RLP - Boots v My 15 yr old daughter

[Feline007]

My 15 year old daughter was shopping with friends in Boots and handed loads of different lip glosses to a 15 year old male friend she was with saying 'hold this, hold that etc' while making her choices. She then decided on one, put all the rest back and queued with 2 other girls to pay. They bought theirs, but she realised that if she purchased it she would not have enough money to get something to eat after. She gave the lipgloss to her male friend and asked him to put it back on the shelf. She did this quite openly - she did not 'palm' it. He protested that she was being lazy and didn't want to put it back, and she laughingly shoved him and shouted 'PUT IT BACK!'. This I believe is all on CCTV. She continued her way out of the store but he did not put the item back but unknown to my daughter made a split decision to steal it. On leaving the store he was stopped and they were both interviewed by 2 male security guards. She was really frightened and tried to explain the situation to the security but they would not listen so she clammed up and decided to wait for us to get her to explain. They were both taken to a police station and he had to write their names and addresses on 2 forms which they signed. My daughter has no idea whatsoever what she signed. They were told no charges but may have to pay a 'small admin fee'. They were photographed and evidently banned from Lakeside Shopping Centre for a year. The boy was crying so much he did not give any reason for what he did. They have received a demand from a recovery company of £137.50 each.

 

I do not think that my daughter should have to pay for his decision, and furthermore, its so out of character for her friend that I would like to help him too if possible. Surely thay should BOTH be charged £137.50 for the same thing?

 

I called RLP and told them I believed they were operating without a licence (confirmed to me by phone by OFT) and a very shirty lady told me they DID have a licence for CIVIL recovery - not debt recovery.

 

Can anyone help please?

[BankFodder]

it is reasonable they should pay an administration fee to cover exactly the losses they were suffered by Boots as a direct result of their wrongdoing.

 

Don't do anything more on the telephone with anybody. You should always record your calls if you do decide to deal on the phone.

 

I suggest that you don't respond to RLP. They will keep on badgering you with threats. In the end it would probably be Boots would have to sue you and it would be Boots would have to establish the actual losses in court.

 

You could write to Boots, apologise for what has happened, point out that by and large it was a misunderstanding and tell them that you appreciate that the incident may have caused them some administrative loss and if they will let you know what this is a you will be pleased to pay.

 

If Boots give you a proper break down for a sensible figure then pay it.

[Feline007]

Okay thank you I'll write to Boots. My daughter is certainly guilty of laziness, but she did not at any point in time request or ask her friend to take the lipgloss for her.

 

One of the male security guards said to the boy 'was it for her?' and the sobbing boy just nodded. He meant he took it to give to her. However he was not stealing it on her instructions.

[Feline007]

Hi BankFodder.

 

I just read your reply again and I do not agree it is reasonable that THEY should pay an administration fee to cover Boots costs. My daughter did not steal anything, or request that any items were stolen for her.

 

Thank you for the advice though.

Edited September 11, 2009 by Feline007

[Feline007]

Hi, I made a post earlier about my 15 year old daughter being with a friend who stole a lipgloss from Boots (value about a fiver).

 

I do not want to pay RLP one penny as my daughter did not steal or coerce anyone to steal anything.

 

However, the boy she was with who DID steal a lipgloss from Boots is very distressed and has not told his parents about the incident.

 

He has received a bill for £137.50 from RPL. As he did take the item - should he pay the fee or not? I don't know what to advise him.

 

If he pays will his details be removed from the database?

 

I'd appreciate any advice as incident was 27th Aug so time is ticking for the 21 day period to expire.

[maroondevo52]

Two threads merged.

[ForestChav]

Surely she didn't commit any offence? She didn't steal it, nor did she ask someone to - he chose to steal it without her knowing.

 

So why is *she* banned/being illegally fined?

 

Funnily:

- both are being asked for 137.50 as RLP always charge

- despite the fact the goods were recovered

- despite the fact it's the same incident, so it didn't cost the guards twice as much to deal with them anyway

 

He should possibly be asked to pay for some expenses if they can prove they were directly as a result of him attempting to steal (but they recovered the goods, and the guards/cctv would be there anyway, so no idea how much this could reasonably be, or if it's even quantifiable) but she's done nothing so should she be expected to pay any?

 

I'd be more worried about them being added to any naughty DB RLP are running - they're fifteen so they're in year 11 and in the summer will probably do their GCSEs and want to get a job... if they're checking against this it might work against your daughter when she has not committed an offence.

Edited September 11, 2009 by ForestChav

[shanty]

If your doughter was taken to the Police station,what for and why were you not called?

[Feline007]

She was taken with the boy because they said he had taken it for her - and she must have asked him to, and that was even WORSE in their opinion than if she had taken it herself because she had made an innocent do a criminal offence!

 

The police phoned us and asked us to collect her and said, don't worry there is no charge. Furthermore, they said to my daughter as we were leaving there is no charge, nothing recorded, and when you leave this station no-one will know about it except you two (her and the boy).

[shanty]

I see.So glad that it went no further.Interesting how the phrase "Did you take if for her?",can be interpreted in two ways.

 

Rlp are shocking aren't they!

Are you saying the Police Officer got her to sign a form?Without you being present?

[Feline007]

Yes, she was made to sign the standard RLP form that everyone seems to sign, that they do not give you a copy of. When my husband went to pick her up they did not go through anything with him, or show him the form. They just let her go and said that was the end of the matter. I am not going to pay this amount as she didn't do anything wrong.

[shanty]

It is something you need to take up with the Police. A Police Officer should not be getting a juvenile to sign a form,it is not police business.

[Feline007]

The whole situation is getting me down to be honest. I told my daughter we are not paying it, and the boy who actually stole the flipping lipgloss has also written to RLP saying he's not going to pay it as I told my daughter they are crooks. I don't know if I've given him the right information though as if his name gets added to a bad debt list I'd feel responsible as though I advised him wrongly. Why oh why did she go shopping that day!!!

[2Grumpy]

It is something you need to take up with the Police. A Police Officer should not be getting a juvenile to sign a form,it is not police business.

 

I suspect that this was at Boots

 

I also suspect that they "had to sign it" and that they had no idea what they were signing or the implications of it

[Feline007]

Yes that is true. My daughter is 15 and has never had so much as a school detention. Unfortunately she didn't know her rights. I wish she had refused to sign anything, quoted she was a minor, and asked for e telephone call to me, but that didn't happen. I'm writing to Boots to tell them of the situation, however I can't believe they are unaware - they must be getting this sort of thing every day - or maybe most people just pay it.

[ForestChav]

Yes that is true. My daughter is 15 and has never had so much as a school detention. Unfortunately she didn't know her rights. I wish she had refused to sign anything, quoted she was a minor, and asked for e telephone call to me, but that didn't happen. I'm writing to Boots to tell them of the situation, however I can't believe they are unaware - they must be getting this sort of thing every day - or maybe most people just pay it.

Isn't it unenforceable anyway because she is 15 and too young to enter what is effectively a credit agreement? Hell, under 18s can't even consent to contracts, in most circumstances.

She was taken with the boy because they said he had taken it for her - and she must have asked him to, and that was even WORSE in their opinion than if she had taken it herself because she had made an innocent do a criminal offence!

Surely they should have to prove this, then, or else it is defamation?

[Feline007]

I would assume so - unfortunately I need to know what our rights ARE! I need someone who knows the law who can say to me 'RLP cannot hold information about your daughter, and any threats they make are unenforceable'. If there are any solicitors or barristers out there - please let me know!

 

Also, as the boy DID steal the item - where does it leave him if he refuses to pay? He is also 15, and believe it or not is a nice kid who is considering a career in LAW! I know it sounds ridiculous and I wish he had not stolen the lipgloss and involved my daughter by association, but kids do stupid things and learn by their mistakes.

[ForestChav]

They can only legally recoup any losses they incurred by the boy stealing the item.

 

The security staff would have been employed anyway if he had not stolen it, and had just walked out without it, so their time doesn't matter. They presumably recovered the item undamaged as well so that is still in a saleable condition so they can't really claim for that either.

 

The police attended and didn't charge either of them with anything, didn't they? So they're not guilty of it because if they were the police would have given them a caution or something.

 

It's always the nice kids who are more likely to get caught by this, I'd imagine - he probably just did it on a whim because they didn't have enough money (and the whole association thing is flawed logic anyway, because they would surely have to prove the intent i.e. that your daughter asked him to steal it for her) and thought she would like it anyway - the kids who are used to stealing would be more used to evading being caught. Plus (as he did) they're often more likely to lose their nerve because they didn't intend to do anything wrong...

[Feline007]

Thank you - it's all very helpful. I've written to Boots asking them to request RLP stop the action against my daughter and I've also asked the manager to cancel the lifetime ban from shopping in Boots that they put on my daughter (although whether its wise to spend money in Boots is questionable!).

 

I've also written to RLP telling them my daughter is not responsible and will not pay (£275.00 total costs for a security guard walking 10 feet outside the store and stopping 2 kids).

 

I just hope that I've made the right decision and her name is not blacklisted somewhere but at the end of the day she's 15 and they would have to prove intent.

 

Wish me luck!

[ForestChav]

I guess you could ask for the data to be removed from file by RLP considering she isn't guilty of anything. Presumably she'll be looking for jobs soon, as will he (even if they go to sixth form/uni they might want some little jobs) and if they have ended up on a blacklist and not been found guilty of anything then that might affect them if they're using that referencing source.

 

The boy I can understand - he did walk out of the store with an item which hadn't been paid for, regardless of the circumstances, so he did steal (even though it was recovered and he wasn't charged by the police) but your daughter has done nothing wrong, she didn't ask for it to be stolen, and she didn't steal it herself - HE made the decision to steal it for her. Teens thinking they know it all again, really.

[Feline007]

Hi, no answer from Boots yet but there has been a new development regarding the boy. He wrote and said he was only 15, not old enough to work and there's no way he could pay the fine.

 

They have written back and said if he sends a copy of his birth certificate showing he is under 17, they will reduce the fee to £35!

 

Evidently they made it very clear at the time that they were both only 15, so RLP was obviously chancing its arm.

 

I wrote to RLP saying I'm not paying for my daughter - if they send me a request for £35 I'm still not paying it because it would be an admission of guilt.

 

If the boy pays the £35 (I think he will as he did steal the item) will his name still be added to this supposed blacklist do you think?

[Button1]

Hi, no answer from Boots yet but there has been a new development regarding the boy. He wrote and said he was only 15, not old enough to work and there's no way he could pay the fine.

 

They have written back and said if he sends a copy of his birth certificate showing he is under 17, they will reduce the fee to £35!

 

Evidently they made it very clear at the time that they were both only 15, so RLP was obviously chancing its arm.

 

I wrote to RLP saying I'm not paying for my daughter - if they send me a request for £35 I'm still not paying it because it would be an admission of guilt.

 

If the boy pays the £35 (I think he will as he did steal the item) will his name still be added to this supposed blacklist do you think?

 

Hi Feline,

 

The boys name and your daughters name will already be on their 'database of defenders', regardless of payment or not!

 

RLP are above the law in this country, and it is up to the defender to prove their innocence, rather than the other way round!

 

It is proving very difficult in ensuring my details are removed from RLP/Cireco Ltd! Aparently, Boots withdrawing the action is not sufficient for RLP??!!!:-x:-x:-x:-x:-x:-x

Edited September 28, 2009 by Button1
spelling

[ForestChav]

I wouldn't send the birth certificate at all. It gives them some more "data" to add.

[Feline007]

You're right! Didn't even think of that - what about passport? Stuck between a rick and a hard place because if you don't send it you worry they'll take it further and if you do send it they have more info on you!

[Sugar Plum Fairy]

I haven't corresponded with RLP at all only Boots, they certainly won't see my daughter's birth certificate. I suppose you could send a copy to Boots on the strict instruction that its not to be passed on to RLP.

 

Still awaiting a reply regarding my daughter from Boots, 3 RLP letters, 3 debt collection letters I wonder what the next step is?