Jump to content

silverfox1961

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    21,068
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Everything posted by silverfox1961

  1. If memory serves me right, the BPA state that cars parked without showing a badge but once proof of the badge is provided, the charge should be cancelled. I know this is an IPC case but I haven't fully read their guidance as yet. The problem is that blue badge cases are voluntary and no member is forced to make adjustments which is why it is pointless to argue with any member of the IPC as all they are after is the money.
  2. I remember other SP cases where they were out of time and at least one was from the same site. This is what I would do so not recommended. I would (as the keeper) write a strongly worded letter to Smart Parking that I would not be naming the driver as I don't have to and if they wish to pursue this case I will report their misleading manner to the BPA. A case of 'Put up or shut up' I would also contact the DVLA to find out what date the keepers details were obtained. If that date was more than 14 days after the parking event then SP obtained keeper details in a manner that they should have not done- and known it too. As well as being in breach of KADOE, it would be a breach of the GDPR as the grounds to obtain those details would have ended.
  3. DO NOT Tell (not so) Smart Parking who was the driver. Explain to the keeper what we have told you and reassure them that if SP do try it on, they will lose.
  4. Hi and welcome to CAG First of all, stop stealing! we will help as much as we can but if you continue to steal then it makes us look like fools. Now, don't worry about this 'fine'. It is nothing of the sort. Security staff should know this but some of them are wannabe police and think they have some power. Nah! what you will receive is a letter from RLP full of weasly words that will make you think that this charge is valid. IT IS NOT! Primark got the goods back so there is no loss. You will be made to believe that the charge is for security costs. It's not All you need to do is ignore RLP totally. They can do nothing to you - ever! What you do need to do is get help finding out why you steal in the first place. Your GP may be able to assist with that.
  5. Hi Ignore them totally. ANPR tickets should be received by the keeper within 14 days of the infringement. This Notice to Keeper is well out of time unless some minor miracle occurred and a paper ticket was stuck to the car. If no Notice to Driver (windscreen ticket) was issued just ignore all attempts by them to get a penny out of you
  6. Blimey, not a lot to look at is it! It is my belief that they are trying to get around the requirements in their guidance of the IPC. They have confirmed that it isn't a parking charge but it was stuck to the car. As it stands, if they obtain the vehicle details from the DVLA before the 28 day period has expired and it is NOT an ANPR ticket where the Notice to Keeper should receive this within 14 days, they would be in breach of the GDPR as they had no grounds to request the keeper info from the DVLA. I suspect they are trying it on in the hope of getting a few quid out of the unsuspecting motorist. If you do go on to the website and it asks for any personal details before you can see the pictures, DON'T!!
  7. Hi and welcome to CAG Myparkingcharge IS Excel...or VCS but they are the trading name of excel. I have just had a look at the 'what do they know' site regarding the bylaws regarding the airport. According to the DfT, the bylaws were signed in 1982 and no revocation nor alteration has been made up to the date of the FOI request. 7th March 2018 so I would assume the bylaws are still in place which means that excel/vcs/myparkingcharge would have no interest this is a case where the bylaws have been infringed meaning that any case would have to go to the magistrates court where a penalty would be imposed. This fine goes to the crown. This is why the parking company want you to pay them rather than face a court as then they get their payday. I can see no harm in checking out the website to see what they have. Can you upload the card they left on the windscreen minus any car details. Pdf is best
  8. TNC group services are a separate company to P4 Parking but they are members of the BPA in their own right and as such may have the right to get details from the DVLA. I would question this as it is P4 that issued the original ticket so I would contact the DVLA to find out who actually got the keeper details. I can't see TNC doing this as they would have had no interest in this matter until they were assigned the case. The letter itself will be a template and some uneducated person didn't fill it in properly so the location should be challenged if this ever saw a court, which I doubt. For the whole of 2018 (so far) P4 have taken just two cases to court but we don't know if P4 won or lost the case. They are a small company who tend to rely on manual ticketing only. I have had a look at the images again and the double yellow lines start in Arsenal Way and progress around the corner. IMO, if the DYL were part of the area covered by P4, they would start from inside Duke of Wellington Avenue and continue on, NOT start in Arsenal Way and finish in DoWA so again I say that you were not parked in the area covered by P4 and as such, a possible breach of the GDPR would occur and if P4 were stupid enough to try it on in court, a possible counterclaim could cause them to think again. Just my opinion of course. Trespass is the only thing I can see in the area and that means the landowner, not P4, can take action.
  9. Let's make this clear. RLP can do nothing. All they can recommend is that Primark take action in the county court and Primark don't do court. To clear up any other confusion. A county court has nothing to do with a criminal court so no criminal record would ensue if a court case was made (it won't) Have a look at this thread. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?356933-Oxford-Retail-Loss-Prevention-A-Retailer-**-reveiwed-September-2015-**&p=3898857&viewfull=1#post3898857 A long read but well worth doing so. The case above is why no county court cases have been made since 2012. If Primark were so certain of their position, they would go to court but as we know, security costs are already factored into the prices people pay at the till. They cannot chase for the loss of goods as they had them back so all they can try is the security aspect. Ignoring the letter is always the best option with bottom feeders.
  10. As far as I am aware, ATOS operate the Idependent Assessment Services for PIP claims and Maximus do the ESA claims. I have a complaint with the Independent Case Examiner at the moment but the workload must be huge as they are currently dealing with cases from July last year I have to say that Maximus were brilliant with me but ATOS screwed me over and nobody wants to read the transcript of the recording I made because I did it secretly. I'm hoping ICE will read the transcript or listen to the recording No doubt the assessor will twist your responses as they did in mine.
  11. Hi I think that this from another site explains things quite well http://tinyurl.com/y7p3qwp5
  12. Hi and a warm welcome from me, All I can do is generally agree with the other posters here. I take it you haven't had the details of the CRO. It may be something as simple as writing a letter of apology. You would be surprised how many people come here asking similar questions as yours and for similar reasons too. Mental health issues form a large percentage of the cases here so seeing your GP is the one thing I would recommend. Speaking to your doctor might just help in understanding the poor choice you made. You may be offered a short course of anti - depressants. Don't be afraid of them. They do help (once into your system) As for RLP. Everybody here will say don't pay them. I agree. RLP share with retailers the proceeds of people foolish enough to believe their rubbish and RLP get the lions share. The letters will claim that each incident costs between £300 and £500 and that all they want is a contribution to these costs. Total rubbish of course for one simple reason. If it was true that it cost Primark this amount, shouldn't they get 100% of the claimed monies? The last I heard, RLP take 60% and the store gets the rest. Don't fall for the lies which is exactly what they are. The letters will be worded in such a way that people believe they have some power. They Don't! Always read and read again to discover what they actually mean. I wrote this post a ling time ago but it is still relevant today. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448994-RLP-FAQ-s.-What-do-they-mean-Reviewed-September-2015&p=4762870&viewfull=1#post4762870 Now, I am not 100% sure I agree with their being nothing on a CRB check. A basic one would not show anything but this is the bit I am not sure of. An enhanced CRB check allows the police to add things that may be relevant to any job and the CRO may show up. Like I said, not 100% but better be more alert to the possibility. Sorry if I sound pensive but I just don't know. After such a long missive, it boils down to this. Do the CRO Ignore RLP See your GP Good luck
  13. We have another member who was a loss prevention member who gave great advice. Your input on this forum will help us help others by giving a more detailed explanations as you have been involved in loss prevention and not just someone who has an interest in stopping the likes of RLP profiting on the misery of someone who has stolen. Just because the police tend to not get involved in cases under £200 must not mean that they shouldn't be. While I know it's a pipe dream, it is my opinion that police should be the first call, not RLP
  14. Fully agree with losspreventionguy in everything said except one word. 'Mistake' From the majority of threads I have been involved with, the shoplifter makes a 'choice'. I appreciate some people have mental health conditions and any choice made would be classed as a mistake but for others, it's a choice. Sorry if I seem a little pedantic over that word. If you really want to get up someone's nose, just say 'FINE' when it isn't and DX will have a hissy fit.
  15. Hi and welcome to CAG. Whilst this is true that no action can be taken, this does not stop the likes of RPL getting involved. They prey on the consumers lack of knowledge to obtain *cough* 'redress' *cough* for their acts. I have seen some threads on CAg where an 'alleged' shoplifter has paid for the goods after being caught and then been chased for security costs. RLP like to claim that each event costs the retailer between £300 and £500 per incident and that the sum demanded is a contribution to the stores losses. This can never be true as RLP take a cut first before sending the remainder on to the store. I could trawl this forum to find the relevant threads but I really can't be ar**d
  16. The site is located at 48 reads Avenue and there are no planning applications going back to 2011
  17. Blackpool seems to be the target at the moment. I have seen quite a few cases. Can you say which car park it was. There are two. There is one behind an hotel which is easily missed and the other is next to Norwood hotel. This is the one I suspect is the one you used. If so, the contract has changed hands. It was ran by North West Car Parks Ltd (NWCP) which now means the signs will have changed. As far as I am aware PA have a court record of zero. I suspect that as they get closer to the court date, they will back off. Were you just visiting? If so, getting up to date photos is going to be hard. As PA are members of the IPC they don't normally follow PoFA 2012 which means that they can only go after the driver, not the keeper. A few more checks on the company is needed. Planning Permission for the signs being one.
  18. As already mentioned, the likelihood of you getting a phone call from anyone is slim. I get lots of private number calls on my phone. Very few are [email protected] (unless you are/were a customer of Talk Talk) If you answered and it is RLP (or one of the others, simply one of two things. 1 "In writing only" 2 " Eff off" Both routes will work. In the UK, lots of firms are not allowed to hide behind a withheld number. Some NHS services do hide the number (My GP does this) and they are allowed. All you need to remember is that these people have NO power over you. Just because they may say they have, they are lying. One of the worst things about the English language is the ability to use various words to imply one thing when in reality, it means something else. At the moment, none of us can say for certain that any civil recovery company will get involved so it's a case of wait and see but try not to worry about something that may not happen. It's pointless to do so. One other thing. You mention that you don't wish to have this thread on the forum. Unfortunately, this already happened when you posted the first post. It doesn't matter either way. You won't be identified. You are one in millions of possibilities so no need to stress over that. Also, the fact that your post is in the open means that you get advice from others who have experience and not just from a few of us.
  19. Ignore what I said about writing a letter. I was unsure of the full situation. Remember, your details will be stored by RLP only and ONLY if Lidl passed this over to them. Lidl do not have their own shoplifter database so they cannot remove your name as it wasn't there in the first place. You will make yourself ill by questioning every thought. What's done is done. Move forward. nothing serious will ever come of this, believe me. I have been doing this for a long long time!
  20. If you read around other threads where a visa was worried about, you will see that they had no problems and neither will you. there is no OFFICIAL record of this so on any visa application you can truthfully say that you have no convictions. I must have mis read you original post as I assumed you have been banned. You haven't been but that doesn't men that you can go back to the store (just in case) but there is nothing stopping you going to the other store nor any reason to not go into any store you wish to go. No photograph was taken so there will be no images of you anywhere. It may be that the security staff decided not to do anything and may have believed you. Just a case of wait and see if anything comes in the post. RLP tend to write within two to three weeks. You really do need to read up on what security staff powers are. very simply-very little. They cannot fine you. They cannot put your name on any database (only RLP do that) They cannot add anything to any official database so there is nothing to worry about. You may get a ban letter, you may not but for now, stay away from the store. Finally and I'm going to shout out off the rooftops. THIS WILL HAVE NO, NONE, ZERO, NADA, ZILCH AFFECT ON ANY VISA APPLICATION. You will have had trouble if the police were involved but they weren't so you are all clear to apply and never mention this on any form. Is that clear enough?
  21. They cannot contact your husband as that would be a breach of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) as it is you that was apprehended. I do recommend that you explain to him what you have said here as that will help you to be able to discuss it UNLESS your husband has a temper then keep quiet. This database. As nobody has confirmed it actually exists, we have to assume it does. Any name stored on it will be there for six years. As mentioned, it cannot be disclosed to anybody (apart from the police) without your written permission. The chances are that nobody will ask so that is nothing to worry about and of course you can refuse permission when asked. Sharing of pictures is something that has been done within the same group of companies and if there is a shopwatch/storewatch scheme in the area, they would share it to them too. You didn't say they had taken your picture so if you are referring to CCTV, that won't be used as it has other shoppers visible. I can't say for sure that by you going into the other store that you will not get asked to leave. That is something you would have to try and see what happens. You are free to enter as many other stores as you wish. You have only been barred from Lidl. As an aside, you could write to Lidl head office explaining what happened and offer an apology. It was not your intention to steal but the situation you were in at the time caused you to get flustered and you forgot about the dress. You never know, Lidl might have someone who understands and not treat everybody as a shoplifter. Any CCTV will have been stored by the shop so the head office can view it at any time. Up to you of course.
  22. Thank you for the expanded explanation. I'm not sure who Lidl use for civil cases as it's one of the stores that don't come up very often. The biggest player is RLP but there are a couple of smaller companies that do the same. Either way, you can ignore them as they have no power over you. They cannot force you to pay a penny. Only a court can do that and retailers are very reluctant to go down that route as it will cost them more than they could ever recover from you. Any money claim is via a county court. This has nothing to do with the criminal court where fines can be imposed so don't worry about that. RLP have a database (alleged as no proof this exists) which they store the details of apprehended individuals. They cannot divulge any details without your permission but they can to the police. The police won't use their database because it isn't a database of convicted shoplifters, only alleged so don't worry about that either. Try to put this behind you if you can. Nothing serious will come of this except your stress levels. If you find you are not coping well, please see your GP and tell them. They are experienced enough to help and it's confidential. Don't bother going into Lidl for around a year. That gives them time to forget what you look like. Aldi is just as good and their Farmhouse bread is to die for If you did go into Lidl, the worst they could do is ask you to leave.
  23. Hi and welcome to CAG. You will need to expand on this as I cannot understand what you are asking. I have to ask if your main language is not English? Not tht it matters as once we get the picture, we will be able to assist
  24. Hi and welcome to CAG I heartily agree with every response so far. Just to clarify. As no official record was made-because no police were involved- there will not be anything on record at Border Control. If you needed a visa to enter, you could truthfully say that you have no criminal record-because you haven't. RLP have no power over you, ever! Only a company with a fool for a director would try to get payment from another country. As three years have passed since the incident, you can safely go into any Primark store as they have forgotten about you. Come to the UK. Enjoy our culture and don't steal. Simple enough.
  25. BF, that link didn't work for me. I will retweet this as soon as I go on twitter. To the OP. To me, this sounds like someone who gets a good feeling from making others feel small. I must look suspicious when I go shopping as I have to stop regularly to let the pain pass and my breathing returns to normal. (Hidden illnesses) Plenty of other stores available and certainly cheaper but I agree that someone at Sainbury's must take ownership of this and respond positively to you
×
×
  • Create New...