TK Maxx & RLP

[K1rr1e]

Hi All,

 

New member looking for advice please. My wife was stopped outside TK Maxx last month and accused of changing the price label on an item which she subsequently paid for. She was told that she could accept the stores sanctions and thus avoid the Police being called. They said they had CCTV evidence but didn't show it to her. The goods were taken from her and she was refunded the sum she had paid, so TK Maxx suffered no loss whatsoever. She recieved the usually banning letter and a seperate RLP letter neither of which makes reference to the other.

 

A month later she recieves the RLP letter claiming an arbitrary figure of £137.50 in compensation, but which is not backed up or broken down at all.

 

I have read this forum, read the 2009 CAB report and consulted the CAB and former colleagues in the Police all of whom say don't pay. I have drafted a reply to RLP based on the advice received from the CAB but have not yet posted it. Before I do so, can anyone offer any further advice please?

[ScarletPimpernel]

The advice you've had is sound.

 

Just send RLP a very brief letter stating that any liability to them or anyone they claim to represent is denied, and then ignore them. We are aware that of late, and presumably out of desperation, they have persuaded some of their clients to bring court claims in a very small percentage of cases, so keep anything they send and in the unlikely event that you get a claim, we can help you defend it.

 

Be aware that RLP are prolific and circumloquacious letter-senders. Keep your letter absolutely to the point, and do not be tempted to respond to any drivel they send you, which is likely to be written in La Lambert's best pidgin legalese and may refer to Magna Carta (unless, of course she has moved on - perhaps the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam next, or Lord of the Rings - who knows?).

[K1rr1e]

Thanks for your advice SP - I have already done as you suggest and kept the letter brief and to the point, so we'll see what comes back.

 

By the way, I should said that my wife denied their accusation and showed them that half the tag and price label on the item were missing where somebody else had previously tampered with it.

 

I know from my Police days that even if they could prove their allegation in a criminal court, for a low value, one off offence the worst sancion that a court would likely pass in Scotland would be to admonish the defendent and they would NOT be making a compensation order either. This is just a [problem] to obtain recompence using the lower burden of proof allowed for in Civil Law.

 

Why has nothing been done to stop these people? The CAB report was produced two and half years ago!

[K1rr1e]

I have now received a response from RLP, all three pages of it with lots of legal jargon. They basically state that all the points I have made are irrelevant, that the Police had no remit to advise me in relation to this claim and that damages are compensatory and are not required to be proportionate. They have not made any attempt to say how they arrived at the figure they are claiming or to break it down.

 

RLP conclude by giving my wife the same sat of optionds for payment as before and threatening to issue a claim in the Sheriff Court (we are in Scotland) if we do not agree to settle their claim withing 21 days. because we were on holiday when the letter arrived, the 21 days has elapsed.

 

Any advice on what to do next please, because i can see this becoming a never ending letter writing contest if I continue to reply?

[renegadeimp]

Stop playing letter tennis and ignore it. They have NO legal right at all to obtain ANY money from you whatsoever.

[ScarletPimpernel]

RLP's increasing level of desperation is clearly demonstrated in their silly 3-page template letter - is it the 'Magna Carta' version? The old proverb 'an empty vessel makes the most noise' springs to mind.

 

Anyway, since you've already made your position clear, I'd just ignore them. If they want to waste time and stamps, let them - you may get some drivel from them, but unless it's a court claim you can treat it as poor quality lavatory paper. Actually, don't use it as lavatory paper, because apart from probably being smeary, if (and it's the world's biggest 'if',) RLP were stupid enough to go to court, you may need the evidence for a harassment counterclaim.

 

This is a classic case of RLP targeting an entirely innocent person - something La Lambert claims doesn't happen.

[2Grumpy]

Maybe try telling them that that their allegations are incorrect and that they are persuing a totally innocent person and that you are prepared to allow the matter to drop if they pay you the sum of £13750 (or whatever you like)

 

You could also point out that TK Maxx had no right to pass personal data to them and that they have no right to continue processing it and should they continue to do so then you will include them in any action that you take against TK Maxx

[K1rr1e]

SP - if by "Magna Carta version" you mean the letter which on page 2 has paragraphs entitled "Breach of Ordinary Duty of Care" and "Spuilze", then that's the letter I have received".

 

RLP repeat their version of events, or I should say the TK Maxx security staff version of events and claim that my wife was not co-operative. They then allege that she admitted her actions, but have not answered my point as to whether or not they have CCTV evidence or a written statement of admission. She was only stopped by one person anyway, which is insufficient to satisfy Scottish Criminal Law which requires corroboration.

 

What is the liklehood that they will issue a Claim in the Sheriff Court and is there any anecdotal evidence of RLP persueing their victims in the Scottish courts?

[ScarletPimpernel]

I am not aware of any claim being issued in the Scottish courts; remember that it's the retailer that issues, not RLP - they have no cause of action.

 

You should take RLP's faux legal stuff with the world's biggest pinch of salt. It's all designed to intimidate people into paying without going near a court. As we saw in Oxford, of the very, very few claims issued by RLP's clients, the only one that was properly defended (and involved people who admitted theft), was lost by the retailer.

 

What we have seen is that if you engage with RLP beyond the initial denial of liability, they will respond with increasingly bizarre attempts to convince you that you are wrong and they are right, because they say so. It is classic bully behaviour; RLP and its owner are convinced of their own invincibility, have grandiose ideation in re their own importance, and are very quick to claim they are the vicitim when they find their unsavoury practices have turned round and bitten them on the bum. Not answering valid points raised in letters is symptomatic of their cavalier disregard of pesky things like evidence and people not actually having done anything wrong. In short, they are bullies.

 

My opinion is that you should continue to ignore RLP.

[K1rr1e]

A further update and things have developed more quickly than expected.

 

As I mentioned above, the 21 day dealine set by RLP had expired because we were away on holiday. So yesterday another letter arrives from RLP offering full and final settlement of the matter without prejudice, on payment of the sum of £95. If we don't pay or otherwise agree a settlement within 21 days, then they are at liberty to take sanctions as they have already documented.

 

I phoned Citizens Advice Direct this morning and updated them on my tale and they advise as you do SP - just ignore them. Their opinion is that as I have already stated my intention to RLP not to pay and the reasons why, there is no need to do so again and it will just encourage them to write more letters anyway.

[K1rr1e]

Nothing heard from RLP for several weeks untikl the latest version of 'war and peace' arrived on Monday. Unsurprisingly they advise to ignore any and all advice given on this site and they claim the following:

That this site "is currently subject to a criminal investigation by the CID" "Your thread has been forwarded to the CID to consider together with other information regarding criminal offenses of harrassment, malicious communications and public order offences". This is all pretty desperate stuff - CID of which Police force I might ask?

 

Thay also claim that the CAB concluded its interet in the matter of Civil Recovery over a year ago - is this correct? I think not - I have spoken to three different people at the Citizens Advice Scotland helpline who were all well aware of the activities of RLP and all of whom advised me to ignore them and that was in the last four months.

 

RLP are now going to draw my posting s to the attention of TK Maxx and it will be a matter for TK Maxx to make a decision on whether or not to issue proceedings against my wife. In the event that proceedings are issued, my postings may be brought to the attention of the court. This is the only thread I have taken part in on the forum and look back, I see nothing of a derogatory nature.

 

RLP has given us a further 21 days to respond, after which, because we have refused to engage with them (beyond the initial denial of liability) they will advise TK Maxx as to their options. In the exoperience of fellow posters, what is the liklehood of proceedings being issued by TK Maxx please?

[renegadeimp]

What a bunch of total idiots. Time to get complaining to the regulatory bodies.

[dx100uk]

thats a std letter

 

we already have a copy from another source

 

they dont know who you are

 

just bluffing

[sazzle100]

I've received an exact copy of the above letter, obviously direct quotes from our threads are different but the padding is the same x

[2Grumpy]

In the unlikely event that CAG was being investigated by the police, that would not affect the quality or accuracy of advice that you have received here!

 

Given that your wife denied the accusations made by TK Maxx at the time and that they did not call the police - who would be the proper authorities to investigate any wrong-doing - why do RLP continue? Aren't the store / RLP interested in facts? Should you be made to pay for their mistakes or other people's actions?

[BankFodder]

We don't know that we are being investigated. No one has contacted us about anything - but of course if RLP say that there is a criminal investigation then I suppose that it must be true. Why would RLP tell lies about us?

I expect that we will find out in good time.

Maybe you would like to write ask them for the crime report number and also which police force are conducting the investigation.

 

I am quite sure that whatever any investigation might be about, it isn't about the quality of the advice given on this forum - so I would put the matter of any investigation to one side and merely consider the advice which you are receiving.

[ScarletPimpernel]

If it is true that there is some sort of investigation, it doesn't follow that it means that anyone here has committed an offence - investigations exonerate people just as often as they reveal wrongdoing.

 

In any case, I am quite certain that the police would not thank RLP for blabbing about a matter that is under investigation, not least because since no-one at CAG has had any contact, it must be a very, very covert investigation.

 

Where an individual chooses to seek advice is entirely a matter for them; it's simply not RLP's business.

 

Desperate, I think, is absolutely the word.

[lucyyy]

k1rr1e are you still ignoring rlp?

[renegadeimp]

Lucyyy if you are worried about them contacting you, dont be. They have no legal rights and are simply threatening you into paying something that you do not need to pay.

[dx100uk]

k1rr1e are you still ignoring rlp?

 

please start your own thread

 

see below

 

rather than posting on numerous threads of other membrs looking for help

 

dx

[K1rr1e]

Yes, other than our initial response refuting RLP's claim and denying liability, we have ignored all their subsequent communications, as advised by people 'in the know' on this board and also by the Citizens Advice Scotland helpline, who I have consulted on three occasions.

 

By the way RLP claim in their last letter that we should not take advice form what they descrice as a 'rogue' former CAB employee wh posts advice on this board, Anyone know who they might be referring to?

[andydd]

RLP sometimes live in a fantasy world, it is quite strange that at one point they had various 'spies' on here and would sometimes quote whole threads in their answers to people, although they do appear to have ben quietier since the Oxford case.

 

Andy

[ScarletPimpernel]

By the way RLP claim in their last letter that we should not take advice form what they descrice as a 'rogue' former CAB employee wh posts advice on this board, Anyone know who they might be referring to?

 

Well, why would anyone take advice that is demonstrably both valid and useful from the government's chosen consumer advice service, and a popular consumer self-help group, when instead they could take advice from a company with a vested financial interest in discrediting any other advice.

 

I did wonder (though not for very long), if RLP know how ridiculous all these unsavoury and very unprofessional antics make them look.

[K1rr1e]

Andy,

I don't have RLP's latest letter with me, but from memory it does quote selected excerpts from this thread. I will do my best to see if I can upload the letter, suitably sanitised of course.

 

By the way, did anybody see the item on Watchdog last night about Travelodge and their [problem] of pursuing people they accuse of smoking for compensation. Seems they are using another 'vehicle' for their antics called CRS?

[andydd]

Andy,

I don't have RLP's latest letter with me, but from memory it does quote selected excerpts from this thread. I will do my best to see if I can upload the letter, suitably sanitised of course.

 

By the way, did anybody see the item on Watchdog last night about Travelodge and their [problem] of pursuing people they accuse of smoking for compensation. Seems they are using another 'vehicle' for their antics called CRS?

 

It doesnt really matter Ive seen similar letters where RLp have scanned threads on here and then proceeded to 'asnswer' some of the points made, rather starnge and as pointed out above, unprofessional.

 

And yes, the Travelodge 'smoking' model bears similarities, although travelodge appear to back down quite quickly when chalanged.

 

Andy