Jump to content

peggysue122

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About peggysue122

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. as dx says all situations are different. But in my case I was sent to a meeting with social worker under the diversion to prosecution system. A few weeks after meeting the PF wrote to me giving me a warning for the offence. The letter says "if you accept this warning or if you are deemed to have accepted it, I shall not prosecute you for the offence. The warning is not a conviction and shall not be recorded as one. Any alleged victim may be entitled to be notified of the disposal of the case against you. Information about this warning will however be recorded on the Scottish Criminal History System and will remain on the system for two years. This will be used to help inform future police or prosecution decisions if you offend again and it will be disclosable under 'enhanced disclosure' in terms of Part V of the Police Act 1997 during this time." Might not be the same outcome for you so best to follow dx's advice and create your own thread.
  2. Seems like your outcome is less severe than mine. Have you thought about contacting Disclosure Scotland or appropriate body or even the PF office for clarification, just to get a definitive answer?
  3. Hi afteradvice1, I had a similar situation re the Divertion meeting with social worker. A few weeks after meeting the Procurator Fiscal wrote to me giving me a warning for the offence. The letter says "if you accept this warning or if you are deemed to have accepted it, I shall not prosecute you for the offence. The warning is not a conviction and shall not be recorded as one. Any alleged victim may be entitled to be notified of the disposal of the case against you. Information about this warning will however be recorded on the Scottish Criminal History System and will remain on the system for two years. This will be used to help inform future police or prosecution decisions if you offend again and it will be disclosable under 'enhanced disclosure' in terms of Part V of the Police Act 1997 during this time." My understanding (although might not be accurate) is that it may be disclosed in the 'Other relevant information' section of Enhanced Disclosures and PVG checks. From reading on the Disclosure Scotland site this info is included at the discretion of the Police Superintendent. I know this might not be the same outcome for you but I thought I would share my experience.
  4. Just thought I'd update that I have received another letter from RLP today. This one did not have the words "Retail Loss Prevention" on the envelope like the last. Just the return address with no mention of RLP. Whether they have change their procedure or simply have 2 different franking machines. I only mention this as silverfox1961 has advised that they are in the process of discussing the matter of the company name being shown on the envelope with CAB & Trading Standard as mentioned in this tread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?442825-Got-caught-stealing-at-boots-and-sent-to-custody-police/page3
  5. I see where you're coming from. I never got round to sending an email. I will do as those who've commented and ignore them
  6. So I got another letter from RLP today. Exactly the same as the first with the same date so I assume its a clerical error but I might send them a strongly worded email about it.
  7. @ericsbrother: Well it certainly worked putting the heebie jeebies into me. Was nervous just passing through the Center in the car. I have been reading about facial recognition online and I've been getting myself worked up about it. As you say there is often flaws with the system. I intend to avoid it for a long while yet. Don't fancy either dealing with the Police again or dealing with the embarrassment of being identified whilst with family/friends. @silverfox: I'll post the envelope shortly once I have some privacy at the computer, too many folk in the room at the moment. That's what I have thought regarding emails. I've read various threads about RLP and some say completely ignore from the outset; others say send the one letter disputing the claim then ignore them. I think I'll do the latter as ericsbrother says & maybe they'll get the idea that I won't pay. Although I doubt it will deter their paper threats much.
  8. Today I received at letter from RLP as expected. They state that I owe their client £250. The envelope has "Retail Loss Prevention" printed on the front, done by the franking machine I guess. I'm not looking forward to trying to intercept the post for the next 8-12months to get the letters before anyone else in the house does. I was reading this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?439604-Shoplifted-from-Superdrug And the OP emailed RLP instructing them only to contact him/her by email which RLP said they would comply with. I was thinking of doing this myself but wondered if RLP would still comply as Im not a minor unlike the OP in the thread I linked. I was also wondering if I instruct a company to only contact me be a certain method, must they abide by it? Thanks
  9. I wish I could be as optimistic about not hearing anything back. I'm expecting that I'll be cited to go to court. The solicitor I spoke with didn't say either way but I'll expect the worst until I hear something back.
  10. Sorry for yet another question. When i was detained in the shop's security office the store's security asked for ID & I gave him my provisional licence. The security officer from the shopping centre also took a note of my details from licence. (I know now after reading on here that i didnt have to give details to anyone other than police but I was in a state) I presume that the store security took my details to pass onto the likes RLP. But I wondered why the centre's security took details. Was this to send a letter banning me from the centre? He did say I was banned. He took my picture and informed me I was banned from the centre, that they had facial recognition cameras & the police would be called. Would the really have facial recognition cameras? I can't see that they they would have such technology to scan every face that enters the shopping area. I have briefly spoken to solicitor on the phone but i wasn't able to ask him all the questions I had so I hope you guys here don't mind me asking here.
  11. Thanks for the reply ericsbrother. I thought that might be the case I spoke to a solicitor on the phone today. He said pretty much the same - just wait & see what correspondence i receive either from police or PF
  12. Ok, i'll do as i suggest. This not knowing is making me sick. I know its what i deserve though. Do you think the police will contact me to confirm the report has been sent to Procurator or will i just need to wait until the Procurator contacts me? Sorry for all the questions, i really do appreciate all the replies. Have been reading other posts & all posters are fully of great advice. Kudos for the
  13. Only happened yesterday. This is the first time ive ever done anything like this before. Or had any dealing with police. The officer didnt mention anything about having to go to station. Just that he's sending report to procurator fiscal & he needs to do that within 2 weeks. So I guess I will be expecting to be asked to go to station very soon Would it be advisable to call the local police station & ask if i am likely to be called in? I'm not certain that the officers came from there though.
×
×
  • Create New...