Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Nothing will happen in regard to this one shoplifting event, other than Sainsburys won't let you shop in this store again.   But, if you continued to shoplift, then the consequences are more serious. Local to me, there  is a town where about 13 people have been banned from shopping in many of the shops. They are subject to some form of order, where if they set foot in any of the stores, they will be subject to arrest by Police.  
    • Agree with DX, Sadly, from the pics, it looks like you're bang to rights😪 The rules are very explicit. Before entering the box, you must ensure that you are able to completely exit. It looks like the car in front may have moved a couple of feet and tempted you to set off, but when you did that, there still wasn't enough room to completely exit the box. By all means ask to see the video evidence, but saying you had to stop because the vehicle in front stopped, isn't a valid defence.
    • Hello, welcome to CAG. I imagine the letter that the security guards talked about will be a letter from a company or lawyers who specialise in trying to extract money from shoplifters. I think Sainsbury's use DWF solicitors, otherwise it could be a company like RLP. It won't be a 'fine', only the police can do that. Look at this as a parallel 'justice' system that doesn't involve the plice. If you read around the forum for other cases of shoplifting, you'll get the idea of how this all works. If you think your behaviour has become compulsive, we suggest having a chat with your GP who should get you help for this. Best, HB
    • despite our wettest 18 months on record,  Low levels of rain and snow have cut Canada’s hydropower production, forcing it to increase electricity imports from the U.S.   - NYT
    • Hi all…. i was wondering if someone could help me. I am ashamed I have been caught shoplifting from Sainsbury’s by two undercover security guards who I suspect have been following me for a week now… I have been impulsively shoplifting due to what I think could have become an addiction of some kind. I am ashamed of what I had been doing and I do believe being caught has been for the greater good. i was taken to a room and asked to empty my bag, the guards were slightly rude but I complied with them politely as I know they are just doing their job and I am in the wrong. They retrieved my address, name, birthdate and took a photo of me, they asked me how many times I had shoplifted and I said twice and I didn’t want to be foolish and say just once. They issued me a letter of ban from the store and if I was caught in the store again the police would be called. They told me I would be paying 2x what I had stolen today as the goods had been damage which I am guessing is stole around £65 worth roughly. I did offer to pay for the items I had stolen on the day but they declined. They did not call the police but let me leave after claiming I was a lucky person. They told me to expect a letter in the post and that I “would be smart not to ignore it”  what should I be expecting in the post from them? I am aware from reading a lot online about security costs.. people mentioned to ignore these costs however as I had damaged the labelling on the goods should I still comply and pay the fines ?  kind regards awful shoplifter
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 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
      • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5187 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

Reponse from the balififf company

 

You have been charged for our representive attendance with van following a levy being taken against goods. Our representative has attended the address supplied on the 27.10.10 with a van with the intention of removing goods to satisfy the debt. Upon his attendance to the address supplied our rep has neither been able to gain a response from within the property no could they gain peaceful entry. Our rep has noted that a vehicle was parked which was sighted on his previous visit. He has subsequently levied upon the vehicle have reasonable belief that it belonged to the name debtor. Therefore the enforcement fee of 105 and levy fee of£34 has been raised and applied correctly to your file.as we are able to make charge for a bailiff attendance with a vehicle following a levy made upon your property

 

Please be advised that the statement of account and screenshot you have requested are considered to be a subject access request under section 7 of the data protection Act 1998 and you shall need to forward a payment of £10.00 before we are able to act upon your request

 

All our bailiffs are certificated at court and employed to work of newlyn PLC. They work under our instructions and upon work that we give them. We are unwilling to provide the bailiffs name and court details at this time as we believe this request to be vexatious and unnecessary, and his actions are based on instructions given by the office and form part of the our standard. We believe that by taking our bailiffs certificate details you would be looking to issue a form 4 complaint against him as an individual. If you have reason to believe that the bailiffs as an individual has acted incorrectly and not upon our instruction. Please advise

 

It is simply remarkable the number of times that this identical scenario comes up with this one particular enforcement company !!

 

Newlyn advertise on their website that they have online access to DVLA so you may want to remind them to use this service to search the number plate of the car.

 

Once confirmation has been received, you will need to WRITE to the company to ask that the so called "levy" is immediately removed and they all charges associated with this `'levy|are removed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey i got one right.:D [private joke]

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I owe the sum of £650 an outstanding council tax - A liability order was granted in 16/07/09 but made an arrangement of to clear the balance but now have an outstanding of £290 which has now be passed to bailiff. The bailiffs now want an additional £181.50 . My gripe is that this is the first time i have heard from the bailiffs and how can they justify that sum . A letter which included a formal notice and Notice of distress was put through my letter box. I am now in position to pay off the balance but cannot afford to pay 181.50 . I read some where it details the charges a baliffs can charge. Someone please help.

 

I am sorry but I had not seen this thread before.

 

The fees are not right.

 

The bailiff is entitled to charge a fee of £24.50 for "attending to levy (where no levy was made) ie: where nobody was home at the time of the visit and he can charge a further fee of £18.00 for a second such visit.

 

HOWEVER..if the bailiff is able to levy upon goods, then he CANNOT charge the above fee and INSTEAD he will be able to charge a LEVY FEE which is calculated as being a percentage of the debt owed. In your case the amount would be around £20.

 

It is CLEAR that the bailiff company are instead charging you a levy fee AND an "attending to remove fee". An ATR fee cannot be applied UNLESS a PREVIOUS levy had been made on goods.

 

COMPLAIN.......BY LETTER to the bailiff company AND to the Chief Executive of the local authority and mark your letter as FORMAL COMPLAINT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When are councils going to learn what is right or wrong with regards to bailiff charges. They seem only interested in what BS these bailiff companies tell them and take is as gospel. Ive had run ins with collect services a few times where Ive written to them and had to correct not only them but the council also because of their incorrect fee charging with regards to NDR, and also had to pull them up on bogus visits, (CCTV in work yard) showed no such visits ;) . But the councils still seem intent to believe the bailiffs even when proved wrong. WHY ????

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...