Accused of Theft/price swap.

[2Grumpy]

I don't think it will add anything. They will write again & the best action will be to ignore, so miss that out too. You don't want to be involved in letter ping-pong, just a sinngle simple denial

[ItsEssexRob]

Ok so I recieved a responce since my letter that reads like this.

 

'We have considered your recent correspondance with us in which you have disputed your legal respinsiblity to pay the sums sought by our client.

 

Regrettably, we are unclear on the exact nature of your dispute and whether it is in full or in part and are therefore unable to fully consider your representations at this point.

 

Accordingly you now have these 3 options.

 

1. You can supply us with further information and evidence in order that your dispute can be properly considered. We have enclosed a form which may assist you in providing the information.

 

2. You can pay the full amount of 161.17

 

3. You can make an offer to our client to accept a lesser sum in settlement of the claim

 

4. You can request the claim be dealt with by way of mediation. This is an informal process as an alternative to court proceedings in which an independant mediator would look at the case and hear representations from both sides and try to reach some agreed settlement.

 

If you reject all of these alternatives our client will be entitled to issue a claim in the county court. If that is necessary then in addition to the sum claimed, our client will seek to recover costs and interest as [part of that process. The claim will require you to set your case out in a formal defence, disclose any documents upon which you intend to rely and file a witness statement setting out your evidence of events. A judge would then consider gthe evidence at a trial and hear representations from both parties. We are both required to consider all other options before resorting to court proceedings.

 

Please confirm which of these options you would wish to persue within 21 days.'

 

Does this sound like the standard letter people get after the lone ' I deny liability' letter?

 

I take it I now completely ignore the letters yes? They attached a form for a defence with the letter.

 

Thanks

[2Grumpy]

I like it - 3 options - 1, 2, 3 or 4

 

Not sure whether it's a good idea to correspond with them any further

 

I certainly wouldn't be answering that letter in the terms that they want.

 

If anything I would ask for a copy of all documents, statements and other materials that they would be using along with full details of the claim they would be making. Any defence would go direct to the court, not to them.

[ItsEssexRob]

Haha I never noticed that when I typed it out, silly RLP.

 

The general consensus on here is still to ignore right? These are the usual letters they follow up with I take it?

[jackieandwayne]

Yes, I would ignore it. In your case, until they stop coming, which they will. I say in your case because, although it would amuse me greatly to have the chance to antagonise them, I sense that you are still genuinely worried about RLP. Deal with their missives as if they were a chain letter. Tear them up. It will go away, promise!

[ItsEssexRob]

I am confident about it because of what is said on here, but whilst the letters still come in theres always a bit of anxiousness. I shall ignore totally now though.

 

Thanks

[ItsEssexRob]

Something I wanted to ask you guys on here.

 

I am awaiting my 4th letter from RLP atm, but have become a tad concerned about some of the posts on here of late where people are actually paying up.

 

The key points a lot of you make in these threads is there there is no way RLP could convict because no wrongdoing took place.

 

However in my case wrongdoing DID take place, albiet not to the sum of 160 odd quid.

 

Is the advice still to ignore it totally? I guess I just need a bit of a confidence booster because Ive sene a few threads where CAB people have advised people to pay or where people seem to be more leaning towards paying rather than when I first read here and everyone was saying unanimously dont pay and ignore.

 

Is the official stance still that EVEN if you have actually stolen or done wrong?

 

Thanks

[2Grumpy]

The advice here is that the police have already dealt with this

 

RLP have sent a speculative invoice for their time sorting this out.

 

Most likely their costs were zero because they already had security & management there and their time isn't booked up 100% so no additional costs were incurred

 

If they had real costs, they would have itemised them, but they haven't. Their invoice values are based on the amount in question, nothing else, so are not a reflection of any costs involved.

[ItsEssexRob]

Ok recieved my next RLP letter today.

 

It says the following

 

'It has bene some time since we last wrote to you about this matter because we agreed to place the matter on hold for a period of 21 days whilst you clarified your position.

 

You have not notified us of a defence with any merit. Our client is seeking to recover £161.17 representing the sum you converted plus a contribution to the costs of disruption to business.

 

It is stil our clients intention to proceed with this claim against you. This letter comes to restate that intention and inform you that our client intends to issue proceedings against you in the county court if you do not make proposals for settlement within 21 days of this letter.

 

The claim will be for £161.17. Interest has accrued and continues to accrue at 8% and will continue untill the date of judgement in the county court.

 

If you wish to conclude matters quickly and avoid county court proceedings with additional claims for interest and costs you can make payment to us now in the sum of £161.17 in full and final settlement. See overleaf for payment details.'

 

 

Few questions I would like to ask about this.

 

-It says interest has accrued at 8% and will continue to accrue, but in earlier letters they said 8% per annum, and it has not been nearly a year yet.

 

In an earlier letter when talking about defences, RLP mention in their faq that 'I was allowed to pay for the goods, is this right' before stating that 'you should not have been allowed to pay for the goods please tell us about this as it may invalidate the claim'

 

When I commited the wrongdoing I had actually paid for the items but a reduced price ( I switched reduction labels) I wasnt given the chance to pay the full for these items nor was I given the money back, so technically they already took a portion of my money ( about £10), is this a valid defence, should I write to RLP informing them of this?

 

I am concerned by the recent post on here saying RLP are now taking people to court. The letter I recieved simply says the next letter they said will be the client taking me to court, not referring to debt collectors like is stated on here a lot.

 

How much extra are court fees and the additional costs.

 

Im wondering now if I should write to them, submitting that defence and maybe offering to pay the amount that was actually lost, i.e about £30, which I would pay to end the matter, just not £161.17

 

Please help me as i'm now the mosty worried ive been since the matter started.

 

Thanks

[2Grumpy]

Do not pay, it will only encourage them

 

try

 

I deny any liablity to you or your clients

 

Please provide full details of the particulars of claim will be made and a copy of all documents, statements and all other materials that will be used in court.

 

Any claim will be defended in full

Time for them to put up or shut up

 

Keep any response but most likely ignore

[ItsEssexRob]

Ok i've not had any reply from them since July 4th now, and previously they had a pattern of writing within a week of the 21 day response time they set out, so that would be the week between the 25th of July and the 1st of August, so theyre almost 3 weeks late. Does this mean I could be out of the woods or could it mean i'm being moved along and the next person takes longer to reply?

[ItsEssexRob]

Ok so after about 3 and a half months they finally got back to me, but from a 'different' company. This one is called 'Asset Collection and investigation LTD'

 

The letter says the following.

 

Urgent

 

Tesco vs Mr (my full name)

Claim outstanding £161.17

 

In an attempt to avoid legal costs being incurred by either party our above named client have granted us permission to negotiate the balance of the above claim.

 

If we receive payment or your proposals to pay 60% of the balance within the next 14 days, we will consider your proposal favourably.

 

We are also prepared to accept payment over 3 installments.

 

This arrangement will only be available for 30 days and you are urged to take advantage of this offer.

 

Please telephone upon recipt of this letter to discuss how you may benefit from these preferential terms.

 

Rcoveries department.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I did a little bit of reaearch on this company and seems they are even more shady than RLP. My letter appears to have come from Glasgow with the G2 2DN postcode.

 

I assume I just ignore like the RLP letters yes?

 

The is no threat of court on this letter and has the appearance of a letter that doesnt really know what situation its dealing with.

 

Anyone shed anymore light on this for me please?

 

Thanks

[theratboy]

Had one of these letters in 2008 which i ignored. The next letter from asset was from the "pre legal dept" which was also ignored then the next batch of letters were from jb debt recovery. Whether these are all the same company i don't know but unless these companies own the alleged debt there is no action they can take apart from sending you even more desperate begging letters.

[Sidewinder]

Agree with the above. The fact that they are trying to persuade you to part with a reduced sum smacks of desperation.

[ItsEssexRob]

Over 6 months now and no follow ups, do I assume they have given up now?