Jump to content

Myddelton

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Myddelton last won the day on April 25 2012

Myddelton had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

138 Excellent

About Myddelton

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. More from me on the excellent justicegap.com: http://thejusticegap.com/2012/05/very-evil-demonic-card-anag/
  2. A bit more on what went on during the Oxford CC trial hearings: http://thejusticegap.com/News/a-fatal-blow-to-the-reeling-civil-recovery-industry/ A big THANK YOU from me to BankFodder, Martin3030, ScarletPimpernel and the many other Caggers who have travelled this long and sometimes bumpy road. I love you guys! And, finally, a message to jonny46 (who was loitering on here yesterday!) and Frogboy, from one of my favourite songs, "Come on" by The Little Heroes: Maybe we could still find a way, To chip away at our mistakes (hey hey hey), Live a life that gives, Instead of o
  3. A few thoughts on anonymity. As is clear from some of the above posts, the retailer claimant in the Oxford County Court case has requested anonymity in the judgment, transcript, citation, reporting by the press and others, etc etc. For the record, I (and others) have no objection - repeat, no objection whatsoever - to A Retailer requesting and being granted such anonymity. In terms of taking this issue forward, it matters not a jot whether A Retailer is identified or not - the identify of the retailer is irrelevant, and all that matters is the judge's interpretation of the law. He may rul
  4. Morpheus: "Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself." Yes, well, we did try to see it for ourselves, but The Retailer Who Cannot Be Named refused to disclose it to us. Their chief witness was happy to witter on about it in the witness box, as if its application to the sum demanded by RLP explained and justified everything, but he and his bosses didn't want us to actually see it.
  5. Last night, I followed Martin3030's example, and started watching The Matrix. I didn't get very far, as Mrs M wanted to go to sleep, but I got as far as this statement by Morpheus: "The Matrix is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very [court] room. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth." Does Morpheus work for The Retailer Who Cannot Be Named? Or for TSS Security (who CAN be named)? Or for Retail Loss Prevention (who can also be named). Maybe Frogboy can tell us. Or maybe not. She doesn't seem to have any time for us ri
  6. A lot of guests on this thread recently, including right now. But, strangely, none of them posting about how they have received a County Court claim from a retailer (or even A Retailer) in relation to an unpaid civil recovery demand. Is there no-one out there who's received a civil recovery demand recently and needs advice on what to do?
  7. She could be busy explaining herself to (a) Shakespeares (b) A Retailer © a lot of other retailers. Oh, and looking for a new job.
  8. Yep, you were right. Talking of Frogboy, where IS she?
  9. As noted above, the third element of the information provided by RLP to the Home Office, Ministry of Justice and Law Commission in April 2011 was a table setting out brief details of 12 cases “sent for issue” by RLP in early 2011. By ‘sent for issue’, RLP would appear to have meant ‘cases being prepared for the issuing of a County Court claim by the law firm Berryman (which subsequently merged to become part of Shakespeares), on behalf of the retailer in question’. The backstory is as follows: On 22 March 2011, during a short parliamentary debate on threatened civil recovery initiated by
  10. But let’s get back to the here and now, and in particular what we know about County Court claims issued by retailer clients of RLP. In its written response to a short film on threatened civil recovery broadcast by BBC TV’s Watchdog on 14 April 2011, RLP stated: “It should be noted that [civil recovery] claims are routinely issued in Court and that RLP rely on established case law to support its [retailer] clients’ claims. This legal concept was tested in lower value first instance cases and the heads of damages were accepted in County Court by separate judges. Whilst first instance cases
  11. You could be right - I don't have even an A Level in Law! But I am advised by some very, very clever lawyers, and they have advised that there is also the question of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. These make it an offence - punishable by up to two years' imprisonment - for traders to engage in unfair commercial practices (and the Law Commission has recently confirmed that this includes misleading and/or aggressive demands for money in relation to e.g. alleged shoplifting). And I am advised by the very, very clever lawyers that, in any one case of a misleading or
  12. Yep, breakdown by gender: Gender of recipient of demand Gender % of all cases Female 61 Male 39 As for mental health issues/vulnerability, yes: of the adult recipients of a demand (i.e. excluding known juveniles), 12 per cent are recorded as having serious mental health issues or other exceptional vulnerability (e.g. illiterate, heavily pregnant, no English, street homeless). I know from comments made in response to my previous posting of this figure on this thread that some are surprised that this figure is not somewhat higher, but
  13. Yes, a CAB in the north east has been assisting a security guard to claim unfair dismissal. He was sacked for not 'creating' enough civil recovery claim incidents.
×
×
  • Create New...