Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Wrongly accused by Superdrug...


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4228 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

I wonder if they watched the recordings from when only staff were in the shop. I thought that much lifting was done by employees.

 

Maybe they should look round the shop in case the items in question have been moved to a different area for a promotion ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a relatively small store and there isn't anywhere but the makeup aisle to display that amount of items.

 

I have just this minute got off the phone from my friend and she remembered an incident of a cleaner stealing from the same store. Apparently, the CCTV was turned off at night and put back on at opening time enabling the cleaner to make off with goods.

 

I do wish that stores would have much better security systems in place to avoid situations like this. The loss they must suffer each year must be phenomenal, no wonder the price of some items are ridiculous. Perhaps I should become a security consultant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Caledfwlch,

 

In all fairness the officer isn't at fault about me being the only person being pulled in as Superdrug only sent my images, my details and CCTV footage containing my 40 minutes to him so their sucurity is at fault.S

 

Sorry, but that doesn't fly. The Officer is absolutely at fault. He is required to investigate, not to be drip fed one item by a member of the public, and focus on that. A decent officer competent to be in the role would have upon his first viewing immediately contacted Superdrug for the entire days footage. Even a Probationer could see the footage of you was clearly evidence of nothing (have you an invisible accomplice perhaps? :p )

 

I bet you, once he approached his senior Officer, the guy took 5 seconds to say wtf? had he been daft enough to send it to the CPS the officer would be a laughing stock.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having seen the footage I can only agree with you. I am thoroughly put out that he had to know every detail about me but didn't have much to go on from the store. I thought an investigation would be a two way street.

 

He did intimate, on the day he showed me the footage, that it was of such unclear quality that he doubted it would go any further. Having said that he also gave the impression he was going to try his best to ensure it did.

 

One question...how did you know about my invisible friend? :wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having seen the footage I can only agree with you. I am thoroughly put out that he had to know every detail about me but didn't have much to go on from the store. I thought an investigation would be a two way street.

 

He did intimate, on the day he showed me the footage, that it was of such unclear quality that he doubted it would go any further. Having said that he also gave the impression he was going to try his best to ensure it did.

 

One question...how did you know about my invisible friend? :wink:

 

So, put in a formal complaint to the stations superintendent, and point out that you will be going to the IPCC. IMO Superdrug have committed defamation here, as the "proof" they have of you committing an offence is non existent and you were forced to waste time in a police station, that should give you some negotiating ground when speaking to their complaints with regards to how much they are going to financially compensate you, and we don't mean in store vouchers ;)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh good lord I don't want any money from them, Caled! I just want my name cleared and not to be humiliated with a ban if I walk in the store...if....

 

I have sent a basic account of what happened and how it has affected me to the MD. I didn't use any threats or anything heavy as I want to give them a fair chance to set things straight...which is more than I got. Should I not get an email back by Thursday I will post on Facebook, Twitter and send an account of what happened to every tabloid that I can. More than likely they won't be interested but I will still do it.

 

Should anyone be insulting enough to try and placate me with anything but what I want then I will send it back...via the media.

 

As for the policeman...I'm a great believer in karma. What goes around comes around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh good lord I don't want any money from them, Caled! I just want my name cleared and not to be humiliated with a ban if I walk in the store...if....

 

I have sent a basic account of what happened and how it has affected me to the MD. I didn't use any threats or anything heavy as I want to give them a fair chance to set things straight...which is more than I got. Should I not get an email back by Thursday I will post on Facebook, Twitter and send an account of what happened to every tabloid that I can. More than likely they won't be interested but I will still do it.

 

Should anyone be insulting enough to try and placate me with anything but what I want then I will send it back...via the media.

 

As for the policeman...I'm a great believer in karma. What goes around comes around.

 

If compo can be gained, then gain it! This is not a compo culture gone mad issue, you have genuinely been wronged, and suffered distress.

 

Also, given how the Officer was, and what he said, do not be surprised if your Criminal Record file and/or the PNC has now been marked as "suspected shoplifter"

 

Certainly, if you are ever accused again, this incident will be brought up, and used as pressure against you, it is now sitting on various systems.

 

This is not to worry you, just pointing out that this business has had a major effect on you, you have been defamed/libelled, and now your name etc is sitting on a Police System, where it may not have existed before, unless you have been pulled in for an offence in the past.

 

My own clean record was blighted in January this year by thugs making false accusations after attempting to break into my flat and stab me. Sadly for them the whole thing is on CCTV, and the CPS as soon as they (finally) got round to viewing it, cleared me and are treating me as a victim of violence. I am in Court next week to give evidence, and am still considering what action to take against the thugs, and the Police. Certainly I will be getting my DNA etc removed.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

How awful for you to go through something as harrowing as that. I can't even begin to imagine how you feel and wish you all the best of luck for next week.

 

I appreciate what you are saying about compensation but it doesn't sit well with me. Superdrug shareholders have lost enough money with people stealing from them without me trying to get money for nothing. The 'nothing' being that fact that I have incurred no expense at all and no amount of money will wipe away the last week or exonerate me. All it would mark me as is a greedy opportunist, wanting something for nothing. Or maybe no one else would see me like that but that is how I would feel about myself.

 

The police can mark me with what they like (what is the PNC?), they wouldn't have acted without the security personnel at Superdrug zoning in on me because (I suspect) they are too bone idle to check the rest of the CCTV footage and are too untrained to be able to see if someone if filling up a handbag or not. All on the grounds that I 'seemed most likely because of the length of time I was in there'!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, SDV we ought to pair up - a murderer and a tealeaf! The PNC is the police national computer. What caledflwch is trying to make you aware of is, if you were to apply for a job or voluntary position that required an enhanced CRB (criminal records bureau) check, its a possibility that this might be on your record when the check is done.

 

Its why I've kicked up such a stink with IPCC - I did not threaten to murder anyone and I won't rest until this is off my record. You haven't stolen anything and there should be in existence a huge tape which will show this as well as show who did pinch the stuff most likely, if only someone would bother to watch it fully. If the police had listened to the taped telephone conversation between myself and Unison they wouldn't have bothered even visiting me. Unison destroyed the tape very quickly.

 

You might not have incurred any expense, but they sure have put you through the wringer. At the very least I would expect a sincere written apology, an extremely large bouquet, and a voucher or a cash offer. They don't have any other way of putting it right, they can't undo what damage has been done to you, this is all they can do really. So don;t be feeling guilty at taking any compensation on offer, think how this has made you feel.

 

One other thought, do your local shops operate a "ringmaster" scheme? The police/shops should be able to tell you. This is where the shops/cops all work together to catch the light fingered and other genuine criminals in the shopping area. If so, you should be looking for confirmation that you haven't ended up on that as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jackie/Wayne

 

I do see your (and Caleds) point but I would be more than satisfied with an apology.

 

I haven't a clue about the ringmaster scheme but I am not bothered about it. If the rest of the shops want to keep an eye on me shopping then that is fine...it stops any further mistakes from taking place.

 

Your situation is much worse than mine and I feel terrible for you. I sincerely hope that you get your name cleared and get to put the whole nasty experience behind you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be wanting more than an apology and the apology would need to be in writing in case I needed an enhanced CRB check for a job so that I could point to the false accusation.

 

The PC admitted that there was nothing on the CCTV so his conduct was poor.

 

The store acted atrociously and will get away with that unless you make a complaint.

 

The only way that a complaint is taken seriously and escalated - which this needs - is if there is compensation involved. For the sake of other innocent customers, make the complaint. The next victim might be a vulnerable person who might admit to something they haven't done just to get out of there - it does happen. It might also give you closure on the event

Link to post
Share on other sites

Grumpy, I have emailed the MD with my complaint. If he doesn't answer me back by Thursday then I will go further. I state again that I do not want compensation, I want an apology, nothing more, nothing less. I will escalate it if I don't get a response.

 

I am allowing them 2 days to look through the day and a half of CCTV footage and then giving them another day to put together my letter of apology. But all things considered, it took a week for the police to get to my door with the information given to them by Superdrug HQ security. At the most it should have been 2 or 3 days. So I don't expect a lot from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jackie/Wayne

 

I do see your (and Caleds) point but I would be more than satisfied with an apology.

 

I haven't a clue about the ringmaster scheme but I am not bothered about it. If the rest of the shops want to keep an eye on me shopping then that is fine...it stops any further mistakes from taking place.

 

Your situation is much worse than mine and I feel terrible for you. I sincerely hope that you get your name cleared and get to put the whole nasty experience behind you.

 

Please don't feel sorry for the Shareholders, they are not making a loss, or losing any revenues, the "cost" of shoplifting is included in the price of every single item you can buy in Superdrug, it is why the Oxford RLP trial was a win for the (guilty!) shoplifters, the Judge ruled the cost is already covered, and RLP had no case.

 

Also, the poor shareholders, will mostly be wealthy business people who pay very little tax in the UK, using every loophole they can.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it's D-day. I said that I would give it 'til today before telling my tale of woe to anyone who would listen (or read as the case may be) if I didn't hear back from Superdrug's MD. I got an email today! From MRS Joey Wat. Oops...that will teach me not to Google. She is passing my case on to her Customer Service Team and the reason she didn't answer sooner is because her and her family have been on holiday. Shame on me for sending a second email today warning that I was going to talk to someone who WOULD listen. In fact I am half way through an email to the Daily Mail.

 

I have emailed her back to say I would hold off a bit longer to see what her CST come up with. Probably nothing positive now that I have inadvertently upset the boss lady. I feel a complete idiot for not checking up on her first, especially as I don't hesitate to check up on youth workers and alike.

 

Oh well, I guess I will have to wait a little longer to hear their verdict but at least I know that something is being done...fingers crossed it is the result I would most like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol no Honey,

 

I sent emails to Mrs Wat, not a department. She is MD. She is passing me on to Robert Dean who is Head of Stores Operations. Mrs W says 'Rob, my colleague is very experienced and he will follow up.'

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Good morning all!

 

Firstly I would like to thank all of you for your advice, help and kind words. Without this wonderful forum I wouldn't have got the result I wanted...yes, Superdrug apologised. They held a thorough investigation and have now put down the whole sordid debacle down to over vigilance of the store manager. I was offered a £30.00 gift card but have refused it as I got what I wanted with the all clear and apology.

 

None of this would have been possible without you guys, so thank you so much! I will keep popping in regularly and who knows...maybe I can help someone in turn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

£30 for what you went through, what an insult! I hope you are feeling a bit better now sdv, and I'm sure your experience will help others in the future. Take care!

 

Thank you lily,

 

I did ask for the gift card to be sent to a charity of their choice, so some good will come out of it.

 

I feel like a weight has been lifted, even though I know I didn't do it, having other people think I did is worse I think.

 

Never mind...all done now and I can heave a sigh of relief lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once the machine was recording the officer read me my rights and informed me I wasn't under arrest and could leave at any time and asked me if I wanted a solicitor, which I declined as I figured I hadn't done anything wrong so wasn't necessary.
I just want to quickly chime in with something, please avail yourself of the legal aid system should you ever be the same situation again, that is being interviewed by the police whether you have committed a crime or not. Too many innocent people find themselves at the wrong end of a criminal charge after they have been interviewed by the police and then inadvertently incriminated themselves. Sadly people think that getting a solicitor involved is somehow an admission of guilt, but it really isn't!

Apologies for the formatting in my posts, I do put paragraphs in but the forum removes them for some reason :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just want to quickly chime in with something, please avail yourself of the legal aid system should you ever be the same situation again, that is being interviewed by the police whether you have committed a crime or not. Too many innocent people find themselves at the wrong end of a criminal charge after they have been interviewed by the police and then inadvertently incriminated themselves. Sadly people think that getting a solicitor involved is somehow an admission of guilt, but it really isn't!

 

Yes, you are absolutely right. I think it is a common misconception that to not bother with a solicitor in the vain hope the the police will assume you are innocent. The old adage 'innocent until proven guilty' only counts in court. In the police station it is the other way round, except they aren't so keen for you to prove you are innocent. Should things have escalated and I had been charged then I would have had a solicitor there in a flash.

 

According to Miss xxxx (Superdrug) the police officer and the shop manager were not acting in accordance with company policy. The police officer shouldn't have come to me before seeing the CCTV. I suspect he was fresh out of college as I'm pretty sure he was a community officer before.

Edited by honeybee13
Removing name for privacy reasons.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...