I did for many years, including retail for Sainsbury Stores and Tesco as well as a CCTV operator for a major UK city in the Midlands (which was fun)

This is 100% out of order!!! The reply from the Co-Op is the biggest pile of crap I have ever heard. I can assure you that IF the security officer(s) had observed your actions in real time then you would have been detained in the car park and returned to the store. I get the feeling that the statements have been pretty much written for the people who have signed them rather than them writing them themselves. You have to escalate this incident. I am outraged by this Micheal and I really wish you could take this to the papers. It's just so damn wrong. There is no conduct of a shopper. Yes, some shoplifters do act differently than normal shoppers though trust me this is not an easy thing to spot. The Co-Op really are talking crap here and I hope your solicitor takes them apart.

Please read the following so that if you find yourself in a similar situation you can take the right action to ensure you not only get an apology but also can take legal action and sue the store. If you are stopped by any member of staff at any store (not just the security staff) and they ask you to come back to the store you can flatly refuse to comply with their wishes. You are then free to go on your way. IF they then grab a hold of you in ANY way they will have commited an act of "Common Assault". At this point they SHOULD tell you that they are detaining you and the reason why. This would be along the lines of "I am arresting you on suspicion of theft etc" Just beause the store door alarms have activated does NOT give them the legal powers to detain you for any reason. If they ask to look in your bags you can refuse and continue to leave the store. Remember, they need enough eveidence that can be considered strong enough to justify giving them "suspicion". An door alarm activating as you pass by it does not give that justification. As you have not stolen anything then they will now have committed the act of "Wrongful arrest". Even though they used the word 'suspicion'. For a member of staff to arrest you they would still need to have seen you select an item and know that you have not paid for it and are still in possesion of it. If the member of staff is not 100% sure on any of the above parts then they shou have been trained NOT to stop you when leaving the store. This is how shoplifters get away so often. They are so quick with the selection and concealment of an item that the member of staff becomes unsure if they really did select and conceal the item. If there is ANY element of doubt then they should not stop the person when they leave the store. If they then force you against your will to return to the store they are committing further offences. Once they have you back inside the store they will take you to a private room where there SHOULD be another member of staff (usually female) and SHOULD be a female member of staff if you are female and they are male. At this point you need to tell them that you wish to leave the room and the store. They will of course tell you that you cannot leave and that they are holding you until the police arrive. When the police do arrive please make sure that you allow the store staff to put their side of things first. Remain very calm. The police will ask you for you side of the story. When they do simply tell them everything that happened from YOUR point of view. Tell them slowly and clearly, step by step. As you will have been accused of theft ad being in possesion of the items which the store claims you have, they police will search you. When the police confirm that you do NOT have the items the police will allow you on your way. The ploice MAY ask to see the stores CCTV footage and when the store confirms that they did not see you on CCTV then there is a clear cut case of false arrest and common assault. You may even push for False imprisonment All in all the store is now in VERY deep legal trouble and your next port of call should be to your solicitor who wll happily jump all over the case.

It's not exactly the case as the store would have prove your INTENT to perminantley deprive the store of th egoods. This has been covered earlier in this thread which has turned out to be a cracking good thread. Michael I am so glad that you have sought legal advice. The Co-Op are about to get a real kick in the backside and this store manager needs taking down a dark alley and 'spoken' to. Good luck and kep us updated buddy

I think the store manager used to be a JCB driver as he seems used to being able to dig big holes for himself with ease. As you already know Michael, the actual ACT of theft never took place which means you cannot be called a theif by the store manager who is acting in an official capacity as store manager for the Co-op. PLEASE make sure you keep us up dated as to how this pans out. I'd love to meet this store manager and actually have a chat with him about the whole incident. It sounds as though he needs some things pointing out to him. As someone mentioned earlier, there was no security guard watching you on CCTV. They have only reviewed the CCTV AFTER you pointed out to them what had happened. This probably left them quite red faced too. I am quite sure that someone from head office will be able to sort this whole matter out fairly swiftly as it seems the store manager is the only one who thinks what you did is theft - clearly it is not theft. And for my last point on the matter of theft - what really makes a difference here is that when they reviewed the video, IF it had shown you concealing the item before leaving the store then they may have a case that you were trying to steal the item. This is where the part about "INTENT" comes in to play. The store has to prove your intent to permantily deprive the store of the goods. Lets say you are in a shop and you pick up an item and place it in your coat pocket and then leave the store without paying for that item then the store would be able to prove your INTENT. When working for Tesco I monitored a young girl who was shoping with her mum. The girl placed a small makeup item in the trolley and then placed her mums handbag on top of the item which hid it from view. When they passed through the checkout the handbag wasn't moved so the item of makeup wasn't paid for. But at that point we could not legally do anything. I had to wait for them to get to their car and when the mum lifted her handbag she saw the item of makeup. It was at this point that they realised that the item had not been paid for. It was their actions at this point which made the difference of this being an honest mistake or theft. If they left the item in the trolley or returned it to the store it would have been just one of those honest mistakes. As it turned out, at that point they chose to remove the item from the trolley and get in to their car with it. At that point the daughter was arrested for theft as the act had taken place and the "INTENT" could be proved.

LOL now that is funny ;-)

I would seek legal advice and then take them to court as can sue the store manager and the store for damages. I assure you that they will settle out of court due to the details and circumstances of this incident. Trust me, if this had happened when I was working at Sainsburys or Tesco then I would have been torn apart by head office. I would expect to receive an immediate final written warning too. You should expect an easy win in court although I know that the Co-op wouldn't want it to get to court. Your good name has been damaged by the actions of the store manager who was representing the Co-op at the time which is why you can sue both of them.

Hi Michael, I hear what you are saying and agree that the way in which you have been treated is 100% wrong. The store manager does have the right to ban anyone from entering the stoe for any reason. He can do that as the shop is classed as private property and as a member of the public the shop is allowing you to enter unless the store manager revokes this invite by telling you. I worked for many years in senior retail security roles. However, I know for a fact tha if I had taken the action that this store manager has then I would get my arse kicked from here to kingdom come by head office. It is isnteresting thatthe store security watched you leave the store without paying for the item and chose not to do anything about it. I commend your honesty Michael as I doubt many other people would have offered to pay for the item if they were in the same situation. In my opinion te best way to deal with this matter would be to contact the local newspaper to see if they would run a story about it. Maybe even the national papers. The store in question would hate the bad publicity and I am 100% certain that you would receive one heck of an apology and the store manager would receive 'further training' to improve his customer service skills. If the story was covered by a newspaper then you would receive the public vote which would also clear your name of any wrong doing. I know for a fact that a real shoplifter would not go to the newspapers to have this story covered because a good shoplifter relies on being anonymous. I would 100% go to the newspapers about this Michael. With regard to this incident being classed as theft? Well, actually no it isn't. The actual act of theft didn't ever occur because you have not permantly deprived the store of te goods. Had you have gotten home, realized what had happened AND THEN chosen not to return the item or make offer of payment for it then yes an act of theft woul dhave taken place at THAT moment. A store has to prove the INTENT beyond all reasonable doubt that they person was going to permantantly deprive the store of the goods. With this the store manager cannot use the reason for banning you because you are a theif and in fact by calling you a theif it could be classed as defimation of character. Maybe you should also seek leal advice on this matter and then consider taking the store to court for damages. I quite sure they would settly out of court. Sorry for the spelling errors - in a rush here

Which insurance company are you using to get the items covered? Did BH accept this insurance?

Thank you to all who have responded to this. The above really answers the question I had which was "Can Marlin charge interest on the debt that they purchased from BCT". As the debt was indeed over £5000 then I guess they can charge the interest which they did at the sky high contractual rate. Maybe I got a good deal by getting them to reduce the interest rate down to 6% or 8% or what ever it was. Lesson learned? Bear in mind that when you sign a credit agreement it can end up costing you more than you could eve imagine. The original purchase price of the car was £7,300. Total paid back in the end? £9,200 to Marlin Financial Services £2,000 to British Credit Trust (under the original CCA) oh and the car was reposessed too. I had the car for around 12 months before it was taken back which makes the cost of having that car around £1,000 for each month that I owned it. Not the best deal really was it.

I do remember calling British Credit Trust about the charging order and was told that the amount now owed was fixed and would not increase. I am wondering if that meant they would not seek to add any further interest or does it mean that interest cannot be added to a Charging Order debt?

I wish I had found this site sooner. OK, In March 2008 I sold a property that had a charging order on it The Charging Order was from British Credit Trust for vehicle finance. The vehicle was reposessed and the outstanding balance was CCJ'd which very quickly went in to a Charging Order. When the charging order was granted the amount was £8000. This was in March 2006 ( Roughly). So the Charging Order was Granted in March 2006 for £8000 by British Credit Trust. In February 2008 I received a letter from Marlin Finacial Services stating that they had aquired the debt and all rights from Britis Credit Trust and that amount outstanding was £8000. As advised by my solictitor, I contatced Marlin to get a final settlement figure and when I did they stated the debt was now £12,000 as they had excerised their right to add interest to the amount of the charging order. The interest rate they used was the one on the original CCA I signed for the car with British Credit Trust and they had calclated the interest from the date the charging order was granted. The guy I spoke to told me that they had the rights to do that as the charging order stated that they could recover the original amount owed plus interest and other costs. I eventually managed to negotiate a lower figure by getting them to calculate the interest at just 6% instead of the original sky high one I signed for with British Credit Trust. I eventually settled the debt by paying them £9,200 which was paid to them directly from the sale of the property. What I would like to know is if they really had the right to charge interest on the charging order and charge it from the date when the charging order was obtained. I never did see a copy of the charging order to see the specific details of whether interest could be added etc. Have I been had over by Marlin Financial Services? Any help is very much appreciated.

Yes, pay the council directly. If you can then pay it online or an automated phone payment system if your council offers one. That way the council cannot refuse your payment. As for the charges to the bailiff (someone will need to confirm this) but I am sure that if you no longer owe the debt to the council then any fees from the Bailiff cannot be enforced under the order made by the council as this will no longer exists if you pay the amount owed to the council. I think the Bailiff can still chase you for the fees that you owe to them but this would now be a seperate case from the council one and therefore the Bailiff cannot use the coucils distress warrent for the fees you owe to the bailiff. I hope someone can confirm the last part for sure but I do know for a fact that you can pay the council any monies owed to them directly but use an automated payment system. Once the money is in the councils account they cannot refuse it and the debt you owed to them is then paid.

Yeah you just gotta love the way they word their letters (when they can be bothered to leave them). I was once told by a Bailiff, while on the phone to him, that he would be able to break in and remove the goods even if I was not at home. He was right apart from the fact he failed to add the part about he could only do that if he had already been inside the property. I didn't know what a Bailiff could and couldn't do back then so I coughed up the cash (stupid boy). Just remember two things: 1) Don't believe a word they say when it comes to them telling you your rights and what their rights are. 2) Don't answer the door.

SKP27 I am very proud of what you have done. You sought advice and followed it. You placed your trust in everyone on this thread - and it worked. Together we have defeated a Bailiff - now that is one heck of a feel good Friday. Just remember, he may return but all you need to do is ignore him and he will go away. I am glad to hear that you are making the payments to the council. They can withdraw the case from the Bailiff and if you state that you will pay the debt but refuse to deal with the Bailiff then the council may withdraw the case from the Bailiff earlier as the sooner they do that then the sooner they can collect the revenue owed to them by you which is their goal. Well done to you and everyone else here.