My wife received the latest letter from RLP today; the first one since August. Compared with what has gone before, this is only a short story. It basically says that because we have failed to respond since the initial denial liability and therefore RLP have been unable "to conclude the matter by pre-action correspondence", they have advised TK Maxx that the matter should be "presented to and determined by the courts". RLP have also advised TK Maxx "to report the incident to the Police". Apart from anything else, I doubt very much that the Police will be interested when RLP / TK Maxx had the opportunity to report the matter at the time, but wait for six months because their intimidating letters have failed to get the desired response. Can anyone advise if this is just another standard letter or something more serious, and should we continue to ignore RLP, as the CAB have once again advised?

I already have an independent report from a computer diagnostics engineer, which how we are certain that the Motherboard is defective and requires replacement.

I purchased an HP Pavilion laptop for my daughter from Currys online in May 2011 for £379.99. It wouldn't have been my choice but that was the machine she wanted. 18 months later, there is a problem with the screen which has been traced back to a fault in the VGA connection to the Motherboard, which can't be repaired and necessitates the replacement of the Motherboard. We didn't purchase Currys extended warranty at the time of purchase due to its poor reputation. I have been advised by both the CAB and Aberdeen Trading Standards that although the manufacturers 12 month warranty has expired, a major component such as the Motherboard should reasonably be expected to last more than 18 months fault free and that we should pursue the matter with the retailer. We visited the local Currys store on Sunday where they were obviously not interested and the Manager was 'too busy' to speak to us. We were given a form to complete and send to Currys Customer Services where I expect we will be 'fobbed off'. Before I go any further, does anybody have experience of similar issues with Currys and who can advise me on the best course of action and tactics to employ?

There is a very good article about it on the BBC Watchdog website. Travelodge: Smoking or non-smoking? Travelodge is the fastest growing budget hotel chain in the UK. Seven million rooms were sold last year alone and some for as low as £19 a night. But whilst your bill may be low during your stay, afterwards you may be sent a demand for seven times that amount as a punishment for something you haven’t done. Along with restaurants and other public places, hotels have restricted the places on their premises that people can smoke. Light up and you can be fined up to £200 if convicted, plus damages if the company is granted them in court. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006...avelodge-fines

Andy, I don't have RLP's latest letter with me, but from memory it does quote selected excerpts from this thread. I will do my best to see if I can upload the letter, suitably sanitised of course. By the way, did anybody see the item on Watchdog last night about Travelodge and their [problem] of pursuing people they accuse of smoking for compensation. Seems they are using another 'vehicle' for their antics called CRS?

Yes, other than our initial response refuting RLP's claim and denying liability, we have ignored all their subsequent communications, as advised by people 'in the know' on this board and also by the Citizens Advice Scotland helpline, who I have consulted on three occasions. By the way RLP claim in their last letter that we should not take advice form what they descrice as a 'rogue' former CAB employee wh posts advice on this board, Anyone know who they might be referring to?

Nothing heard from RLP for several weeks untikl the latest version of 'war and peace' arrived on Monday. Unsurprisingly they advise to ignore any and all advice given on this site and they claim the following: That this site "is currently subject to a criminal investigation by the CID" "Your thread has been forwarded to the CID to consider together with other information regarding criminal offenses of harrassment, malicious communications and public order offences". This is all pretty desperate stuff - CID of which Police force I might ask? Thay also claim that the CAB concluded its interet in the matter of Civil Recovery over a year ago - is this correct? I think not - I have spoken to three different people at the Citizens Advice Scotland helpline who were all well aware of the activities of RLP and all of whom advised me to ignore them and that was in the last four months. RLP are now going to draw my posting s to the attention of TK Maxx and it will be a matter for TK Maxx to make a decision on whether or not to issue proceedings against my wife. In the event that proceedings are issued, my postings may be brought to the attention of the court. This is the only thread I have taken part in on the forum and look back, I see nothing of a derogatory nature. RLP has given us a further 21 days to respond, after which, because we have refused to engage with them (beyond the initial denial of liability) they will advise TK Maxx as to their options. In the exoperience of fellow posters, what is the liklehood of proceedings being issued by TK Maxx please?

A further update and things have developed more quickly than expected. As I mentioned above, the 21 day dealine set by RLP had expired because we were away on holiday. So yesterday another letter arrives from RLP offering full and final settlement of the matter without prejudice, on payment of the sum of £95. If we don't pay or otherwise agree a settlement within 21 days, then they are at liberty to take sanctions as they have already documented. I phoned Citizens Advice Direct this morning and updated them on my tale and they advise as you do SP - just ignore them. Their opinion is that as I have already stated my intention to RLP not to pay and the reasons why, there is no need to do so again and it will just encourage them to write more letters anyway.

SP - if by "Magna Carta version" you mean the letter which on page 2 has paragraphs entitled "Breach of Ordinary Duty of Care" and "Spuilze", then that's the letter I have received". RLP repeat their version of events, or I should say the TK Maxx security staff version of events and claim that my wife was not co-operative. They then allege that she admitted her actions, but have not answered my point as to whether or not they have CCTV evidence or a written statement of admission. She was only stopped by one person anyway, which is insufficient to satisfy Scottish Criminal Law which requires corroboration. What is the liklehood that they will issue a Claim in the Sheriff Court and is there any anecdotal evidence of RLP persueing their victims in the Scottish courts?

I have now received a response from RLP, all three pages of it with lots of legal jargon. They basically state that all the points I have made are irrelevant, that the Police had no remit to advise me in relation to this claim and that damages are compensatory and are not required to be proportionate. They have not made any attempt to say how they arrived at the figure they are claiming or to break it down. RLP conclude by giving my wife the same sat of optionds for payment as before and threatening to issue a claim in the Sheriff Court (we are in Scotland) if we do not agree to settle their claim withing 21 days. because we were on holiday when the letter arrived, the 21 days has elapsed. Any advice on what to do next please, because i can see this becoming a never ending letter writing contest if I continue to reply?

Thanks for your advice SP - I have already done as you suggest and kept the letter brief and to the point, so we'll see what comes back. By the way, I should said that my wife denied their accusation and showed them that half the tag and price label on the item were missing where somebody else had previously tampered with it. I know from my Police days that even if they could prove their allegation in a criminal court, for a low value, one off offence the worst sancion that a court would likely pass in Scotland would be to admonish the defendent and they would NOT be making a compensation order either. This is just a [problem] to obtain recompence using the lower burden of proof allowed for in Civil Law. Why has nothing been done to stop these people? The CAB report was produced two and half years ago!

Hi All, New member looking for advice please. My wife was stopped outside TK Maxx last month and accused of changing the price label on an item which she subsequently paid for. She was told that she could accept the stores sanctions and thus avoid the Police being called. They said they had CCTV evidence but didn't show it to her. The goods were taken from her and she was refunded the sum she had paid, so TK Maxx suffered no loss whatsoever. She recieved the usually banning letter and a seperate RLP letter neither of which makes reference to the other. A month later she recieves the RLP letter claiming an arbitrary figure of £137.50 in compensation, but which is not backed up or broken down at all. I have read this forum, read the 2009 CAB report and consulted the CAB and former colleagues in the Police all of whom say don't pay. I have drafted a reply to RLP based on the advice received from the CAB but have not yet posted it. Before I do so, can anyone offer any further advice please?