Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
    • Developing computer games can be wildly expensive so some hope that AI can cut the cost.View the full article
  • 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

Caught in Primark - What happens now?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2932 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

Dear all,

 

I got caught in Primark shoplifting yesterday. I don't condone my actions obviously and I'm sorry for what I've done.

Now my question is what happens next?

 

I was brought to a back office where my bags were searched and I cooperated as much as I could. The guy in the office gave me a piece of paper to fill in my details e.g. name, school, address. I was not told to sign anything. After I filled in my details he insisted I call someone to have my address verified if not he would have to involve the person. My friend managed to verify my address and he told me I was free to go. Before I left however, he told me that I was now banned from Primark, and he gave me a notice from RLP. I was never given anything to sign, and after that I was allowed to leave.

 

My questions are:

1. Am I banned from Primark? He did not tell me for how long, and I did not have to sign anything, nor had to have my photo taken.

2. I've read from the forums that I should not respond to any letters from RLP, other than the first letter whereby I should tell them I admit no liability whatsoever. Can I just ask how long will RLP usually chase me for payments?

 

I will be grateful for any replies, thanks!

Edited by weareinvictus
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there, welcome to CAG.

 

I would think you'll have the same experience as others in your position, although I don't know if your age makes any difference. How old are you please?

 

I'll try to find you a Primark thread or two, but please have a read around the forum, the stories don't vary much. Sadly, not everyone comes back here to tell us how they got on, but we've heard stories about letter trails arriving, quoting the Magna Carta and other interesting stuff. I think it's likely that you will hear, because there's money in it for them.

 

Some people here have sent a short letter denying liability, which you'll find if you have a look at a few threads, or maybe someone who knows a bit more than me will be along later with some tips for you.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Honeybee! Thanks for your reply. I'm 20 and I'm currently a full time student, will it make a difference?

 

Hello there. I'm not sure to be honest, other forum members know more than me and they should be along over the course of the day.

 

Here's another thread about Primark for you. Just so you know, some of the civil recovery firms read this forum, so I think that's all we need to know about you, thank you for the info.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?361562-I-have-been-caught-shoplifting-in-Primark-and-MHV.-Consequences-please

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt your age will make any difference - you're 20, so you're legally an adult. I think the age thing only ever came up as a question in relation to what would happen if RLP ever tried to enforce their fee through the county courts, which they do very rarely anyway.

 

TBH, regardless of age, the advice would still be to ignore the speculative invoice that you receive, so it doesn't particularly change anything.

"Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me". Martin Niemöller

 

"A vital ingredient of success is not knowing that what you're attempting can't be done. A person ignorant of the possibility of failure can be a half-brick in the path of the bicycle of history". - Terry Pratchett

 

If I've been helpful, please click my star. :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt your age will make any difference - you're 20, so you're legally an adult. I think the age thing only ever came up as a question in relation to what would happen if RLP ever tried to enforce their fee through the county courts, which they do very rarely anyway.

 

TBH, regardless of age, the advice would still be to ignore the speculative invoice that you receive, so it doesn't particularly change anything.

 

RLP cannot take anyone to court; only the retailer can do that. Most don't, especially since the only contested case ended badly for the retailer.It's not a fee, or a fine - it's just a speculative invoice. RLP call it a claim for damages, but if you read up on the Oxford case you will see that the Courts don't agree - and neither, it seems, does the Law Commission. The proper way to deal with thieves is through the criminal justice system. The fact that the retailer decided not to involve the police doesn't excuse RLP acting as a parallel justice system.So ignore RLP's letters, as threatening and desperate though they will undoubtedly be - but please do think about what might have happened if the police were involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey,

 

I was in a very similar sitaution last year... I got the letters continuoulsy for a few months. I completely ignored them!! Then they stopped coming. I just received one again last week (over a year later)...

 

I keep trying to find info an people being taken to court by rlp... but can't find anything appart from the stuff on their website!! it's strange.

 

I was wondering if paying part of the fine (coz thats all I can afford) reduces the chances of me going to court (if I was to)?

 

Main concern is because such a record can affect my employability.

 

Thanks for all your help guys! you guys are great!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Retailers and their security staff searching an alleged shoplifter's bags or person is an absolute no-no. They have no right or power, legal or otherwise, to do so. If RLP come demanding money, just point out that they searched your bags, which is something only a warranted police officer can legally undertake, and how do they or you know, the retailer didn't conceal something in their hand and then allege they had found something in the bag? Also, they are responsible for any loss or damage to goods in your bag that are your property. Once the retailer has taken money from you, placed it in the cash register drawer and closed the drawer, proper right and title passes to you. Any goods paid for are then your property.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

omg,im in total shock here, the more i read the more amazed I am by the responce in regards to security officers working on behalf of Primark....

 

Let me tell you a little background about myself..

I am a security officer employed by a company (legal reasons i can not mention) that is contracted by Primark.. and in the 4 years Ive worked there I have never seen such resentment nor power tripped stories.... I can only assume these are the primarks in the mainlands...

 

I would like to point out the main factors on which is required from us as security.. firstly a guard is purely a deterrant to shoplifters, occasionally working as a team, most of the other times alone.... some stores have CCTV some do not, some have anything from 2-8 officers on the premisses at one time others only 1... it all depends on how busy or how much loss...

 

Now, when you have a team of 2 or more in a building, there is most likely to be a store detective (non uniformed). they are the ones that do most of the catches (as this is what my main duty is).

Now to read all these different stories about what a guard/officer has done has and still does dumfond me as to how they can get away with this....

 

we are all trained to a SIA standard which holds us 100% liable for a wrongful arrest as a guard/officer must be 110% sure before stopping anyone....

 

the sheets they write on were statements and their own detective sheets, gaining as much info about you as possible, but, in all seriousness, its for their own records to prove they are doing their jobs... if no police were involved nothing else will come of it... chances are an exclosure was presented to you, denying you access to most (if not all) shops in the area. (legally binding) regardless to you signing it or not. however

where i live, we do not issue these anymore. further more. we have no right to place our hands in your belongings more several reasons, but the main reasons have already been mentioned by someone else. we can not prove your details are correct, which is why the police get involved to prove this, we have no power that you do not have, unless you did steal, but the power we have is only a citizens arrest, nothing more nothing less. we do have the right to detain you until the police arrive (however long that may be) you committed a crime and we witnessed it, we have all the rights there until the police say different) once we have detained, the police arrive, we hand over our evidence and they deal with the issue, its out of our hands..... we cant hold grudges in this job, and we can not discriminate.. yet im hearing more and more of this happening, which (sorry to say) ****es me off.. i work to my best, i dont stop anyone unless I have seen them select the item, conceal and and leave without paying, anyone of these that i dont see, i wont stop at all, not even as a risk, we have a license and if we dont do things properly we will loose our license, and in effect our job...

 

Please please please, I must stress, if you have been treated unfaily and you were innocient, dont let it lie, take it as far as you can, because those that take the risk and are wrong deserve to have their license revoked so they will either have to be retrained or will loose their job (the latter is normally the case) . but dont let them carry on as you wont be the last, make a stand and make them realise, they cant treat you like this coz they are security......

 

I will gladly answer any questions in regards to security, but can not nor will i name the company or area i live..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey,

 

 

I keep trying to find info an people being taken to court by rlp... but can't find anything appart from the stuff on their website!! it's strange.

 

I was wondering if paying part of the fine (coz thats all I can afford) reduces the chances of me going to court (if I was to)?

 

Main concern is because such a record can affect my employability.

 

Thanks for all your help guys! you guys are great!!!

 

I was in a very similar sitaution last year... I got the letters continuoulsy for a few months. I completely ignored them!! Then they stopped coming. I just received one again last week (over a year later)...

 

I understand RLP, I dont agree with it, only recently where i live this has come into effect, before this, it was a straight prossecution or caution, no inbetweens or grey areas. unfortuantley, i belive mistake or not, if you wernt caught then, would you stop?? dont think so, you would carry on and on until you get caught. this is where the problem lays.... the fine, is to prevent any further time from the police and security, rather than goin through the courts, you get a fine.... you dont pay it (i cant speak of knowledge) but im guessing the more ppl dont pay it the more likely it will be made law in due course or something else that will make it all worse for everyone else.... just saying... this seems to be an easier punishment than goin to court and haveing it on your criminal record...

Link to post
Share on other sites

omg,im in total shock here, the more i read the more amazed I am by the responce in regards to security officers working on behalf of Primark....

 

Let me tell you a little background about myself..

I am a security officer employed by a company (legal reasons i can not mention) that is contracted by Primark.. and in the 4 years Ive worked there I have never seen such resentment nor power tripped stories.... I can only assume these are the primarks in the mainlands...

 

I would like to point out the main factors on which is required from us as security.. firstly a guard is purely a deterrant to shoplifters, occasionally working as a team, most of the other times alone.... some stores have CCTV some do not, some have anything from 2-8 officers on the premisses at one time others only 1... it all depends on how busy or how much loss...

 

Now, when you have a team of 2 or more in a building, there is most likely to be a store detective (non uniformed). they are the ones that do most of the catches (as this is what my main duty is).

Now to read all these different stories about what a guard/officer has done has and still does dumfond me as to how they can get away with this....

 

we are all trained to a SIA standard which holds us 100% liable for a wrongful arrest as a guard/officer must be 110% sure before stopping anyone....

 

the sheets they write on were statements and their own detective sheets, gaining as much info about you as possible, but, in all seriousness, its for their own records to prove they are doing their jobs... if no police were involved nothing else will come of it... chances are an exclosure was presented to you, denying you access to most (if not all) shops in the area. (legally binding) regardless to you signing it or not. however

where i live, we do not issue these anymore. further more. we have no right to place our hands in your belongings more several reasons, but the main reasons have already been mentioned by someone else. we can not prove your details are correct, which is why the police get involved to prove this, we have no power that you do not have, unless you did steal, but the power we have is only a citizens arrest, nothing more nothing less. we do have the right to detain you until the police arrive (however long that may be) you committed a crime and we witnessed it, we have all the rights there until the police say different) once we have detained, the police arrive, we hand over our evidence and they deal with the issue, its out of our hands..... we cant hold grudges in this job, and we can not discriminate.. yet im hearing more and more of this happening, which (sorry to say) ****es me off.. i work to my best, i dont stop anyone unless I have seen them select the item, conceal and and leave without paying, anyone of these that i dont see, i wont stop at all, not even as a risk, we have a license and if we dont do things properly we will loose our license, and in effect our job...

 

Please please please, I must stress, if you have been treated unfaily and you were innocient, dont let it lie, take it as far as you can, because those that take the risk and are wrong deserve to have their license revoked so they will either have to be retrained or will loose their job (the latter is normally the case) . but dont let them carry on as you wont be the last, make a stand and make them realise, they cant treat you like this coz they are security......

 

I will gladly answer any questions in regards to security, but can not nor will i name the company or area i live..

 

Thank you for having the courage to take a stand. I am a retired police officer and worked in the retail industry before I joined the police service. For every security officer like yourself, there will be at least six whose behaviour and actions fall well short of the standard any reasonable person would consider to be lawful and legal.

 

The technology that retailers use for point of sale and security has a poor record as regards reliability. Doorway sensors, although claimed to be 100% reliable, are around 40% accurate. They can be triggered by a staple or, even, a strand of copper wire in a motorised wheelchair. There is also the problem of checkout operators not removing tags from merchandise. I have had this happen to me at least twice. On one occasion, the security bod got quite upset when I tipped out everything on a counter and showed him the receipt. I have also witnessed security bods claiming they have a "common law right to search" and then have their actions questioned in an open court, in one case, having the case dismissed. Scanning tills are even worse. Even retail staff admit they are unreliable. The most common fault is "mis-scanning", which occurs when a checkout operator scans an item, the bleep is heard, but the item does not record on the receipt. I have had that happen to me. Self-service scanning tills have an even worse record of reliability and mis-scanning.

 

CCTV is another area where there are problems. One incident I witnessed was a shop assistant accusing a customer of putting something in their bag and attempting to go past the till without paying. When I viewed the CCTV footage, I said to the shop assistant, "If I were you, I would leave a note for your manager to say you've resigned. If that customer makes a formal complaint to your manager or head office, you are history." She resigned that day. Inept, incompetent or bored CCTV operators are another problem. They can cause a lot of problems. Making a false or erroneous allegation of theft is very serious and has serious consequences, not only for the customer, but the retailer, also.

 

As far as discrimination goes, I have seen this happen to a person with learning difficulties, in the street, at the hands of a security bod who was accompanied by a retail manager. He got a shock when I called the local police and they ripped his gonads off. The retail manager learned that standing around like a spare part at a wedding and doing nothing to stop that sort of behaviour is not clever and can get you arrested for being an accessory to an offence, which it very nearly did in that case. The person with learning difficulties was completely innocent.

 

It takes courage to speak out as you have and I commend you for doing so. Something does need to be done to remove the unprofessional and rent-a-thug elements from the security industry - that is for sure. Let's hope your post starts a drive to bring this about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

If they know your name and working in security and a description, they could contact the SIA and tell them

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. how will affect my SIA badge if they have just my name and age ( i lie to them saying that im working as a waitress) they dont know im working as a security and they dont know were im working

2. how they will contact my employer if they dont know were im working ( so by name and age) they can know eveything about me or im just imagining

3. if i went to primark and asked them ( im sorry and i will not do that again) so they can accept my apologies and remove my details, or we will catch me again because im back

4. they have the right to send my picture all over the primark ( so im not allowed to go to any primark)

5. how long its take to remove the banned

5. if the police didnt come thats mean it will not affect my criminal record

 

 

TBH you are now doing what most would do in your situation and that is to look far in this than you need to. Its now over please forget it and don't do it again and move on. Nothing should happen now except some stupid demanding letters for money. you can safely ignore them. Others will say the same but you need to stop fretting...

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest issue is that you did it knowing the repercussions, since you are employed with an SIA licence. THis means you did it willingly and deliberately. Should you actually get caught and police caught, you would be looking at a higher punishment than others due to you being in a position of trust.

 

That means you need to stop shoplifting. From your posts, you show no remorse, just worry that you were caught.

 

In short, stop shoplifting, stop worrying about primark and get on with your life.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

i didnt know what happen to me exactly to do that ' it was the first time and it will be the last time in my all life), and i really regret but whats is done is done, but i really need the answer pf this question just to move on and leave in peace mind( i cant stop thinking what will happen) so please can you answer my question, maybe i will feel more confortable if you did.

 

1. how will affect my SIA badge if they have just my name and age ( i lie to them saying that im working as a waitress) they dont know im working as a security and they dont know were im working

2. how they will contact my employer if they dont know were im working ( so by name and age) they can know eveything about me or im just imagining

3. if i went to primark and asked them ( im sorry and i will not do that again) so they can accept my apologies and remove my details, or we will catch me again because im back

4. they have the right to send my picture all over the primark ( so im not allowed to go to any primark)

5. how long its take to remove the banned

5. if the police didnt come thats mean it will not affect my criminal record

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop worrying. They are unlikely to do anything. Theyre just primark guards. Stay away from the stores and get on with your life.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...