RLP Letter help?

[ScarletPimpernel]

You have two options; the first is to ignore everything RLP send you. The second is to send a short letter as follows:

 

Dear Sirs

 

I refer to your letter dated xxxxx.

 

Any liability to you or any company you claim to represent is denied. No further correspondence will be entered into.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

Don't go into any detail - just the denial of liability, and then ignore everything RLP send you.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Appreciate it mate. How confident are you guys that nothing will happen though?

 

Points to note:

 

RLP can't take anyone to court - they rely upon persuading retailers to do it, and it's extremely uncommon

 

The cost of bringing a court action in a case like yours is likely to be prohibitive - and if properly defended, they'll lose

 

RLP rely upon trying to intimidate people into paying by sending letters which appear to be designed to make RLP look like a legal firm, which they aren't, or that they have some sort of authority, which they haven't

 

 

RLP will send you a series of increasingly demanding (and ever sillier) letters. You may hear from JB Debt Recovery, too, but they have the same legal status as RLP, i.e. none. Do not be tempted to respond. If, and it's a huge if, you get a court claim, come back here and we will help you.

 

CAG doesn't condone stealing, but we also don't judge (that's for the courts).

[ScarletPimpernel]

Thanks mate, appreciate it! If I phoned them and told them I'm not really in a position to be able to pay them as I'm currently unemployed, is there any way they'd quash the fine or lower it? If not, how much would the installments be, do you know?

 

We've advised you what the best course of action is already; it doesn't include phoning RLP, ever.

 

It's not a fine. Only a court can issue a fine.

 

Don't phone them; they aren't interested in your circumstances, just your money.

[ScarletPimpernel]

You will see that in the thread to which you refer there was a good deal of engagement with RLP. We do not advocate this. Send them the one liner denying liability, and then get on with your life.

[ScarletPimpernel]

We've already told you how to deal with RLP; the advice hasn't changed. Of course they can't force you to reply, but if you had followed our advice and sent the 'liability denied' letter you'd have cut that avenue off for them.

 

Up to you, though.

[ScarletPimpernel]

No, you can send it now. Just copy the wording provided on page 1 of this thread and send it by recorded delivery. You will get more of their silly letters, but you should ignore them.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Did you send the denial of liability letter?

[ScarletPimpernel]

We've given you the best advice we can. If you choose not to follow it that is entirely a matter for you.

 

As Andydd says, it's unlikely that RLP's letters follow the CPR guidelines, not least because their status in any litigation isn't clear, but the purpose of the denial of liability letter is that it shuts down the 'you haven't responded' avenue. Of course RLP will still send silly letters, but in the extremely unlikely event of a court case, you can show that you responded and made you position clear at the outset - or, as in this case, when the OP can be bothered.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Oh yes..their spies were hard at work.

 

I was going to say that they shouldn't give up their day job, but in RLP's case that would be an excellent outcome.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Anyone can make an allegation to the police at any time; whether the police do anything about it, especially when their involvement was not sought at the time because the retailer thought it not worthwhile because the value of goods was so low, is another matter.

 

Another RLP scare tactic, which they use because they realise they are utterly impotent.

 

Given that they've put the threat in a letter, I suspect that the police would be distinctly unimpressed if they discovered that they were being used to as a lever to bully people into paying RLP - as indeed might the retailer concerned.

[ScarletPimpernel]

The most significant point is that if their client intended to bring a county court claim, they'd do it - they wouldn't be getting RLP to continue to send out these whining letters trying to bully and wheedle money out of you. The only reason RLP is involved is to try to make money for themselves.

 

I'd be very wary of the veracity of anything on RLP's website, and especially their case summaries. They don't provide sufficient information to enable them to be checked for accuracy. In any case, we know that RLP's retailer client lost the only properly contested case.

 

All the other cases are either default judgments (in other words, no defence was submitted), or involved staff theft (so not the same type of case).

 

The case RLP refer to was entirely different to yours, in that the individual concerned was a prolific, convicted thief. It is not known whether or not he actually paid the sum awarded. This on its own should be enough to show you that RLP seek to mislead.

 

Then you must consider that of all the many thousands of speculative invoices RLP have sent out, all they have to demonstrate their fearsome legal weight is a handful of uncontested wins by retailers. Remember also that ACPO and the PSNI required RLP to remove misleading articles from their website.RLP aren't a firm of solicitors - and if they misrepresent themselves as such they could be in trouble - so the only time you need to worry about the Civil Procedure Rules and Practice Direction is if the retailer issues a claim, or you are contacted by a proper legal firm.

 

You have set out your position - which is that you deny liability to them or their client; the ball is now very firmly in the retailer's court. RLP, as usual, are just an irritating irrelevance. The CAB advice remains that you should ignore RLP, and I concur.

Edited October 15, 2012 by honeybee13
Paragraphs. :)

[ScarletPimpernel]

I see the spacing gremlins are with us yet again!

[ScarletPimpernel]

I'm obliged to Honeybee for the spacing. Mine appears to be alright now.

 

 

Right guys, thanks a lot. Am I best just ignoring them from now on yeah? If you had to say, what's the likelihood anything will come of this? (court/bailiffs etc..)

 

It's difficult to say. There is always the danger that RLP, who are nothing if not vindictive, will seek to persuade their retailer clients to bring a court case against someone who has sought advice here. On the other hand, I suspect that their clients will not wish to risk the reputational damage that another loss will bring, nor, perhaps, will RLP wish to repeat their spectacular 'Streisand Effect' own goal, although their talent for self-aggrandisement should never be underestimated.

 

The numbers say that RLP send out many thousands of speculative invoices; of these, a miniscule proportion have ended in court. Of that small number of cases, almost all were default judgments, and it's likely that some of the defendants still didn't pay. Overall, I think the chances of a court case are small, but you can never legislate for the rather irrational moments that RLP are sometimes gripped by.

 

My money's on another pompous willy-waving letter from RLP.

[ScarletPimpernel]

I must be psychic:

 

 

My money's on another pompous willy-waving letter from RLP.

[ScarletPimpernel]

I am loathe to offer advice because so far you have ignored the advice you have been given.

 

All the advice you need has already been provided.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Then you have done all you need to.

[ScarletPimpernel]

RLP won't issue a claim, because they can't, having no cause of action.

 

Only the retailer can bring a claim, and if they did it would probably be for the full amount - the full amount that RLP pulled out of the air, or rather from their 'matrix'. The same matrix that was so effectively demonstrated in the Oxford case to not represent a true pre-estimate of loss, and therefore not a satisfactory basis for a claim.

 

The chances of a court claim are slim, though. The retailer is almost certainly blissfully unaware of you or your travails with RLP. RLP's threats of court claims tend to be pish and wind, both things they are full of.