Drydens Solicitors £150 demand-Sainsburys alleged shoplifting.

[jmrocketmail]

Hi, not sure if this post is in the right section... anyway, myself and my uncle were recently involved in an incident in a supermarket regarding alleged shoplifting. This was however a genuine mistake as my uncle put an item in the trolley and forgot all about it. (he is registered disabled after a motorcycle accident 20 years ago and has basically no memory). I had a trolley load of goods from another supermarket that were paid for and i had a receipt. We were stopped outside and asked to come back inside and we complied. Police were called and we voluntarily gave our statements, where we were informed it would be 6 months before we heard back but we would more than likely recieve a caution. I accepted this as i was under the impression this would be the end of the whole thing, until i recieved a letter a few days ago from the supermarkets solicitors which was a notice of intended civil recovery to the amount of £150. I have no intention of paying this although the letter states if i do not it will go to court and i could end up with ccj's, bailiffs or they can seek a deduction from my wages! I would like some information on this and what I can do about it, is it worthwile getting a solicitor? am i entitled to legal aid? is it worthwile bringing them up for defamation of character? Should I contact local press and/or MP? Anything would be much appreciated as I am at my wits end!!!!! Thanks.

[elsinore]

Hi jm.

 

1. Exactly when did the incident take place?

2. Have you received any communication about the matter, either verbal or in writing, from anyone since the incident?

3. Do the solicitors specify what the charge of £150.00 is for?

4. Who are the solicitors?

 

Els

[jmrocketmail]

hi thanks for your reply,

 

the incident took place on the 26/11/08,

i recieved a telephone call from sainsburys today enquiring whether or not i was going to pay the fee as i had requested having the ban dropped (we wer also banned from all sainsburys stores)i was informed that someone from another department would be in touch shortly to discuss the payment further,

the charge of £150 is to cover security costs apparently!!

the solicitors are Drydens Lawyers.

 

Thanks J

[elsinore]

Drydens are glorified debt collectors. They will use agressive tactics to bully and frighten you into paying.

 

I'm confused about which store group is involved. Was the incident at Sainsburys or another store group?

 

In any event, the fact that you appear to have been banned, suggests that the matter has been taken very seriously by the store group.

 

I think you might benefit from seeking the advice of a solicitor. There will be a number in your area who offer free consultation and advice.

 

Els

[jmrocketmail]

sorry, yes the incident was at sainsburys. thanks was thinking about going to a solicitor so i might just give it a go. have no intention whatsoever of paying these cowboys anything but i dont want it to come back and bite me in the ass in the future, cheers for your replies,

 

J

[Jim27]

Hello,

I was wondering what the outcome of this was as the same thing happened to my wife?

Many thanks.

[shanty]

What happened to your wife jim? If there were medical issues,the doctor should have been contacted.Was he?

Edited May 23, 2009 by shanty

[funkyparott]

Police were called and we voluntarily gave our statements, where we were informed it would be 6 months before we heard back but we would more than likely recieve a caution. I accepted this as i was under the impression this would be the end of the whole thing

 

Just to confirm. Did you admit the offence of Theft to the Police?

[MARTIN3030]

Last activity on the site was 5th.December last year.

I will see if I can find out more on this.

[shanty]

Just to confirm. Did you admit the offence of Theft to the Police?

 

 

If he had medical reasons,which could have been clarified with his doctor,then he did not have dishonest intentions.This should have been sorted out a lot quicker than the 6 months stated,if there were medical issues.

 

You said you were told you would receive a caution,but these are only given if you admit the offence,and if medical evidence can disprove this (ie the police contact his doctor) there should be no further action.If his mental capacity was in doubt,the Police should have told you there would be further enquiries,did they contact his Doctor?

 

Unfortunately the Police won't just take his word for it,there has to be proof,otherwise anyone could claim this.

Edited May 23, 2009 by shanty

[MARTIN3030]

I have made contact with JMrocketmail.

He said basically he ignored the demands and has heard nothing since.

Obviously he has stayed away from the store.

[Billybumpkins]

I have made contact with JMrocketmail.

He said basically he ignored the demands and has heard nothing since.

Obviously he has stayed away from the store.

 

 

If this guy feels he or whoever was with him was treated unreasonably because of his/her condition, he can appeal the store ban to the regional business manager. It would be a good idea to add as many facts as he can. The RBM's are usually quite good with these and life bans are usually for repeat offenders or serious crims.

[MARTIN3030]

So do we take it that you are a shareholder in Sainsburys as well as ASDA ?

Or will you answer my previous question.

You appear to have much to say in the RLP forums,most of which is in support of them.

Again-can I ask in which capacity do you assume these experiences-are you working in/have been working in the loss prevention industry ?

[Billybumpkins]

So do we take it that you are a shareholder in Sainsburys as well as ASDA ?

Or will you answer my previous question.

You appear to have much to say in the RLP forums,most of which is in support of them.

Again-can I ask in which capacity do you assume these experiences-are you working in/have been working in the loss prevention industry ?

 

What shares I hold are my business and not for a discussion in a forum like this. I worked in retail for many years and have experience of a lot of things that go on.

 

I support what I feel is right, I offer advice, personal not definitive, from my experiences. I would love to work in Loss Prevention. If the people who are dishing out the RLP notices would do them correctly then this forum would be pointless. I thought I had addressed my capacity in other posts.

 

No civil recovery company is doing anything that is unlawful, the law of tort is the law in question and supermarkets, as much as any other individual has the right to redress and loss caused to them by the wrong actions of another. I do support, and have voiced on this forum, support to those who have had a wrong done against them and have offered a possible solution to this. This is not a [problem], OK yes they do go in a bit hard sometimes, but as the courts rarely offer any redress to the company, then they must seek damages in the civil courts, or do we expect them to carry these losses and go out of business or keep passing them on to you the consumer? These companies will always listen to an offer if you have done wrong, otherwise they might just do what I have seen them do in the past and carry on with what they are doing.

 

I have done in the past, and will continue to do so in the future, arrest anyone who is commiting a crime, whether it be on a neighbour or in a supermarket and I have done in the past and will continue to support those who have had a wrong done against them.

 

I hope this is sufficient.

[MARTIN3030]

"No civil recovery company is doing anything that is unlawful":confused:

 

Are you sure you have read through these threads ?

[JonCris]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/retail-loss-prevention/226784-proposed-meeting-re-rlp.html

[JonCris]

What shares I hold are my business and not for a discussion in a forum like this. I worked in retail for many years and have experience of a lot of things that go on.

 

I support what I feel is right, I offer advice, personal not definitive, from my experiences. I would love to work in Loss Prevention. If the people who are dishing out the RLP notices would do them correctly then this forum would be pointless. I thought I had addressed my capacity in other posts.

 

No civil recovery company is doing anything that is unlawful, the law of tort is the law in question and supermarkets, as much as any other individual has the right to redress and loss caused to them by the wrong actions of another. I do support, and have voiced on this forum, support to those who have had a wrong done against them and have offered a possible solution to this. This is not a [problem], OK yes they do go in a bit hard sometimes, but as the courts rarely offer any redress to the company, then they must seek damages in the civil courts, or do we expect them to carry these losses and go out of business or keep passing them on to you the consumer? These companies will always listen to an offer if you have done wrong, otherwise they might just do what I have seen them do in the past and carry on with what they are doing.

 

I have done in the past, and will continue to do so in the future, arrest anyone who is commiting a crime, whether it be on a neighbour or in a supermarket and I have done in the past and will continue to support those who have had a wrong done against them.

 

I hope this is sufficient.

 

"Not doing anything unlawful" I think others will be the judge of that

[PVD2009]

Hi Everyone

 

I'm new to the board and would like to say hello to everyone, I hope you can help. My partner visited an H&M store during her lunch hour. She had one item that she was purchasing and she was looking at a pair of sandals. Because she only had 10 minutes left, instead of trying the sandals on, she took out a sandal that she had in her bag to see if the sandals were the same size.

 

The sandal that she pulled out of her bag were in fact purchased from H&M some 2 years previous and it was quite clear from looking at them that they were well worn. My partner decided not to buy the sandals and went to the till to purchase the one item after placing her sandal back in her bag. At the till, a security guard approached her and took her into the back of the shop at which point he charged her for shoplifting. Despite my partner protesting and requesting that he look at the sandals, the security guard told her to wait in a room on her own. She was there for 3 hours before being picked up by police.

 

Upon getting to the station, my partner again tried to advise them of the mistake but the officers stated that they were not dealing with the matter and that she would have to save it until she is interviewed. A further 4 hours passed when she finally was interviewed. She immediately advised the interviewing officers of the error and showed them the sandals. The officers left the room and within 5 minutes they returned advising all charges had been dropped.

 

I told my partner to write a complaint about the whole thing but did she? No she didn't . She has since received a letter from Judge and Priestley Solicitors advising that she now has to pay £150.00 costs!! She sent a letter with the discharge note given by the police and explained the situation. We have received another letter which basically shows that they didn't even bother to read her letter and that they were proceeding regardless.

 

I really don't think she should pay this charge. My partner is not a person that would even consider shoplifting. Please help!!

[JonCris]

Hi Everyone

 

I'm new to the board and would like to say hello to everyone, I hope you can help. My partner visited an H&M store during her lunch hour. She had one item that she was purchasing and she was looking at a pair of sandals. Because she only had 10 minutes left, instead of trying the sandals on, she took out a sandal that she had in her bag to see if the sandals were the same size.

 

The sandal that she pulled out of her bag were in fact purchased from H&M some 2 years previous and it was quite clear from looking at them that they were well worn. My partner decided not to buy the sandals and went to the till to purchase the one item after placing her sandal back in her bag. At the till, a security guard approached her and took her into the back of the shop at which point he charged her for shoplifting. Despite my partner protesting and requesting that he look at the sandals, the security guard told her to wait in a room on her own. She was there for 3 hours before being picked up by police.

 

Upon getting to the station, my partner again tried to advise them of the mistake but the officers stated that they were not dealing with the matter and that she would have to save it until she is interviewed. A further 4 hours passed when she finally was interviewed. She immediately advised the interviewing officers of the error and showed them the sandals. The officers left the room and within 5 minutes they returned advising all charges had been dropped.

 

I told my partner to write a complaint about the whole thing but did she? No she didn't . She has since received a letter from Judge and Priestley Solicitors advising that she now has to pay £150.00 costs!! She sent a letter with the discharge note given by the police and explained the situation. We have received another letter which basically shows that they didn't even bother to read her letter and that they were proceeding regardless.

 

I really don't think she should pay this charge. My partner is not a person that would even consider shoplifting. Please help!!

 

Hi as RLP read this forum please PM me direct