Help with RLP

[frogboy]

I've told you I have made a FOI request. That doesnt happen overnight. Take some of your excellent advice about paragraphs

[andydd]

FOI to who ?

 

And what is your involvment in all this Mr Frogboy ?

 

 

Andy

[Myddelton]

Also, if you take a close look at the document provided by Naughty Johnny Boy/Girl, there is a file path reference, containing the name Sarah Wilkinson. And there just happens to be a Sarah Wilkinson working as a debt recovery executive at Shakespeares, the Nottingham-based law firm acting for Boots (google Sarah Wilkinson and Shakespeares, and you'll find her on Linked In).

 

Has Ms Wilkinson been moonlighting as Frogboy? I think the SRA should be told ...

[MARTIN3030]

Martin3030: no, this is not the claim that is being tried in Oxford county court on Thursday (10am, in open court, so feel free to attend). That is a claim issued by Boots in May last year, against the CAB client 'M', featured in the Citizens Advice report Uncivil recovery, and another teenage girl. A Retailer/RLP have so little confidence in the legal basis for their claim that they are trying to exclude any evidence about RLP's practices more generally.

 

Thank you,since my post I have been briefed on it.

[Myddelton]

Do you think you have to have an A level in Law to be a debt recovery executive at Shakespeares?

[MARTIN3030]

Also, if you take a close look at the document provided by Naughty Johnny Boy/Girl, there is a file path reference, containing the name Sarah Wilkinson. And there just happens to be a Sarah Wilkinson working as a debt recovery executive at Shakespeares, the Nottingham-based law firm acting for Boots (google Sarah Wilkinson and Shakespeares, and you'll find her on Linked In).

 

Has Ms Wilkinson been moonlighting as Frogboy? I think the SRA should be told ...

 

Absolutely,once again there are posters here who have understimated our ability to make clear determinations.

[Myddelton]

Lambert/Wilkinson: to whom have you made your FoI request? RLP? They are not a public body, so not covered by the FoI Act. Ditto the retailers. Did you not learn that on your A level Law course?

 

Come on, it's a straight question. Give us a straight answer.

[andydd]

I noticed in the Uncivil Recovery report that CAB mention that RLP/Boots may issue an application for Summary Judgment in the case of M, I wonder if they ever have actually followed this route ?, this could be rather risky for them as you have to prove that there is no reason at all for their to be a hearing, if they should fail in this (which I would of thought quite likely as surely there are very important issues to be discussed such as is civil recovery actually allowable and even if it is, is the amount claimed allowable ?).

 

Should RLP/Boots fail in this, the defendant can claim costs (at this stage it is pre AQ so not a small claim), in fact, it is possible that RLP/Boots lose the SJ application, the defendant is awarded costs and then even if RLP/Boots win the actual hearing the SJ costs are greater than any costs they get at the actual hearing.

 

 

Interestly Im just putting together my Summary assesment of costs in a SJ application Im making for approx £900.

 

Andy

[ScarletPimpernel]

I have been asking Frogboy to substantiate his claims, and provide answers, for a while now, but he either can't or won't provide any. I think his silence speaks for itself.

 

Quite why he focuses on FOIs I cannot imagine. Perhaps he means that one could FOI the courts, but as I said earlier I do not think that HMCS would be able to comply within the constraints of the Act. If, on the other hand, Frogboy has made an FOI request to the courts, why doesn't he share the information - it's in the public domain, after all.

[Myddelton]

No, they didn't, that was just the usual bluster from RLP. The claim was issued in May 2011, it was originally listed for trial in January, but then re-listed after being allocated to a Circuit Judge (as opposed to a District Judge, as would normally be the case). One consequence of this is that, should A Retailer somehow succeed with their strategy of avoiding all legal argument in favour of trying to paint the defendants as daughters of the Devil in the hope that is enough to win the judge's sympathy, then we will have a right of appeal to the High Court, which is less likely to be impressed by such bully boy tactics. Bring it on!

[Myddelton]

Come on Frogboy, I know you're there ....

[ScarletPimpernel]

If the claim form document has not come from RLP or Shakespeares, then how came it into the possession of Jonny46? Has there been some sort of criminal activity?

 

If the claim form did come from RLP or Shakespeares, then it seems to me that at the very least a serious attempt to deceive and mislead has been made, potentially as part of a greater conspiracy. CPUTR, anyone?

[Myddelton]

Plus the names of the defendanst appear to be at the end of the file path too, so could be a DPA offence.

[Myddelton]

I suspect Sarah Wilkinson has a very bad day at work coming her way ...

[cerberusalert]

I wonder what the partners of Shakespeares would think if a copy of that pdf was forwarded to them asking the question whether they are aware that documents from their Nottingham office have been posted on an open public consumer forum?

 

Rob Adey

Finula Allen

Herbert Andrews

Nick Atkinson

Brian Averill

 

+ all the others; http://www.shakespeares.co.uk/people

[MARTIN3030]

http://www.sra.org.uk/handbook/

[frogboy]

Lambert/Wilkinson: to whom have you made your FoI request? RLP? They are not a public body, so not covered by the FoI Act. Ditto the retailers. Did you not learn that on your A level Law course?

 

Come on, it's a straight question. Give us a straight answer.

 

Derrrr - the Courts. Your paranoia is hilarious. Glad to hear the case is in open court. I might see you there. Mmmm, shall I wear my beard?

[Myddelton]

Derr - and what have you asked them for? Paranoia? About what? It's you that's providing the hilarity. And the funniest part of it is that you can't see that.

[andydd]

Frogboy. And where did you send this request and what exactly is the question you asked ?...and more importantly, why ?. Your actual motive here is somewhat hard to understand.

 

Andy

[Myddelton]

Indeed. We already know that RLP's retailer clients (in most cases, Boots) have issued a handful of County Court claims, all of which have either been settled without a trial, or have resulted in a (meaningless) default judgment. They could do so in a thousand cases - or ten thousand - and it still wouldn't mean anything. So, what is your FoI request going to tell us? Answer: nothing.

[ScarletPimpernel]

I am not sure why, if Frogboy really has FOI'd HMCS, he doesn't share the information. Unless, of course, it contradicts RLP's claims; they are invariably careful to only publicise information that appears helpful to them.

[frogboy]

Indeed. We already know that RLP's retailer clients (in most cases, Boots) have issued a handful of County Court claims, all of which have either been settled without a trial, or have resulted in a (meaningless) default judgment. They could do so in a thousand cases - or ten thousand - and it still wouldn't mean anything. So, what is your FoI request going to tell us? Answer: nothing.

 

Thats the point of the FOI request - to find out. It takes longer than a few days to get it. You keep saying you know this and you know that, but from what I have seen from you lot, you dont appear to actually know anything.

[frogboy]

Also, if you take a close look at the document provided by Naughty Johnny Boy/Girl, there is a file path reference, containing the name Sarah Wilkinson. And there just happens to be a Sarah Wilkinson working as a debt recovery executive at Shakespeares, the Nottingham-based law firm acting for Boots (google Sarah Wilkinson and Shakespeares, and you'll find her on Linked In).

 

Has Ms Wilkinson been moonlighting as Frogboy? I think the SRA should be told ...

 

Or is Ms Wilkinson a secretary who typed the form? Who is Shakespeare's? The form says Berryman. Aren't they up north somewhere?Your paranoia is quite incredible.

[MARTIN3030]

you dont appear to actually know anything.

 

The facts are, that we know quite a bit more than you think we do.

[frogboy]

I am not sure why, if Frogboy really has FOI'd HMCS, he doesn't share the information. Unless, of course, it contradicts RLP's claims; they are invariably careful to only publicise information that appears helpful to them.

 

Will gladly share it when received. Might make it my little project. I have a couple of months free before I am off on my travels. I have a strong suspicion it may make you all look pretty stupid.Oh, and funny comments re Johnny being a criminal. He has already admitted that. That is why he is on your site. He is a thief by his own admission - like millions of other people in the UK. You would have them all get away it with would you? Would you feel the same if a constant stream of people walked into your house and took your stuff every day, or your office, or all of your family and friends' houses and places of employment? You would expect the Police to arrive and deal with it right? But how could they, as they would probably at the 6 million other people's houses and offices attending to thefts from there. Cant be everywhere can they? Oh no, what would you do? Couldnt possibly ask the people who steal from you to pay. That would be criminal surely! You wouldnt want to instruct somebody to recover your belongings and other losses on your behalf would you, as that would be illegal and harassment and all the other rubbish you lot spout. Dont understand your attitude to theft and criminals who mar our society and make life miserable for everybody else, the seemingly few honest and good people left in this country. I'm glad I'm going to be away from it for a year or so.