Ashamed, embarrased - Tesco Theft

[stargazerlily]

Thanks old bill, very interesting.

[ashamed_lucy]

Hi Lucy

 

I cant believe they asked for so much £137.50 and you still have the worry of waiting to hear from the police. I am not at all justiying what we have all done but I do believe the security and police know by the persons reaction whether they are 1st time offenders which the police check anyway. In my cirmcumstance the police officer actually said to me I can see you will never do this again which I wont, a short sharp shock certainly brought me swiftly to my senses.

 

The store choose to call the police, the police decide whether to issue a PCN, then it shoud be left that the case has been dealt with by the police and the store should leave it at that if low value .

If the store wants to prosecute then they should be made to go through the courts but after reading all whast on here they dont because it costs too much money. if they want payment recovery then they shouldnt call the police. I am sure they would make more money like that as terrified people would probaly agree to pay anything whilst in that little room, if you could pay the store direct and no involvement with the police or RPL I know I would have done if given the option in that office to pay costs of £137.50 or they will call the police/ involve civil recovery I think would have agreed to almost anything that day They cant have it twice

 

 

If people refuse the PCN then the police have the power to take things further. I really cant understand why they took you to police station and went that far with low value items that was returned, as you have not heard anything perhaps you will be lucky and it may go away and they never follow it up. I doubt a court will look at it too favourably with the value involved and the time and cost of a court case for under £35. Maybe you will get a caution if they contact you. When the police was writing out my PCN he read me my rights you know ths stuff they say on the TV.... anything you say may be taken in writing etc etc I dont know if this was a caution as well for me I wasnt in my right senses to ask what was going on really, he said I wouldnt get a criminal record but the PCN would stay on file for the future so I dont know if I was cautioned or just read my rights, if you have any info on that let me know

 

There is thread somewhere on here from an ex TK max security guard and he says some stores have targets of how many people to catch, worth a read if you have not read it already.

 

I will let you know once I recieve the letter and how much they ask for, keep me posted on how you get on as well and when you next letter arrives, I really wish there where posts with how long it took RPL to give up, it makes me wonder if they ever give up or will it come back to haunt us in years to come when left unpaid.

 

Flowerbomb

 

Thanks Flowerbomb, Yes, I also believe that they have targets both police and stores, I think that they needed to fill some kind of quota that day, The police were going to caution me there and then, they told me that, went out of the room and then after a call to the station ( I believe as I overheard one officer) or something the store said they decided to charge(?) me down at the police station. I am really confused about this too, but as I was in shock I didn't ask too many questions.

 

I know the worry about the RLP and still waiting on hearing back from the police and prosecution service has me in knots. I wondered the same about when RLP decide to give up and how threatening they become, I will let you know if I hear anything else and when, hope you hear from them soon so you can get the initial letter over and done with. I am just going to ignore completely, and post on here for help!

 

Thanks again

 

Lucy

[ashamed_lucy]

Lucy and flowerbomb, hope all works out well for you both.

Does anyone know if it's only at the Police Station you are entitled to a Solicitor or does the same apply when the Police are called to the store?

 

Hi Stargazerlily, I hope so too, and the same in return after your letters from Drydens, I hope Old Bill was able to answer your question as I am not sure on the whole police solicitor thing!

[ashamed_lucy]

The Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (as amended) requires that anyone taken into police custody who is accused of committing an offence is entitled, by law, to the services of a solicitor, at their own or public expense. When police are called to retail premises in cases of alleged shoplifting, the officers dealing will assess the case. This requires them to listen to both sides, view any CCTV footage and use something known as the Ghosh Test. This is the two-part test for dishonesty prescribed by the Court of Appeal in the case of R -v- Ghosh 1982. If only one or neither of the two parts of the test are satisfied, there is no offence. It is becoming evident that retailers are trying their luck with civil recovery when there is clearly no offence or grounds in law for attempting to bring a civil claim.

 

Thanks for this Old Bill, after racking my brain thinking if they offered me a solicitor I still can't be sure, do you know if they have/take recordings in the room/area in the police station that they arrest you? could I request this information. That whole time in the station went by in a blur, It was so noisy from a women in the next room shouting and swearing and lots of officers in the room/area where my prints were getting taken, they would ask me a question and then discuss other things with their colleagues. I am annoyed at myself that I can't remember. Thanks again

[old bill]

By law, the police have to keep a custody log for each person who goes through the custody suite. You can ask for extracts from this. You need to approach the Station Superintendent at the police station where you were processed to enquire about this. This needs to be in writing. The recordings you mention are a Tape-Recorded Interview. The only person who can request a copy of the tape used for your interview (if you were interviewed) is your solicitor.

[ashamed_lucy]

By law, the police have to keep a custody log for each person who goes through the custody suite. You can ask for extracts from this. You need to approach the Station Superintendent at the police station where you were processed to enquire about this. This needs to be in writing. The recordings you mention are a Tape-Recorded Interview. The only person who can request a copy of the tape used for your interview (if you were interviewed) is your solicitor.

 

I see, thanks for all your help OB, I will wait to hear about what course of action they will take, I suppose I am just taken aback because with most cases I read of they haven't proceeded past the back room, I wish now I had been more inquisitive at the time and feel like a fool for staying so quiet. Thanks again, you have been very kind

 

Lucy

[old bill]

It can be a very traumatic experience for anyone, Lucy. If any of the muppets retailers employ as security staff these days had a brain, they'd be cabbages. The reality is, major retailers have been allowed to do what they like without any interference from Parliament. Indeed, you only have to see to Posh Boy Cameron, wringing his hands on television about "emburdening business with regulation", to wonder whose pockets his party is in. I am currently working on a Code of Practice for Civil Recovery, on another site, which, hopefully, addresses the abuses retailers and civil recovery operators engage in.

 

You first step is to write to the Station Superintendent at the police station you attended and enquire about extracts from the custody record. This will give you a better idea of what happened. Basically, the CPS can recommend the matter proceed, which means it goes to court, or a Formal Caution, which does not carry any financial or custodial penalty, or NFA (No Further Action).

[ashamed_lucy]

It can be a very traumatic experience for anyone, Lucy. If any of the muppets retailers employ as security staff these days had a brain, they'd be cabbages. The reality is, major retailers have been allowed to do what they like without any interference from Parliament. Indeed, you only have to see to Posh Boy Cameron, wringing his hands on television about "emburdening business with regulation", to wonder whose pockets his party is in. I am currently working on a Code of Practice for Civil Recovery, on another site, which, hopefully, addresses the abuses retailers and civil recovery operators engage in.

 

You first step is to write to the Station Superintendent at the police station you attended and enquire about extracts from the custody record. This will give you a better idea of what happened. Basically, the CPS can recommend the matter proceed, which means it goes to court, or a Formal Caution, which does not carry any financial or custodial penalty, or NFA (No Further Action).

 

Thanks Old Bill, I cannot express how much I appreciate your input, I havent heard anything else from anyone yet from the CPS hopefully it will just disappear but that is really wishful thinking!

[old bill]

Hi Lucy

 

There is thread somewhere on here from an ex TK max security guard and he says some stores have targets of how many people to catch, worth a read if you have not read it already.

 

 

That concerns me deeply. It encourages indiscriminate and reckless behaviour by retail security. If you're wondering why those who have learning difficulties and mental health issues feature heavily in cases dealt with by CAB it's because they are easy targets. They are easily influenced and easily lead. Over the last 39 years I have worked with such people in professional and voluntary capacities. The experience was useful when I was in the police force, but it meant that I got landed with interviewing people with these problems as no-one else wanted to do it. Typical. TK Maxx and any other retailer who thinks it is clever and acceptable practice to set arrest targets for their security staff should seriously reconsider their dangerous policy. Not only could they face legal action for discrimination, but wrongful arrest, unlawful detention and malicious prosecution, too. As Tesco found when they wrongly accused two women of shoplifting, the price of getting it wrong is high - £70,000 in damages each for the two women, plus the full costs of hearings at the Magistrates, Crown, High and Appeal Courts.

[old bill]

Thanks Old Bill, I cannot express how much I appreciate your input, I havent heard anything else from anyone yet from the CPS hopefully it will just disappear but that is really wishful thinking!

 

Your're welcome, Lucy. The final decision as to prosecution lies with the CPS. Please be assured that Crown Prosecutors work to a Code and have to be able to satisfy a test as to whether it is in the public interest to prosecute and whether there is a realistic prospect of conviction. At present, this prospect stands at 51% or more. Please also be assured that it costs the taxpayer £2,000 to take a case through a Magistrates Court, considerably more through a Crown Court. The retail industry cooked its goose years ago when it clogged the court system with cases involving small amounts of money - in one case, as little as 65 pence - and which resulted in cases involving serious crimes having to be abandoned due to statutory time-limits on the commencement of proceedings, thereby denying justice to the victims of serious crime. Before the retail industry starts throwing its collective weight about, it wants to take a long, hard look at its own behaviour and address its shortcomings and less creditable conduct, including ripping-off consumers of millions of pounds.

[flowerbomb01]

Hi Lucy

 

Just thought drop you a line to see hows things are going with you, have you heard anymore from the police or RPL, I had first letter today asking for £137.50 take a peek at my thread to see. I just dont know what to do, have you resisted contacting them if you did what did you say. Hope your doing well

 

Flowerbomb01

[ScarletPimpernel]

I just dont know what to do

 

Yes you do - we've told you!

[ashamed_lucy]

Hi Lucy

 

Just thought drop you a line to see hows things are going with you, have you heard anymore from the police or RPL, I had first letter today asking for £137.50 take a peek at my thread to see. I just dont know what to do, have you resisted contacting them if you did what did you say. Hope your doing well

 

Flowerbomb01

 

Hi Flowerbomb, I did get a letter from RLP and never replied and haven't had another yet. I am taking the advice of the good people on this site and refraining from replying from any threatening letters. I haven't heard from the CPS yet and am praying I don't as everyday I am waiting on that letter coming. I will post this on your thread too just incase you don't read this. As most have said, don't reply to it is the best advice, my thoughts were it would just agrevate a situation so until I get another letter I am sticking to the not replying, if the next one worries me I will seek the advice of the great people on this site!

 

Hope that helps

 

Lucy

[old bill]

Hi Flowerbomb, I did get a letter from RLP and never replied and haven't had another yet. I am taking the advice of the good people on this site and refraining from replying from any threatening letters. I haven't heard from the CPS yet and am praying I don't as everyday I am waiting on that letter coming. I will post this on your thread too just incase you don't read this. As most have said, don't reply to it is the best advice, my thoughts were it would just agrevate a situation so until I get another letter I am sticking to the not replying, if the next one worries me I will seek the advice of the great people on this site!

 

Hope that helps

 

Lucy

 

Hi Lucy,

 

Unless procedures have changed,

you will receive a letter from the police force who dealt with the matter, not the CPS.

 

The Crown Prosecutor for your area will examine all the evidence placed before them and decide whether there is sufficient or insufficient evidence to justify any form of action against you.

 

If the Crown Prosecutor decides there is sufficient evidence,

they then have to decide whether there is a realistic prospect of securing a conviction and if it is in the public interest to prosecute.

 

As stated in an earlier post, the threshold for prospect of securing a conviction is currently 51% or higher.

 

If the Crown Prosecutor decides there is sufficient evidence, but there is not a realistic prospect of securing a conviction

or it is not in the public interest to prosecute, the Crown Prosecutor can recommend a Formal Caution be administered.

 

If there is insufficient evidence, the Crown Prosecutor will direct that no further action be taken.

 

This, in police circles is referred to as an NFA (No Further Action).

 

However, sometimes, some of the decisions made by Crown Prosecutors can be mind-boggling, so expect the unexpected.

 

As for the letter from RLP,

my considered judgement of this company's activities is that it is open to question as to whether the demands they make, on behalf of retailers,

amount to Unjustifiable Enrichment or something bordering on Fraud.

 

The A Retailer -v- Ms B and Ms K 2012 case, at Oxford CC, earlier this year,

clearly showed that the demands had been significantly exaggerated and that an attempt was made to mislead the court.

 

HHJ Harris, quite rightly, in my considered judgement, struck the claim out and refused leave to appeal.

 

I am just waiting for someone to counter-action them and one of their retailer clients. It would be interesting to see what RLP's and the retailer's response would be.

[ashamed_lucy]

Thanks old Bill, not heard anything from the police yet, did receive another letter from RLP worded pretty strongly but am sticking to the non replying even though I had been wandering if I should sent the letter denying any knowledge? will wait until another arrives before I make a decision.

 

Thanks for your help, you are all very knowledgeable, and I really appreciate it. I am petrified of the letter from the CPS/Police coming, do you know that if the CPS advise the police that there should be NFA required if I would still receive a letter from the police informing me of this decision? Thanks again

 

Lucy

[dx100uk]

i would have suspected that by now you would have heard from police/cps.

 

dx

[old bill]

Thanks old Bill, not heard anything from the police yet, did receive another letter from RLP worded pretty strongly but am sticking to the non replying even though I had been wandering if I should sent the letter denying any knowledge? will wait until another arrives before I make a decision.

 

Thanks for your help, you are all very knowledgeable, and I really appreciate it. I am petrified of the letter from the CPS/Police coming, do you know that if the CPS advise the police that there should be NFA required if I would still receive a letter from the police informing me of this decision? Thanks again

 

Lucy

 

It can take some weeks for the CPS to come to a decision, Lucy, depending on their caseload and whether a case has to be referred up to the Chief Crown Prosecutor for the area in which the alleged offence took place. RLP do tend to wave the sabre around, but if you took the sabre off them and waved it in the direction of them and their retail clients, they would, in my considered judgement, back away. The case of A Retailer -v- Ms B and Ms K 2012 was quite clear in its condemnation of attempts to mislead the court and attempts by the retailer involved to unjustifiably enrich itself. The judgement of HHJ Charles Harris QC was clear and unequivocable - the retailer had no case. The decision to strike-out and refuse leave to appeal was, in my considered judgement, a correct decision by HHJ Harris. The Law Commission has already gone on record as saying that there is no legal basis for the fixed-sum claims demanded by RLP and retailers.

 

A poster on another site has succinctly summed up the unsafe nature of RLP's demands -

 

1. Retailers have already claimed the cost of security equipment in their premises against tax;

2. The cost of running such equipment is compounded into the price of merchandise on sale in the retailer's premises;

3. Security staff are not only employed to deter crime, they are also employed to ensure the physical security of the premises and its contents and safety of the staff who work there, as well as deal with any incidents affecting the physical security of the premises and its contents and safety of staff;

4. CCTV footage is normally handed to police in unedited form for forwarding to the CPS and it is they who decide whether the CCTV footage shows evidence of a crime, along with what is contained in the police report on the incident and statements from any witnesses;

 

CR operators need to be brought under the control of the Claims Regulator whether they want to or not. As stated previously, I am working on a Code of Practice for Civil Recovery which will, hopefully, address the issues that arise with the sort of claims made by operators such as RLP.

[ashamed_lucy]

Old Bill,

 

Thanks for your reply, it makes for really interesting reading, look forward to reading the code of practice you are working on.

 

Thanks

 

Lucy

[lucyyy]

ashamed_lucy, are you still ignoring rlp? have they sent you anymore letters since?

[stupidwoman]

Please help, im in a similar situation - this is my thread... First ever shoplifting offence! Help

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?382586-First-ever-Shoplifting-offence!-Help!!&p=4143716#post4143716

Edited February 16, 2013 by ims21
Link to thread added

[davewright13]

Hey Lucy,

 

Don't beat yourself up love we all make mistakes.

 

Courts are not as bad as you fear and if you've already pleaded guilty then you're simply wasting the courts time anyway. They see this thing all the time but on most occasions they don't plead guilty so you have that in your favour. One thing i would strongly recommend is that you contact a solicitor and also legal aid as you should by the sounds of it be entitled to

 

Hope everything goes alright and let us know how you get on