Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Caught for shoplifting at Asda, saying civil recovery fine


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4629 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

Hi All, my friend and I were shopping at Asda, she had trolley with her stuff and I had my own stuff, I was in the queue but then realized she is in some kind of trouble with security officers, After 40 mins or so she came out and explained me what happened - for some reasons she took trolley out of asda gate without paying and one security officer came out and asked her if she had paid, she honestly said she has not and came back in, they took her to security room and started interrogating her, they obviously did not believe that it was just her mistake and she agreed that she made a very stupid mistake but she is not a criminal. Moreover she just received British Citizenship and is about to apply for British passport.

Security officer did not call any police as she agreed that she made a mistake, and she signed a letter which states that she is now banned from coming to asda for next 6 months or so, officer also mentioned that she will be receiving fine of £150 which she has no issues in paying

 

She is working as a manager in a very reputed company and now extremely worried for following reasons, has been reading about all of this since it happened yesterday with her, Any kind of help will be much appreciated.

 

1. Is this incident going to affect her current employment, she is working there from last 4+ years and has very good reputation

2. Is this incident going to affect her future jobs etc especially if she works for a financial institution

3. Is this going to affect her passport application, she has already received British citizenship

4. Is this information going to be shared with police? can police be involved now?

5. Officer told her that she will receive civil recovery fine from another company, I read some posts related to that where it says that her information will be stored in National database of dishonest people, is that true, if yes how does this affect her career?

 

Pls help with information, does she needs to visit a lawyer?

Regds

Shikha

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of controversy about this sort of private enforcement.

 

It seems to me that the mistake is to avoid the police. To say that "she is not a criminal" is to suggest that a conviction is not so likely if the case were tried, so a person so sure of this would be better off with the opportunity to plead her case before a Justice of the Peace, to demonstrate her innocence.

 

It is otherwise an extraordinarily unconvincing assertion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the police were not involved it will be purely a civil matter and you can either pay the crf or ignore it and hope they dont take it court, which in most cases they dont. but you will get lots of threats. So in theory you could get a CCJ if you dont pay which may appear on any credit records etc.

they do have a data base, but someone would actually have to check if anybody is on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi raydetinu, Thanks for the reply, she will immediately pay the fine as we just want to close this matter, as you said they have a database but some one has to actually check if anybody is on it, Would employers go and check that database? that is main worry? other then the fact that she is about to apply for passport.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that is good idea. Does anybody knows how will this affect her current job, future jobs etc?

 

:roll:

 

If you are wondering why some of us are not so keen to answer the question it may be because we would rather not be seen to conspire to deceive.

 

If this is the sort of thing that an employer should wish to know, because of the nature of the work, in so far as the omission "dishonestly fails to disclose to another person information which he is under a legal duty to disclose", the offence could be prosecuted under Section 3 of the Fraud Act, "Fraud by failing to disclose information".

 

An honest person, "not a criminal", would and should inform an employer or prospective employer in any case, regardless of the Security Officer. This would not be counted as a breach of confidence under the Data Protection Act, so if you want to know if they would disclose, the question should be put to Asda.

 

There is no general right to deceive an employer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I thought in order to have committed "theft" you needed to intentionally deprive someone of something. "Intent" here would have been if she had intended not to pay for it at all - although it makes me wonder why she decided to go out of the store with the trolley in the first place.

 

ASDA cannot "Fine" you, nor can private companies. By using this term they are in effect pretending to be in authority. ASDA did not lose any of their goods, and as I read your post no goods were damaged, so what damages did ASDA or their security suffer? £0. Which is all they could take you to court for.

 

Yes, if the police were involved then a criminal conviction could have come of it, but as they were not, then it cannot happen.

 

 

This information is correct as far as I know, although I am not a solicitor and therefore will not be held liable if it is inaccurate.

Edited by sparx
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Asda cannot fine anyone, nor can they threaten to do so. Your friend is pefectly entitled to stand there and tell them to shove their so called fine where the sun doesn't shine. Your friend is perfectly within her rights to go back to the store and demand her money back and in fact could take legal action because a security officer does not have the power to force people to pay fines. Its tantamount to pretending to be a police officer.

 

I would suggest that your friend writes to Asda, apologising for the mistake, and making sure she makes it perfectly clear it was a genuine mistake. I would insist they reimburse the £150 which was ILLEGALLY requested if she has already paid it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, if the police were involved then a criminal conviction could have come of it, but as they were not, then it cannot happen.

 

:roll:

 

It is Common Law right, to prosecute an offence.

 

Section 6 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 provides that any person may institute or conduct any criminal proceeding to which the duty of the CPS to take over does not apply.

 

All you have to do is lay the information before a Magistrate in order to issue a summons if the evidence appears to be sufficient to justify the prosecution. The Police need not be involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...