RLP and £89.49 for sweets from 14 year old girl.

[intransit]

hi to all

my friends daughter took some loose sweets from a well known shop

(yes a friends daughter) i got boys less trouble i think, anyway the daughter received a letter from civil recovery specialists for the sum of £ 89.49 shes 14 years of age she told her mum, said sorry and learned a lesson.

mums pays the bill done and dusted.

what i would like to know can a company pursue a 14 year old who earns no money for civil recovery i know the law regards 14 years to know better, in my day you got a clip round the head from the shop keeper.

[raydetinu]

Hi, yes in law the child would not have to pay ( too young to be sued in court )and should have ignored it, however the shop would have the opportunity to take the parents to court to recover the costs; which in my opinion would fail.

the whole civil recovery process, is like receiving a parking ticket, you dont have to pay and they would have to go to court to recover costs, and they would have to justify the charges which are often punitive and arbortary; mainly due to the costs incurred by the recovery agency used and not to cover the loss ( which is often recovered and time etc.).

There is also the question of this interfering with the criminal side and the presumption of innocence. surely you have to be guilty of a crime ( proved ) before they can seek compensation. You do not have to accept the FINE and elect to go to court, however the burden of prove in a civil court is much less onerous than a criminal one.

[intransit]

thanks for reply

at what age can you be sued in court

[raydetinu]

As far as I am aware it is 18 in England and Wales and 16 in scoland.

[intransit]

Retail Loss Prevention Limited - About Us

this is the company she received the claim from.

her mum paid because she was worried it may have gone to court as it says 14 years old may be sued in the civil courts although they may have to be represented. what would have been the outcome if she ignored the letter. is it like the parking invoices i have been reading in the forums they just hope you pay but cant enforce it.

[raydetinu]

They are wrong, as is usually the case, the age of majority in England is 18 and therefore cannot be sued; and anyway what assets would a 14 year old have anyway! The parents could be sued but again the plantif would need to prove they were responsible in some way, negligent or other, they would not be responsible just because they were the Parents.

I would have just ignored it!

If these things do go to court they can only claim for the loss ( usually recvered ) and time and if proved to the satisfaction of the court; the cost of the action ( although this is not always guarnteed ) especially for minor offences, the judge might consider was over the top, the plantiff would be stuck with all the court fees, legal costs, agency etc. so in most cases they wont persue. But if you are caught bang to rites, most do pay! just to get it over with.

[ScarletPimpernel]

RLP are really just a variation on DCAs and PPCs - they are bullies who rely upon people not being aware of the law. They do go to Court sometimes, usually in the hope of a default judgment.

[gyzmo]

they could have reported the matter to the police. Being 14, a charge could have been brought. Take it as a lesson learned.

[KJD]

received a letter from civil recovery specialists for the sum of £ 89.49

 

That's a lot of sweets! What does this figure cover?

 

Any unfair charges?

[rousin red]

To Scarlet Pimpernel

 

As you are on line and have commented on RLP Ltd - Would you be able to tell me if they can make a claim on behalf of a company, 1 year after an investigation was closed, unconcluded?

 

Does this company, whilst not a Debt collection co, but one which is claiming monies have to have a Consumer Credit License?

 

Many Thanks

[ScarletPimpernel]

They can make a claim - whether or not it is valid is another matter.

 

The OFT advised me that this company needs a consumer credit licence, but does not have one; the matter is being investigated by Trading Standards.

[JonCris]

I'm posting this on ALL of the RLP threads.

 

I need members who have been a victim of RLP to PM Mod Martin with a view to coming forward prepared to put their situation before both the ICO and the media

 

Thanks in anticipation

[buzby]

Does RLP offer credit? If so, to whom? I can't see any need for a CCL under their current mode of operation.

[JonCris]

They don't need to They only have to collect debts on behalf of their client (which they claim these are) to need a CCL

[buzby]

They can also argue it is a 'bill for services supplied' (ie not a 'debt' per se), as their business model appears to be self-financing, they do the chasing in much the same way as a parking company, which also doesn't require a CCL.

[JonCris]

They AND you can argue all you like but if they are collecting a debt on behalf of a another (which they claim they are) then they need a CCL Anyway the OFT through the local TS are investigating so we'll see what happens

[labrat]

got bored so wrote this

 

dear sir/madam i am writing to gain further information on writing a factsheet for possible publication

this is in regards to your companys dealings with a firm known as retail loss prevention.

 

i know that stores have the rights to attempt to cover costs from theft by civil prossicution however the dealings of this company have recently come under scrutiny and we are looking at your companys views on some of the complaints.

 

i have had confirmation off the office of fair trading that the activities under-taken by this company would come under the heading of debt collection and as such would require a liscence to operate, however the company in question has no such liscence and is currently the subject of multiple complaints to the nottingham trading standereds office, what is your companys views on dealing with what may after investigation turn out to be an illegal operation

 

i have spoken to several people who have been chased by this company, some stories of which do not tie in all the legal details, for example RLP (retail loss prevention) writing to inform a 14 year old girl that she was to be taken to court if she did not immediatly nearly a hundred pounds, as you are probably aware it is not possible to issue a civil claim against a minor. how do you feel it has affected your companys image by allowing a firm to issue baseless threats on your behalf?

 

on the retail loss prevention site it states that "if a person cannot understand english or cannot comprehend the demands then it is the persons responcibility to resolve this, how does this tie in with your companys goals of non-discrimination?

 

many of the claims that we have seen paperwork for lists in what case seems very highly inflated costs, in the cases where these have been asked to be broken down no detailed explanation of the costs has been forthcoming, could i please confirm if RLP contacts your for copies of timesheets and other evidence to justify costs?

 

and the last question is - many firms use retail loss prevention as a deterant do you feel that this is working as a policy, does it provide any benefits to the stores involved? and what proportion of the costs claimed off individuals does the store see returned?

thank you in responce for the answers to these questions i understand this may not reach the correct department but i request that it be passed on to the right department as needed.

 

thank you

*name here*

 

(please note im sorry for using the 14 year old girl example, however ive not named anyone, used referance to this site, mentioned any details about it as i know you said you wernt happy going to the media, this is NOT to be published anywhere mainstream i just said that to try and get a prompt responce tho if they get mardy ill knock up a quick story on shortnews if my accounts still valid)

 

emailed it to a few people off RLP's client list to see what responces i get

[JonCris]

labrat it's a good start but please tell me you used the spell checker BEFORE sending

[labrat]

well it was midnight during a bout of insomnia, im dyslexic and it was done in notepad which doesnt have a spell checker

 

yes i know im kicking myself now

 

first update had an email back from game stores - basicly goes " thank you we have passed this onto our PR department who should reply to you shortly"

[labrat]

no replys from any stores, sent a letter asking similar questions to RLP and no reply

[raydetinu]

Not surprised; they know they are pushing it in a lot of cases and want it to be a deterrent, so I think they will not divulge any details.

[MARTIN3030]

They are unlikely to put anything in writing before consulting with RLP.

RLP will of course tell the stores that it is defensive action,I think its almost a certainty that they will be extremely guarded-possibly issuing a jointly prepared response that attempts to defend both store and RLP.

Its pretty predictable.

[labrat]

yep well seen as the email route failed (probably as alot went to customer services and never got passed on) then ive decided to write directly to companies pr departments, ill start trying to get hold of addresses in the next few days problem is cos of shift patterns it may be 3 weeks + before i can get anything done

[doobeedoobeedoo]

this is my first thread - not sure if I am adding in right place......

6th April afternoon call from husband to say TKMaxx Croydon holding 15 year old daughter because her friend had purchased a bag after swapping the price tickets on two bags.

Husband told he could either collect daughter or police would be called. Husband told TKMaxx (or person holding daughter) that they should call police if she had done something wrong.

I drove home and contacted TKMaxx (approx 40mins) later to find out what was happening – daughter still held but her friend had been collected by parent. I said I would get there as soon as I could – it took me about another 40mins (including finding the store which I never use).

Security guard brought daughter to me in the store. He made no mention to me of any future charges or of any paperwork that my daughter was asked to sign.

Daughter said he had called the police twice but they were not available. Also daughter claimed guard told her that he could not release her without a parent collecting or without contacting police but could say that police had been called and she had been cautioned. Remainder of time spent making paper airplanes.

Thursday 16th April daughter received letter from RPL Limited claiming to be acting on behalf of TK Maxx.

………”From the age of 14, our client is legally entitled, due to your wrongful actions, to claim the full cost of compensation against you”

Their wording suggests that as their client is over 14 they can claim against my daughter but I assume they mean that their client can claim against someone who is aged 14 or over.

They state the total loss to their client is £137 (broken down into

value of goods…… (0.00),

Staff and management time investigating…. (82.50),

Admin … (24.75)

Apportioned security and surveillance……..(30.25)

They stated they would be willing to accept 35.00 if copy of birth certificate supplied and payment made within 21 days. They included a two-paged document of frequently asked questions, ways of paying, consequences of not paying etc.

As my daughter had not been reported to police I didn’t believe she could be fined. I do not wish to supply a copy of an important document to a company I do not know –if TK Maxx had needed proof of her age my daughter could have shown her child Oyster card. We decided not to respond. Daughter said security guard had mentioned a fine to her when she was being held but did was not told how much.

Yesterday Sat 9th May 2009 daughter received a further letter from RLP Limited claiming that as they are unable to confirm her age their client has no option but to assume she is over 16 “and to pursue with this civil claim on that basis”

They state they will accept £110 if paid in next 21 days.

I have a number of concerns:

1> RLP Limited was given my daughter’s details – obviously she supplied them to the security guard at TK Maxx. Are they allowed to pass them to anyone without consent (daughter does not remember signing anything and was not given a copy if she did)? Can RLP pass these details on – can I find out if they have?

2> Are 15 year olds not entitled the to protection of an adult? If they are being told important information (e.g. about their personal data being given to a collection company and possible fines/consequences etc) should they be given this information in writing or have an adult present?

3> Even dodgy car parking services display notices warning people they may be fined or clamped. As mentioned by one of your contributors perhaps stores should display warnings that wrongdoers will be pursued financially regardless of whether the wrongdoing is proven (or even reported).

4> What is best way to proceed? Some threads suggest ignoring letters and wait to see if RLP Limited takes further action?

5> Seems trivial, but the poor use of grammar in the letters made me suspicious.

[dx100uk]

this is my first thread - not sure if I am adding in right place......

6th April afternoon call from husband to say TKMaxx Croydon holding 15 year old daughter because her friend had purchased a bag after swapping the price tickets on two bags.

 

Husband told he could either collect daughter or police would be called. Husband told TKMaxx (or person holding daughter) that they should call police if she had done something wrong.

 

I drove home and contacted TKMaxx (approx 40mins) later to find out what was happening – daughter still held but her friend had been collected by parent. I said I would get there as soon as I could – it took me about another 40mins (including finding the store which I never use).

 

Security guard brought daughter to me in the store. He made no mention to me of any future charges or of any paperwork that my daughter was asked to sign.

 

Daughter said he had called the police twice but they were not available. Also daughter claimed guard told her that he could not release her without a parent collecting or without contacting police but could say that police had been called and she had been cautioned. Remainder of time spent making paper airplanes.

 

Thursday 16th April daughter received letter from RPL Limited claiming to be acting on behalf of TK Maxx.

 

………”From the age of 14, our client is legally entitled, due to your wrongful actions, to claim the full cost of compensation against you”

 

Their wording suggests that as their client is over 14 they can claim against my daughter but I assume they mean that their client can claim against someone who is aged 14 or over.

 

They state the total loss to their client is £137 (broken down into

value of goods…… (0.00),

Staff and management time investigating…. (82.50),

Admin … (24.75)

Apportioned security and surveillance……..(30.25)

 

They stated they would be willing to accept 35.00 if copy of birth certificate supplied and payment made within 21 days. They included a two-paged document of frequently asked questions, ways of paying, consequences of not paying etc.

 

As my daughter had not been reported to police I didn’t believe she could be fined. I do not wish to supply a copy of an important document to a company I do not know –if TK Maxx had needed proof of her age my daughter could have shown her child Oyster card. We decided not to respond. Daughter said security guard had mentioned a fine to her when she was being held but did was not told how much.

 

Yesterday Sat 9th May 2009 daughter received a further letter from RLP Limited claiming that as they are unable to confirm her age their client has no option but to assume she is over 16 “and to pursue with this civil claim on that basis”

 

They state they will accept £110 if paid in next 21 days.

 

I have a number of concerns:

 

1> RLP Limited was given my daughter’s details – obviously she supplied them to the security guard at TK Maxx. Are they allowed to pass them to anyone without consent (daughter does not remember signing anything and was not given a copy if she did)? Can RLP pass these details on – can I find out if they have?

 

2> Are 15 year olds not entitled the to protection of an adult? If they are being told important information (e.g. about their personal data being given to a collection company and possible fines/consequences etc) should they be given this information in writing or have an adult present?

 

3> Even dodgy car parking services display notices warning people they may be fined or clamped. As mentioned by one of your contributors perhaps stores should display warnings that wrongdoers will be pursued financially regardless of whether the wrongdoing is proven (or even reported).

 

4> What is best way to proceed? Some threads suggest ignoring letters and wait to see if RLP Limited takes further action?

 

5> Seems trivial, but the poor use of grammar in the letters made me suspicious.

 

 

i would be inclined to start your own thread.

 

dx