Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi and thanks It looks like they ticked all the boxes to me but I'll try and upload the notice. I was wondering if a witness to late delivery might be considered proof - I'm assuming they posted it as normal but Royal Mail stuffed up delivery. If not then they're really saying it just has to be posted within 12 days of the incident, regardless of when it is received. Annoying! edit ok thanks Honeybee here's my 2nd (actually 3rd) attempt at anonymising, copying and uploading the notice! Sorry about the state of it - I sat on it while distracted by my dog 🙃 pcn front.pdf pcn back page.pdf
    • ROFL - dont get upset just because someone (quite a lot of someones) dont want smart meters - well unless you get paid for it .. in which case ...   I assume you haven't been with Octopus long enough to be on one of the very long fixed price tariffs they offered before the prices went bonkers .. and that you dont use your electricity in the evening/lunch time if you think the 'agile type tariffs are good value .. let alone worth installing a smart meter for - high price a good disincentive for an evening cuppa eh? Let alone all your computer/tv etc time in the peak price evening or lunch time. - and boy do those peak prices instantly hammer your bill when those Russian and middle eastern issues kick off.   I would only have considered a smart meter if solar panels had been an option for me - but roof is oriented completely the wrong way. Oh - and My opinion hasn't changed since the smart meter trials 40 years ago, because neither have the issues (well not enough) but I'm happy for you. Be happy for me.
    • Hi. I'm afraid I've had to hide your post with the pdf files to keep this anonymous for you. You've left the PCN reference number and your car reg showing. Could you edit that and repost please? HB    
    • Well naturally if you want to maintain your outrage, and retain something to bitch about, then arguing about the level of your fixed monthly DD is the way to go. You are of course perfectly free to ignore the easy solution.
    • His financial situation isn’t great, and the landlord has made lots of things up. The things he’s put isn’t true at all. My friend did tell the full truth with incoming and outgoing, I helped him fill in his form and he checked bills etc. to make sure it was right. His wage is ok, but not as good as the landlord thinks it is,  and he doesn’t have anything spare. How much are they likely to take from him? Should he send any reply?  the letter just says to take the court letter with him. 
  • 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

B&Q Security dragged me out of ny van over bogus theft assumption


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4681 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

  • 1 month later...
  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The guard has no more powers than you or me. He can only make a citizens arrest if he has grounds to believe your committing an offense & he can't use undue force to detain you

 

I thought that you could only make a citizens arrest if the crime could result in a penalty of five years or more. Does this apply to shoplifting?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that you could only make a citizens arrest if the crime could result in a penalty of five years or more. Does this apply to shoplifting?

 

There is no specific offence of shoplifting, it is simply theft, and this can carry a max penalty of 7 years in prison.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that you could only make a citizens arrest if the crime could result in a penalty of five years or more. Does this apply to shoplifting?

 

The legislation has changed.

 

I think you are referring to the term 'arrestable offence'.

 

There was an old definition of what an arrestable offence was:-

 

1: Offence for which the sentance is fixed by law (eg murder)

2: Arrest for which a person over the age of 21 on first conviction *may* be commited to prison for five years or more.

3:...

 

(sorry, I can't remember the rest. Its been a while since I left the force!)

 

SOCPA is now the power that dermines whether an arrest is lawful. Under Socpa I believe the 'any person' power of arrest is only for indictable offences (for which Theft doe fall under)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Plain clothes staff carrying out licensable activity do not have to openly display their licence on their person in many cases.

 

Hi shanty

 

i know you have been told to start your own thread but i would like to say you both right and wrong.

Plain clothed staff do not have to have their license on show but they do have to have it on them at all times whilst working and to be able to show it to people/police as proof, No security other than in hiouse can be conducted without a license and a license must be on the staff at all times whilst working.

 

On a side note if the CCTV didnt work in the security office how can they prove theft ? they would be no proof of you taking an item and no proof of them removing it from your person so no offense has been commited by yourself ?

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal Experiences/Mistakes lol...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The legislation has changed.

 

I think you are referring to the term 'arrestable offence'.

 

There was an old definition of what an arrestable offence was:-

 

1: Offence for which the sentance is fixed by law (eg murder)

2: Arrest for which a person over the age of 21 on first conviction *may* be commited to prison for five years or more.

3:...

 

(sorry, I can't remember the rest. Its been a while since I left the force!)

 

SOCPA is now the power that dermines whether an arrest is lawful. Under Socpa I believe the 'any person' power of arrest is only for indictable offences (for which Theft doe fall under)

 

Yes i can confirm the above a Citizens arrest can be carried out for an indictable offense, however if the person arrested is not handed over to Police then the arrest is unlawful and can be considered as assult/unlawful restraint as a Police officer is the only person who can release a arrested person etc.

 

e.g. if i arrest someone in relation to my job i cannot unarrest them only the police can which is why security dont like arresting people.

If any of my posts are helpful, please feel free to click my scales. All information is given as my opinion only, based on my own personal Experiences/Mistakes lol...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi shanty

 

i know you have been told to start your own thread but i would like to say you both right and wrong.

Plain clothed staff do not have to have their license on show but they do have to have it on them at all times whilst working and to be able to show it to people/police as proof, No security other than in hiouse can be conducted without a license and a license must be on the staff at all times whilst working.

 

On a side note if the CCTV didnt work in the security office how can they prove theft ? they would be no proof of you taking an item and no proof of them removing it from your person so no offense has been commited by yourself ?

 

Reliable eyewitness evidence is adequate, ( not in this case no doubt)you don't have to have CCTV to prove theft.

As for the above,I don't see where I am wrong as I didn't contradict what you said..?? I WAS talking about in-house staff there where you quoted me.

Edited by shanty
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 1 year later...
  • dx100uk changed the title to B&Q Security dragged me out of ny van over bogus theft assumption
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...