Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by silverfox1961

  1. Hi and welcome to CAG.

    I assume the retailer paid for Hermes to deliver to you. If so, your complaint is with the retailer, not Hermes.  The retailer is the customer of Hermes, not you

    If it was you that arranged the delivery and paid Hermes direct then you are the customer and you can continue to claim


  2. Hi and a welcome from me.

    I have an interest in Hermes (and Parcels2Go) and it is my opinion that they do not want their terms and conditions tested in court as almost everything they convey is prohibited for them to carry which (again in my opinion) is not lawful.

    Nearly case I have followed so far has been settled but it needs a full court case to test those terms and conditions. As your case is quite a costly one, Hermes may decide that it is worth defending so you do need to be aware of that.

    Bankfodder is the 'go to' guy in these cases and I am glad to see he is helping.

    • Like 1
  3. Hi and welcome to CAG.

    Don't even stress over this. The time to act has gone. They have no proof you took anything and if they wanted to trawl through hours of footage, that would not be cost effective.  If they did look through the footage, they don't know who you are and if stopped at any time in the future, refuse to go with them and walk out of the store. If they were foolish to drag you back, you would have a claim against them for assault

  4. "Notice of intention to commence legal proceedings" Means absolutely nothing!


    "Despite our offer of a reduced payment of £160" Erm! £160 isn't a reduced payment. Totally laughable letter.


    I echo Dx's post.


    I suspect the next letter will be from either Gladstones or BW Legal with the title "Letter Before Claim". It is at this time that you can act. Before then, sit on your hands.

  5. Hi and welcome to CAG.


    First off, I am assuming that Superdrug are part of a shop/storewatch scheme so yes he would be able to pass your details onto others stores within the same scheme BUT, he cannot state that you are banned from other stores. Each store will have different procedures to dealing with shoplifters. You would normally be asked to leave if they chose to. All stores are private and customers are there by invitation only and that invitation can be withdrawn for any or no reason at all.


    If memory serves me right, Superdrug use Retail Loss prevention (RLP) to collect these "fines!" It is no such thing. It is a charge levied by RLP to you but it has no legal nor lawful power over you. You do not pay it. They have no right to it. Yes they can chase and make statements about court which they don't do. The can't. Only Superdrug can but they don't bother as it would cost them far more than they would ever get back.


    The bad stuff. RLP will write to you directly but their letters are franked (no stamp) with their name on it. Nasty but I have checked and they can get away with it.

    If you don't respond, it has been noted that RLP wrote to the Parent/Guardian. Whether they still do this, I don't know. With this in mind, it would benefit you if you 'fessed up' to your parents but only if you live in a stable family environment. Once that is done, you can direct them to this forum and show them your (and other) threads to show just how powerless RLP are. Letters could take two to three weeks to arrive.


    The letters generalise matters rather than going into fine detail due to RLP using standard template letters. They don't calculate how much they want. They just make up a number and include that in the letter. They also state that each event costs the retailer £300-£500 which is a load of bovine excement. They include this in order to make you think you owe them X amount. You stole. The store got the goods back. No loss. Security staff are paid whether or not they catch a shoplifter.


    I really do encourage you to confide in your mum at the very least because you are not obliged to pay this spurious charge-ever. Nobody can take court action against you mainly because you are under 18 and for the reasons above.


    When you get a letter (IF) can you cover up all your details and post them here. I haven't had a good laugh for ages. Also, read this https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448994-RLP-FAQ-s-What-do-they-mean-Reviewed-September-2015&p=4762870&viewfull=1#post4762870


    and read around the forum as well

  6. As UKPC have not followed the guidelines set by the BPA in that it's members should use PoFA when chasing tickets, there can be no keeper liability. Only the driver can be chased and you are under no obligation to name them. Anybody with their own insurance can drive your car with your permission although under third party rules only.


    I would wait until the Notice to Keeper arrives and see what they say. If they then start relying on PoFA, they would be on a sticky wicket (IMO) as the shouldn't be able to issue tickets under one law then chase under another.


    The NtK should arrive (if PoFA is used) between 29 and 56 days after the issuance of the ticket. If it arrives too early or too late then they are stuffed.

  7. Hi and welcome to CAG.


    I have looked on Googlespy (Street View) and there is one sign at the entrance to the estate but that is on Samas Way and is after the entrance to Alcock Crescent so by assumption, this sign suggests one area (Samas Way) is the permit holder part only.


    Travelling around the site, I spotted 11 other signs (possibly more than I could see) which had individual terms on them however, the main condition is "No unauthorised parking" . This is an absolute term so you cannot breach a term that forbids parking. This is trespass only and only the landowner can take action, not UKPC.


    I can't understand why UKPC have not mentioned PoFA. Can you post up the ticket, suitably redacted of all identifiable information where we can see what is what.

  8. What I am about to say, you won't like at all.


    Driving without insurance has wider implications than just using it sparingly. Your actions cause others to pay higher premiums. If you can't afford insurance/tax then you can't afford a car. If you had been in a crash whether or not your fault, you would have caused wider problems for yourself mainly that your car should never have been there in the first place. No car= no crash! Also, having no insurance would mean no tax either. Did the car at least have a valid MOT?


    As for 'very mild speeding'. There is no such thing. You were caught speeding. Speed limits are there for a reason even if they are not completely obvious.


    I would advise that you stop trying to minimise your actions; you have no excuse. Take whatever is given in fines and/or ban. Learn from your poor choices and don't do it again.

  9. Intriguing. My suspicions are they may be experiencing cash flow problems and before they go bust are trying to get as much money in before they do.


    On looking at Biometrix, the only company I can find with a previous name of Supatelecom . which shows they have only 12 employees and not a lot of cash to go around.


    On checking the Supanet name the company has no assets whatsoever which says much the same thing as I think. No money, chasing potential victims.

  10. Hi

    I am very confused.


    The'Fine'. Who did they pay it to? B&Q or someone else? Did the police attend? Did the police give a fixed penalty notice?


    The manager was wrong to make her pay for the stolen item and then keep it.


    Information about shoplifters can be shared with other stores as long as those stores are members of a Shop/Store watch scheme. If they have passed this on without being in a scheme, they could be held liable for a breach of Data Protection.


    Your last sentence is irrelevant to this situation.


    We do need more info before we can move on.

  11. You could get his signature for you to act on his behalf and instruct them that any further letters be sent to you. This removes the stress on him but if they fail to do so, a formal complaint could be made.

    I don't normally say to contact them but in this case it may help.


    Even though it has been passed to Zenith (DR+ in disguise) the only correspondence should go to (Not so) Smart Parking. Never state who was driving of course.

  12. Hi and welcome to CAG


    It really annoys me when security use threats such as these to scare people. While it is obviously wrong to steal, this should not be compounded by incorrect information.


    You will get a few letters from RLP but as you didn't give the correct apartment number, someone else will get them and maybe pass them on to you.


    These letters will make claims that they 'may' do this or 'might' do that. None of which are true. Only Primark can take action but they don't bother as it is not cost effective to do so


    If you do get the letters passed on to you, let us see a redacted version of the letter to confirm that it is one we have seen before but most importantly, IGNORE RLP!

  13. Hi

    While not wanting to jump in as you have excellent company in Bankfodder, I would like to add my thoughts and questions.


    Firstly it seems that P2G do not want their terms and conditions tested in court ans as you have previously seen, they settle out of court. That is my opinion and may at one time be proved wrong when P2G carry on all the way into court. You paid a fee for the collection and delivery of a product. The value is neither here nor there. They failed to complete the delivery.


    Have you managed to get proof of value? You already have proof of collection and proof of non delivery.

    Did you advise them of the value before collection? Personally I don't think it matters much. Have you researched getting a replacement and the cost? I would do that as I don't think you can claim £200 for a product that has a lesser value when purchased elsewhere.


    To protect yourself although I don't think it would matter, reject the offer of £20. Once you have submitted a Letter Before Action and given them the required 14 days to respond and they have not responded or still dispute your claim, file a claim on day 15. It is always better to have an account set up with MCOL beforehand as it gives you the ability to read more about any claim.

    • Confused 1
  14. I hope this is helpful, in reference to signs taken in June 2018 work these maybe out of date. I work very near Whitfield and the McDonalds situated there underwent major refurbishment around November 2018 so new signage may now be in place.


    If you need photos I maybe able to assist with this next week.


    Absolutely helpful. I do this on occasion as well when I travel near to car parks. It's only a small diversion for me.

  • Create New...