They asked me to return inside to which I also declined. I explained I had a train to catch, it was the last service of the day, so missing it simply wasn't happening.

 

At this point I was just about to bid them farewell and walk away. I hadn't stolen anything, CCTV would prove that. The security guard hadn't completed a SCONE assessment by their own admission. I think I would've been well within my rights to walk away and on a bad physical health and/or bad mental health sort of day I probably would've done.

 

However at this point I didn't really want to give them the impression I had stolen something so I opened a slight part of my backpack to show the sandwich and pringles. They handed me back my receipt and "hope you will be a little more cooperative in future as I'm just a person doing my job" and then wished me a safe journey.

 

The main reason for this post was to better understand ones permissible actions in situations where they are 'apprehended' or 'approached' by security but have committed no act of theft or any act of crime at all for that matter... I have some understanding on this from pursuing my hobby/somewhat obsession of the Railway and taking photos/videos in public of trains etc. However I'm not sure how things like PACE or Stop and Search work in cases like this.

 

An obvious question that some might now be thinking is "Why don't you just allow the search and be on your way" and that is a very valid point which I will declare in some anonymity on an internet forum but would want to hide from random people I don't know in public.

 

*Graphic Part*

I have incontinence and as such I carry a small washbag in my backpack that contains spare underwear, continence pads, wet wipes etc. It also contains a dirty bag for soiled underwear which on the visit in question was filled... Just imagine if someone had opened that on the shop floor how I or indeed anyone else would feel/react? Not to mention the health risk involved...

I had surgery for the same condition that has left permanent nerve damage at one of the incision sites which makes any touch or brush of this area extremely painful. So being patted down wouldn't be a fantastic part of the day.

 

Inside my backpack I also had some "tools of the trade" including some screwdrivers, drill bits, screw bits, RJ45 Crimpers, IDT Punchdown and a pair of very sharp cable cutters. These were all inside another separate zippable pouch thing for reasons which should be obvious. I must stress this isn't something I usually carry around just to go to the shop. Since I had to go into hospital some years ago that kit very rarely if ever leaves the house. But I had it with me today because I terminated 2 CAT6 Network Cable Socket runs.

They say a workman knows his tools... I know those cable cutters well enough from bitter personal experience to know that if you accidentally catch your finger or the bit between your thumb and index finger inside you're going to have a very bad day.

*/Graphic Part*

 

So another reason why I declined the search as I don't really want someone to rummage around inside my backpack, get some very nasty surprises.

 

This leads me to the conclusion of what a person can expect in such a confrontation and more importantly things they may or may not be entitled to ask for or do.

 

In a situation where you know that SCONE could NOT have been satisfied, and the only thing that drew the attention of security was an Alarm, would you be within your rights to politely decline further scrutiny and walk away if challenged? Especially if you had fully exited the store in question and had NOT stolen any goods or all goods were paid for?

Or would you likely be detained and taken to a dark shady room out the back?

 

Lets assume you are detained and taken out the back. Again this is purely for someone who has NOT stolen goods. What should one expect and what are they obliged to do?

 

Do you have to give your name and address and under which legal grounds would this be? (So I can read up further on this area of law)

I'm guessing anything in this room would take place under PACE so would one be within their rights to make a "no comment without legal counsel" response? Or does it not work like this?

How do security personnel adjust to people with disabilities and/or mental health conditions?

Is one at this point allowed to decline bag and person searches, specifically on medical ground. Although in a private room the embarrassment factor is lessened, it's still there and I'm made very much aware of that if you catch my drift...

 

Also if the till offers a receipt but you declined to accept it (Like I do because I don't like wasting paper just for a £1.50 sandwich) how can you explain the goods are paid for but you didn't take a receipt? I assume the Till Server would still have it in their logs?

 

Thanks for bearing with me in this long post. Something about me sets these alarms off on a regular basis, I have been trying to work out what exactly causes it when I go to my local Tesco by taking and leaving different possessions. I'm beginning to wonder if it's something in relation to the surgery I had... This all started not long after...

 

Today is the most amount of scrutiny I've faced and I know one day I'll come across "That Guy" who sets out from home and just wants to ruin your day. So I'm just looking for reassurance of what is the done and not done things because I'm well aware this will happen to me eventually.

 

Having to deal with a mental health condition like Psychosis and a condition like Incontinence is not an easy task. I'm not looking for any sympathy and to be blunt I don't want any. I do ask for a tiny bit of understanding though whenever I go out. But sadly I've noticed with everything else I'm leaving the house less and less and avoiding contact with just about anyone anywhere. So I think if I knew what to do assuming a false accusation I might feel better about going out again.

 

Happy to take questions and / or constructive criticism.

 

As for being uncooperative last night... I got my Karma... Train DID have a refreshments trolley and a lovely 87 minute delay :lol:

 

Happy Early Halloween

 

Shark

This is how I spend most of my life :ranger:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all in how you define" reasonable"

 

Alarm goes off its reasonable to suspect.

However its gets sticky in what security can actually do.

They can "invite" you back, you can decline. They then should perform a citizens arrest under section 24a of pace.

They don't. Partly under instruction of the store ( bad publicity etc) but partly as people usually comply and give permission to search the bag.

What the security guard should not be doing is patting someone down.

If the alleged thief should be handed over to the police.

 

By the way its your phone setting off the alarms in the store

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

Just thank your lucky stars you don't live in the USA. I have seen some videos where there are store staff checking every customers receipt before allowing them to leave the store and if you don't, they won't let you leave and will call the police who will turn out and get heavy with you.

 

 

If the security guard had tried to arrest you and detained you, he would soon be after a new job as to arrest anyone, reasonable suspicion isn't enough. They would need proof of theft and that was obviously not the case. I think that a civil claim for unlawful detention would follow on from his actions.

 

 

Yes, they can ask to see your receipt but you are well within your rights to refuse. The store could ban you from entering again but they can do that to anyone anyway. It's private land.

 

 

You are under no obligation to give your personal details to the security and if they tried to search you without permission. the faecal matter would hit the fan.

 

 

If they tried to force you to go 'round the back' you are within your rights to refuse politely. If you felt fearful for your safety, you could have called the police. It would likely end with the security guard being cuffed, not you.

 

 

Just because an alarm goes off does not mean anything. I have had library books set off the alarms but never a phone? I have also bought electrical goods where the tag has not been correctly de-activated.

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

Silver, you are wrong on citizens arrest.

 

Quoted.

Also look up section 24a of pace

 

Any person can arrest a person who is in the act of committing an indictable offence or

Anyone whom he reasonably suspects to be committing such an offence, if

it is not reasonably practicable for a constable to make the arrest instead and

it is necessary to arrest the person for one of the below reasons,

 

To prevent the person in question,

 

causing physical injury to himself or any other person;

suffering physical injury;

causing loss of or damage to property; or

making off before a constable can assume responsibility for him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

take everything out of your pockets/jacket phone everything then go thru the alarm see if it goes off.

 

my neighbour has a device fitted in his gut that monitors some levels of fluids everytime he goes thru an rf id sensor area it goes off

he carries a letter with him about it

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

One we'll have to differ on. You are correct on your statement on reasonable suspicion. Pace states reasonable suspicion but what IS reasonable suspicion. Setting an alarm off (IMO) does not cause reasonable suspicion.

 

 

 

As for this

 

causing loss of or damage to property; or

making off before a constable can assume responsibility for him.

 

 

We know the police rarely attend so again (IMO) this wouldn't stand. It's more likely that the police would tell the store that they won't be attending.

 

 

 

 

In substance. PaCE does seem pretty vague on what reasonable suspicion is so a security guard would need a little bit more to affect an arrest

 

 

Bit of a amble but I'm writing as I think it.

 

 

:???::smile:

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

Its well documented, in court cases, that the security alarm going off Is grounds for reasonable suspicion.

It is, after all, a device designed to stop thefts.

PACE is not Tha vague on the subject.

 

Unless a security guard ACTUALLY preforms a citizens arrest, which they very rarely do, they cannot DEMAND anything. They can ask, you can refuse. They can stop you from leaving the store ( with all reasonable suspicions) but then they MUST inform you of a citizens arrest.

BUT....

Stores like Tesco actively frown upon the security doing this for a few reasons.

Bad publicity

They do not train the staff enough on control and restraint techniques

Other health and safety issues

Opens stff up to allegations

Opens the store up to protracted legal cases

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Of course not. It is perfectly reasonable to ask a person questions just as it's perfectly reasonable to refuse to talk to security. You know this and I am detecting a hint of sarcasm.

 

Many people will happily stop when an alarm goes off to prove they have paid but the RF tag hasn't been deactivated properly (I have-many times) but there is no obligation to do so and if security staff manhandle a person who refuses to comply but is perfectly innocent, security would be in trouble. A complaint would be wending its way to the store head office at the very least.

 

It is not illegal to refuse to engage.

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

Of course not. It is perfectly reasonable to ask a person questions just as it's perfectly reasonable to refuse to talk to security. You know this and I am detecting a hint of sarcasm.

 

Many people will happily stop when an alarm goes off to prove they have paid but the RF tag hasn't been deactivated properly (I have-many times) but there is no obligation to do so and if security staff manhandle a person who refuses to comply but is perfectly innocent, security would be in trouble. A complaint would be wending its way to the store head office at the very least.

 

It is not illegal to refuse to engage.

 

Indeed. A lot of "professional" shoplifters do that, and most guards know theres nothing they can do about it unless they can show a history of that person lifting. Then it becomes reasonable suspicion. ASDA for example will never perform a citizens arrest unless it is extremely serious, as their staff are NOT trained in detaining. Even if you agreed to go to their office with them, theres nothing stopping you walking right out of the door.

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...