please can you help - worry over a RLP from Primark

[dx100uk]

load of old twaddle

 

IGNORE THEM.

 

dx

[dx100uk]

read from post 25 here:

 

ssame old twaddle

 

you are not the only one

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?371689-How-to-deal-with-RLP&p=4129894#post4129894

 

dx

[citizenB]

I have removed the earlier images as they were surplus to requirements

[Mystic-lady]

Once again ...my heartfelt thanks to all as i truly appreciate everyone for taking precious time out of their day to respond and help me....and those patient with my inexperience of attaching, deleting or not as the case may be.....and whilst I've since learned how to attach things, I still don't know how to add one part of a thread to another or how to delete wrong images, so again a big thanks to all the genius's ..still working on that

 

&....

 

Waiting for the next letter to arrive on my doorstep???

[caro]

I wouldn't waste any more time thinking about them.

[Mystic-lady]

:humble:Caro...again and as said so many times in this thread - Thank you!

[caro]

[Mystic-lady]

HELP AGAIN PLEASE...... I have received yet another letter in this morning's post, this time using far more threatening terminology;

 

I have been informed that if I do not pay; part-pay; respond to them or forward them a reasonable explanation as to why I feel I shouldn’t pay, my details will be passed to a third party debt collector to attain recovery. Not only will I have to pay £130 (bearing in mind they an Item that I had actually paid money for); I have 14 days to pay up respond otherwise my details will be handed to a debt recovery agency to recover monies together with interest plus I will also have to pay charges/fees etc; and still possibly go to civil court!!

 

Up until now I have followed the advice of completely ignoring everything and even started to relax but now with this latest I am so ill with worry...Do I pay? What should I do???

[citizenB]

I will alert site team for you.

[dx100uk]

thats std practice!!

 

you dont owe anything so no debt

 

they cant add anything to a debt that dont exist.

 

they are not bailiffs

and have no legal powers

 

dx

[ScarletPimpernel]

The fatal flaw in RLP's latest effort is that there is no debt - it exists only as a figment of RLP's corporate imagination.

 

The only way that their speculative invoice for a random amount could become a debt is if they issued a court claim and won. Now, we've seen that in the only properly defended case involving a claim based on RLP's notorious matrix, the claimant lost convincingly. RLP have claimed in various rambling letters, and on their website, to have won lots of cases - so we can only wonder, perhaps rhetorically, why, given the number of speculative invoices they send out, and the endless begging letters that follow, why they do not use this apparently successful method more often.

 

The reality is that they do not, preferring instead to employ methods of the sort described by the Law Commission as 'aggressive and misleading', an example of which we see here.

 

You may get a letter from a second-rate DCA called JB Debt Recovery. We can give you a reply to send that will remind them that pursuing non-existent debts is contrary to the terms of their consumer credit licence, and they will crawl back under their stone. We have not heard of any other DCAs taking on RLP's nonsense 'debts'.

[Mystic-lady]

Thank you, thank you, thank you....for taking the time to respond yet again......panic attack subsided for a moment well...at least until the next onslaught.

On the last response...has anyone taken them on for harassment or in my circumstance because they took goods I paid for theft? If only someone would give them a taste of their own medicine...

Again, cannot thank you enough for all your support, help and guidance, it's sooooo very much appreciated:oops:

[ScarletPimpernel]

I don't think anyone has brought an action for harassment - yet. It would be the security guards who stole your goods, not RLP.

 

However, you may be assured that bringing your issue to CAG, and resisting RLP's bullying, has a pleasing effect. Like all bullies, they hate it when they are shown up for what they are.

 

Remember, their silly letters are just pieces of paper with not very well-written words on them. Despite their grandiose posturing, they are entirely impotent; they have no legal authority, and no power to make you do anything you don't want to - ultimately, it's just some unpleasant, inadequate people trying to get money from you.

[citizenB]

ML, could you let us have a copy of the letter please.. for our records

 

Follow the instructions below

 

 

Dx100 – Instructions on uploading pdfs

 

scan the requiredletters/agreements/sheets

as a picture file

remove all pers info inc barcodes etc using paint

but leave all figures and dates.

goto one of the many free online pdf converter websites

convert the image to pdf format.

or ir you have PDF as an installed printer drive use that

open a new msg box here

hit go advanced below the msg box

hit manage attachments below that box

hit the add files button on the top right

hit select files, navigate to your file on your pc

hit upload files

NB:you can set where it goes in the post by hitting insert inline.

the hit reply button

[Mystic-lady]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]42046[/ATTACH]

 

Sorry I wasn't able to attached the letter yesterday, my scanner is not configured to my laptop so had to wait until this morning...

 

Please can you help and advise as there are some very strong threats contained within it...in particular para 1 and 5 which whilst threatening is also contradictory??

 

Are these legite and does it have any bearance on my future

[citizenB]

I will let those with more knowledge advise you if there is anything you need do.

 

From what I can see, you have pretty much been advised that this company are simply attempting to bully you into paying something that a court in Oxford has judged that they are not entitled to.

 

I am not sure where they are recording information for 6 years or whether it will affect your future.

 

I see that they photocopied your Passport - I thought it was not permitted to photocopy those !

 

I see they also seek to align themselves with the Association of Chief Police Officers, I was given to understand that organisation had disassociated themselves from RLP !!

 

They issue threats left right and centre to anyone who tries to highlight their bullying ways.

 

Their whole letter is full of contradictions. They demand to see a defence, when no claim has been issued.

 

They also have an incredibly warped view and lack of understanding of pre action protocols.

[Mystic-lady]

....have you seen this one (letter) before?

 

Is there some foundation to what they say or just another another "scare tactic"...whatever...please HELP???

[ims21]

Just for info

 

Maxx, Tesco, Wilkinson, B&Q and Superdrug. The predetermined fixed sum demanded by RLP in most if not all shoplifting cases varies according to, and is determined by, the total value claimed of the goods or cash involved. If the value is between nothing and £10, the sum demanded is £87.50 and the 21-day settlement offer is £70; if the goods are worth between £10 and £100, invariably £137.50 is asked for, with a discounted 21-day-period amount; if the value is more than £100, £187.50 is asked for, with a quick-pay discounted amount of £150; and if it is more than £300, £250 is asked for, with a quick-pay amount of £200. It is clear that the company has never justified the legitimacy of its action. It has been asked persistently about the evidence for its actions, and it has repeatedly declined to produce any evidence that claims have regularly and successfully been pursued by means of county court proceedings.

 

The company has also clearly misrepresented the position. Until last November, RLP’s website stated that

 

“we have established operating procedures for Civil Recovery and agreed guidelines with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland (ACPOS)”.

 

However, in October last year, the assistant chief constable who leads on retail crime for ACPO wrote to Jackie Lambert at RLP stating:

 

“Whilst there may have been agreements in the past about exchanging data and operating civil recovery with ACPO…there are no such agreements in place now and indeed on several occasions over the last few years I and my colleagues have asked that such references be deleted. Please remove from your website any and all references which state or imply that RLP operates its civil recovery in agreement or cooperation with the Police Service. Clearly if you have an agreement with an individual force you could make reference to that, but I know of none.”

 

In November last year, ACPOS said:

 

“At no time have ACPOS entered into any formal agreement with RLP or assisted them in any civil recovery”.

 

 

Taken from

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm110322/halltext/110322h0002.htm

 

It is quite a way down the page.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Thanks for scanning the letter. It's the usual psuedo-legal drivel, as you may expect.

 

Let's just dissect what they say:

 

as we have not heard from you, our client's account of the incident may be relied upon as an accurate account...

 

This is meaningless; RLP can rely on whatever they want - it doesn't matter, since they aren't any sort of statutory authority. What they appear to be trying to imply is that if you don't respond a court may give more weight to some shop security guard's recollection. In the Oxford case, of course, the shop security staff's accounts of the incident were found to be wholly unreliable; indeed, they were so inaccurate that anyone reading the judgement might think they were lying.

 

In the absence of any defence, our client is also in a position to issue proceedings against you, blah, blah

 

Another bit of meaningless, misleading tosh. Their client could issue proceedings whether you have corresponded with their drones at RLP or not. RLP aren't solicitors, so can't issue on behalf of the retailer anyway. The only time you'd need a defence is in the remote event of receiving a claim - and then it would go to the court, and not RLP.

 

Whilst there is no legal obligation to consider mitigating circumstances in civil proceedings...

 

Well this, at least, is accurate - there is no such legal obligation. Similarly, there is no legal obligation to deal with companies like RLP for any reason.

 

Our client operates civil recovery within a set of core principles which were initially agreed upon with ACPO..

 

At one time RLP's website made much of apparent links to ACPO which appeared to be intended to suggest endorsement of RLP's activities. This included an document that purported to show some sort of agreement between ACPO and RLP. However, ACPO subsequently made RLP remove these references and documents because they were misleading. Note that they go on to say that these 'principles' (not a word I'd ever associate with RLP), were 'developed further' - but they do not say with whom - not ACPO, we know.

 

If we do not hear from you... it will either be issued, or passed to a company that specialises in recovering debts and undisputed claims for damages.

 

The wording of this part is interesting. We know that RLP can't bring proceedings themselves, and that retailers do so very, very rarely, so the chances are that a court claim won't happen. So, their next step is often to pass this to JB Debt recovery, a distinctly second-rate DCA. One letter confirming that there is no debt, and that any liability is disputed, and they shuffle off at once. I suspect that the 'undisputed claims' bit is an attempt by RLP to get round the fact that any DCA trying to collect unsubstantiated or non-existent debts (like RLP's claims), is in breach of the terms of their licence. To suggest that a claim might be undisputed and thus amount to a legitimate debt is misleading.

 

So, in summary, then, what you have is another fanciful attempt by La Lambert to legitimise RLP's grubby business and bully you into parting with some money. Nothing in that letter has any real substance, and you should not be concerned by it.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Lies, damned lies, and RLP letters...

[Mystic-lady]

Wow!

 

..what debt and grattitude I owe all that have responded and helped me on here! Far in excess of what I deserve...Eveyone of you in my opinion are :angel:in disguise!

 

From the bottom of my heart; I really and truly cannot thank you enough!

[honeybee13]

I hope you're feeling a bit better, Mystic Lady.

 

HB x

[Mystic-lady]

Hi there Honeybee13, sorry I've only just picked this up........if honest, whilst reassured so much by the lovely, kind people who've truly helped me, when yet another letter turns up on the door step I tend to creep back to square one!!! Maybe part of that is the guilt pangs due to how very ashamed I feel...

[caro]

You can't change what you did mystic lady, but you've clearly learnt from it, so don't let their bullying tactics get to you,

[andydd]

Excellent dissection of RLP's letter by Mr Pimpernel . it makes you wonder why RLP like to drone on about how you should never take advice from uneducated unqualified people from internet forums, maybe because we are not as dumb as they like to think..or hope.

 

*Waves at the RLP Trolls*

 

Andy