Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You can easily argue your case with no sign on the nearest parking sign
    • Same issue got a fine yesterday for parking in suspended bay which was ending at 6:30 yesterday, next thing I see a fine 15 minutes before it. The sign was obstructed 
    • Hi all, an update on the case as the deadline for filing the WS is tomorrow i.e., 14 days before the hearing date: 7th June. Evri have emailed their WS today to the court and to myself. Attached pdf of their WS - I have redacted personal information and left any redactions/highlights by Evri. In the main: The WS is signed by George Wood. Evri have stated the claim value that I am seeking to recover is £931.79 including £70 court fees, and am putting me to strict proof as to the value of the claim. Evri's have accepted that the parcel is lost but there is no contract between Evri and myself, and that the contract is with myself and Packlink They have provided a copy of the eBay Powered By Packlink Terms and Conditions (T&Cs) to support their argument the contractual relationship is between myself and Packlink, highlighting clause 3a, e, g of these T&Cs. They further highlight clause 14 of the T&Cs which states that Packlink's liability is limited to £25 unless enhanced compensation has been chosen. They have contacted Packlink who informed them that I had been in contact with Packlink and raised a claim with Packlink and the claim had been paid accordingly i.e., £25 in line with the T&Cs and the compensated postage costs of £4.82. They believe this is clear evidence that my contract is with Packlink and should therefore cease the claim against Evri. Evri also cite Clause 23 of the pre-exiting commercial agreement between the Defendant and Packlink, which states:  ‘Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 A person who is not a party to this Agreement shall have no rights under the Contracts (Right of Third Parties) Act 1999 to rely upon or enforce any term of this Agreement provided that this does not affect any right or remedy of the third party which exists or is available apart from that Act.’ This means that the Claimant cannot enforce third party rights under the Contract (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 and instead should cease this claim and raise a dispute with the correct party.   Having read Evri's WS and considered the main points above, I have made these observations: Evri have not seen/read my WS (sent by post and by email) as they would have recognised the claim value is over £1000 as it includes court fees, trial fees, postage costs and interests, and there is a complete breakdown of the different costs and evidence. Evri accepts the parcel is lost after it entered their delivery network - again, this is in my WS and is not an issue in dispute. Evri mentions the £25 and £4.82 paid by Packlink - Again, had they read the WS, they would have realised this is not an issue in dispute. Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency   This supports the view that once a user (i.e, myself) selects a transport agency (i.e Evri) that best suits the user's needs, the user (i.e, myself) enters into a contract with the chosen transport agency (i.e, myself). Therefore, under the T&Cs, there is a contract between myself and Evri. Evri cites their pre-existing agreement with Packlink and that I cannot enforce 3rd party rights under the 1999 Act. Evri has not provided a copy of this contract, and furthermore, my point above explains that the T&Cs clearly explains I have entered into a contract when i chose Evri to deliver my parcel.  As explained in my WS, i am the non-gratuitous beneficiary as my payment for Evri's delivery service through Packlink is the sole reason for the principal contract coming into existence. Clearly Evri have not read by WS as the above is all clearly explained in there.   I am going to respond to Evri's email by stating that I have already sent my WS to them by post/email and attach the email that sent on the weekend to them containing my WS. However, before i do that, If there is anything additional I should further add to the email, please do let me know. Thanks. Evri Witness Statement Redacted v1 compressed.pdf
    • Thank you. I will get on to the SAR request. I am not sure now who the DCA are - I have a feeling it might be the ACI group but will try to pull back the letter they wrote from her to see and update with that once I have it. She queried it initially with 118 118 when she received the default notice I think. Thanks again - your help and support is much appreciated and I will talk to her about stopping her payments at the weekend.
    • you should email contact OCMC immediately and say you want an in person hearing.   stupid to not
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Advice when being banned


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6023 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

The payment was not correct due to the OP swapping price tickets around to make the items cheaper. Beginning and end of story.

I know, OP mentioned they offered correct payment but TKMaxx refused to accept the difference between amount paid and amount payable (but retained shoes that OP had effectively partially paid for).

Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't have to accept the difference at all, they have the option not to sell (but having said that they shouldn't have taken money and not provided goods)

BEFORE starting your claim read through the FAQ's and if there's something you aren't sure of then ask.

If you win, donate to this site

Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions, some formed by personal experience and some from research. If in doubt seek qualified legal advice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are your issues exactly, 2 threads in 2 different sections, slight varience on story http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-knowledge/120085-lara-blues-retail-loss.html :?: :?:

 

Hi Suzie,

First I wanted to know others opinions, as I said I am not British and now I know that I WRONLY thought that if I were, they would have dealt with me differently: Other staff making comments and mocking me, accussing me out of the blue of CREDIT CARD FRAUD, saying that I´ve done that before, etc. Having cleared that out, I was not familiar with these issues. I wanted to know also the legal implications of what happened but also I found very useful that some people expressed what it could have happened if:Arrested, Caution, etc. Which luckily didn´t. Secondly, I was concerned about the fine-payment to RLP; the store kept my money and the shoes. Trying to have some peace of mind, on Friday I asked my boyfriend to buy for me those shoes, they were still there with no tags at all, he went, asked the manager so now I have the receipt and the shoes, they can´t say they couldn´t sell them as a result of my actions and it is my way of making it up to them.Thirdly, Someone here suggested to post a thread to get advice on RLP which is a good idea because I will need to deal with them when I get the fine-letter. And last, I decided to post regarding the banning because I regret I can´t shop at Tk maxx anymore and wondered what if.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty straightforward Lara.

The offences that would have been applicable under the Theft act of 1968 /1978...are now contained within the fraud act which came into effect in 2006.

here are some points of the act.

 

 

The Act gives a statutory definition of the criminal offence of fraud defining it in three classes - fraud by false representation, fraud by failing to disclose information, and fraud by abuse of position. It provides that a person found guilty of fraud was liable to a fine or imprisonment for up to twelve months on summary conviction (six months in Northern Ireland), or a fine or imprisonment for up to ten years on conviction on indictment. This Act largely replaces the laws relating to obtaining property by deception, obtaining a pecuniary advantage and other offences that were created under the Theft Act 1978. These offences attracted much criticism for their complexity and difficulty in proving at court. Much of the Theft Act 1978 has been repealed, however, the offence of making off without payment, defined under section 3 has not been affected.

  • "Fraud by false representation" is defined by Section 2 of the Act as a case where a person makes "any representation as to fact or law ... express or implied" which they know to be untrue or misleading.

  • "Fraud by failing to disclose information" is defined by Section 3 of the Act as a case where a person fails to disclose any information to a third party when they are under a legal duty to disclose such information.

  • "Fraud by abuse of position" is defined by Section 4 of the Act as a case where a person occupies a position where they are expected to safeguard the financial interests of another person, and abuses that position; this includes cases where the abuse consisted of an omission rather than an overt act.

In all three classes of fraud, it requires that for an offence to have occurred, the person must have acted dishonestly and that they had to have acted with the intent of making a gain for themselves or anyone else, or inflicting a loss (or a risk of loss) on another.

 

Gain and loss

 

A "gain" or a "loss" is defined to consist only of a gain or a loss in money or property (including intangible property), but could be temporary or permanent. A "gain" could be construed as gaining by keeping their existing possessions, not just by obtaining new ones, and loss included losses of expected acquisitions, as well as losses of already-held property.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Martin,

 

If I was not arrested by the police, then, what is my situation here? Would you consider paying to RLP whatever fine they place me with? Should I write a letter to the General Store Manager apologizing and telling the whole situation, promise not to ever do it again? I´ve spent about 500gbp in less than a month in Tk maxx and I do have all my receipts. I know I have no right to change prices myself but in my experience with the shop, usually when asked for price clarifications they´ve always given me the most expensive option within the brand. e.g. There were lost of watches from Mango (brand), there was only a different one with black straps no price on it, as on other occassions when getting to the till assuming an itmen may be similar price as others there with the same-identical features, they always have given me a higher price and ended paying it. so I asked a sales assisstant to check the price for me, which she did and while the rest of the watches were 19.99 this one was according to her call to the manager 29.99. I told her I wouldn´t buy it and I didn´t, this was the same shop of the incident.

The day of the Incident which about two days after asking for the watch, I saw loads of the same black strap watches identical to the one I wanted, so I went to see the price on the tags, they all were 19.99! so when I went to the shoe department to look if they had the shoes, they were priced yes, but a lot more expensive than in the other tk maxx shop, so there I thought, if i ask they will just tell me "that" is the price and very wrongly decided to swap tags myself.Again should I write the General Store Manager explaining the whole situation or do you think it is pointless because what I did makes me a horrible person in the eyes of the fair and just and puts me in the same scale as the shoplifters or thieves when I´ve always been an honourable person to the people who have known me or met me, but what I did there errases everything I´ve always been and makes me a dirty **** thief?

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way I thought I should post this

The Fraud Act 2006 repealed the deception offences contained within the Theft Act 68 & 78.

 

Thanks to Paul from pinks for this info.

 

Thankyou to Martin (and Paul) for correcting me in in this issue. I have not served as a police officer since the new law came into force and was unaware of the change.

BEFORE starting your claim read through the FAQ's and if there's something you aren't sure of then ask.

If you win, donate to this site

Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions, some formed by personal experience and some from research. If in doubt seek qualified legal advice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

If someone could advice me please.

I am returning to my country and I still haven´t got RLP letter with the fine, I am stressing ´cause my close friends are moving out of the country as well and I won´t have anyone to send me whatever post I get. What should I do? Should I write tkmaxx telling them or RLP? Go to the police?Thank you in advanced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou to Martin (and Paul) for correcting me in in this issue. I have not served as a police officer since the new law came into force and was unaware of the change.

 

I am returning to my country and I still haven´t got RLP letter with the fine, I am stressing ´cause my close friends are moving out of the country as well and I won´t have anyone to send me whatever post I get. What should I do? Should I write tkmaxx telling them or RLP? Go to the police?Thank you in advanced.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You were very very lucky in this situation, I have worked as Store Security in a Large Marks and Spencers outlet, and Have done CCTV Monitoring before, and you really were lucky that the police did not arrest you for this offence. I would just like to mention that you seem to keep playing the race thing too much, it had nothing to do with your race, just the fact that you were in fact stealing, whether or not you handed over money for the goods, it is stil infact stealing as you had changed the price tags to a lower price. Due to no action being taken by the police, The store should of however refunded you the money they took for the shoes if they were going to keep the shoes.

IMHO I do think you were very lucky that tk maxx only banned you from the store, In cases I have had to deal with similar to this, where people fraudulently pay for items for which they have 'marked down' per se, the police have always took action and the person was always charged and prosecuted, the only times when this was not the case was when there were minors involved. If I were you I would thank your lucky stars that the police did not take action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO I do think you were very lucky that tk maxx only banned you from the store, In cases I have had to deal with similar to this, where people fraudulently pay for items for which they have 'marked down' per se, the police have always took action and the person was always charged and prosecuted, the only times when this was not the case was when there were minors involved. If I were you I would thank your lucky stars that the police did not take action.

 

Yes I am thankful and I will never do anything as such. The tag of a thief or criminal/fraudulent sound awful,and could have made me become a resented and just commit something worse since everyone already thinks I am a criminal and I felt back then as part of the underworld. Friends were very supportive and also reading about it on the net scared me but helped me a lot; I learned my lesson and the whole thing was traumatising. I must say the police were really nice when they came over to verify my address.

However the store did told me I should receive by post a fine given by Retail Loss Prevention which hasn´t happened yet and I am very worried because I am going back permanently to my country and do not know the consequences of ignoring RLP letters as I am guessing they will keep sending a letter over and over with a higher fine each time and then take court action?

Anyways as you said I ´ve been very lucky and I do not want a criminal or anything on my record.I was asking earlier what should I do then: write or call tk maxx and inform them I am going to live abroad, RLP or go to the police?

Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely there is no loss now, the store have the goods plus the lower price you paid for them?

The above post constitutes my personal opinion on the facts in the post compared with my personal knowledge of the applicable legislation. I make no guarantees of its legal accuracy. If you are in doubt seek advice of a legal professional specialising in the area concerned.

 

If my post has helped you please click my scales!

Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely there is no loss now, the store have the goods plus the lower price you paid for them?

 

Ok but, What do you think I should do? I am soon going back to my country. What if I get a RLP letter? I´ve read the case about debenhams and RLP with the niece wrongly accussed;my case is different but I do not have the time to wait and reply to letters. Then again, I ask anyone here, What should I do as I do not want a record on my name as a consequence of what this may bring?

 

 

Gertie, I have a moral and ethical problem as a result of this whole issue. I understand if this seems to cause you a problem or seems to make you sick. I have been sick because of this. So, I guess if this might upset you, remember is you, who decides what to read or not. Best of luck and sincerely hope you never do anything stupid in your life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Gertie100

Lara - the point was that you did something that was not only stupid but what you knew was wrong! There is a big difference between asking for advise because of stupidity and coming on here asking for help to get away with something which is against the law!!!!

As pointed out earlier, you then tried to play the race card as if that extonerated you from blame!

 

I do stupid things every day of my life - I don't break the law every day and come on here asking how to get away it.

Perhaps the moral and ethical part should have come to the forefront prior to walking into TK Maxx?

And if you don't like my posts then perhaps you should stop reading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Much as I don't have any interest in doing so I am going to answer Lara's question. You only have a 'civil debt' to RLP for the cost of dealing with your actions. This is NOT a fine and is not a punishment of any form. I am certain that if RLP were going to they would have already been in contact. You are perfectlt safe to leave the country permanently and, if RLP wish to pursue you for the money they will have to follow the legal system of your country of origin which is VERY HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

 

I do note that you keep saying that your country of origin is not Britain (I think in every post) but you have neglected to tell us where you were actually born. I am of the belief that his is a spoof post as highlighted before

BEFORE starting your claim read through the FAQ's and if there's something you aren't sure of then ask.

If you win, donate to this site

Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions, some formed by personal experience and some from research. If in doubt seek qualified legal advice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lara - the point was that you did something that was not only stupid but what you knew was wrong! There is a big difference between asking for advise because of stupidity and coming on here asking for help to get away with something which is against the law!!!!

As pointed out earlier, you then tried to play the race card as if that extonerated you from blame!

 

I do stupid things every day of my life - I don't break the law every day and come on here asking how to get away it.

Perhaps the moral and ethical part should have come to the forefront prior to walking into TK Maxx?

And if you don't like my posts then perhaps you should stop reading.

 

Gertie, I did not plan to change the price on the shoes prior walking into Tk maxx and I do not brake the law every day of my life. I´ve NEVER done anything before or after the incident and perhaps that´s why this hit me bad and scared me. You asked here if you were the only one with a problem with this threads. Why would I stop reading a thread I started?

 

I want to know what is the best way to deal with it legally because I am going back very soon to my country permanently. Easily I could choose to forget about it, I do not think I need to come back to the UK . The two police officers clearly told me in my house that police has now nothing to do with it and again they were very nice.Anyways sorry Gertie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No answer to me then Lara??

BEFORE starting your claim read through the FAQ's and if there's something you aren't sure of then ask.

If you win, donate to this site

Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions, some formed by personal experience and some from research. If in doubt seek qualified legal advice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Much as I don't have any interest in doing so I am going to answer Lara's question. You only have a 'civil debt' to RLP for the cost of dealing with your actions. This is NOT a fine and is not a punishment of any form. I am certain that if RLP were going to they would have already been in contact. You are perfectlt safe to leave the country permanently and, if RLP wish to pursue you for the money they will have to follow the legal system of your country of origin which is VERY HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

 

I do note that you keep saying that your country of origin is not Britain (I think in every post) but you have neglected to tell us where you were actually born. I am of the belief that his is a spoof post as highlighted before

 

 

Thanks for your reply Blueskies. This incident did happened, I am an international posgraduate student from Colombia. I have concluded my studies and returning to my permanent job back home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm agreeing with Bluey here, I'm afraid peeps - OP's syntax and spelling keeps changing in a way which appears to be inconsistent.

 

It almost seems as if someone is wanting advice after breaking the law or is wanting someone to play the race card - i would advise neither happens.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am wholeheartedly against racism of any form and, as the OP's question has been answered on this thread I see no reason for it to remain open other than to cajole racist comments from members. I am therefore closing the thread. If Lara wishes it reopened then if she could please PM me with a reason and I will do so.

BEFORE starting your claim read through the FAQ's and if there's something you aren't sure of then ask.

If you win, donate to this site

Contents of my posts are purely my own personal opinions, some formed by personal experience and some from research. If in doubt seek qualified legal advice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6023 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...