Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • well be careful if the debt is above £600 you could have HCEO bailiffs at your  and for the want of logging onto MCOL and typing just as your are here  - it could all be simply sorted.   dx      
    • well they do have an alternate, do nothing.   I cant see a past thread on this? why didn't you come here and ask for advice first?   all your threads have a nasty trait you still haven't got out of and that's blindly contacting DCA's    you have never earned above the threshold you should have simply sent a new SLC deferment form.   in a way I think you've paid this money under duress when you had no need too.        
    • Interestingly I've just had another alert on my Clear Score report:   Upcoming Updates A new credit or store card will be added to your January report. Organisation Name: BAIA0090 Account Number: ****9048 Company Type: finance house What does this mean? This could mean that you’ve recently opened a new account, or it might be because a lender has just shared some information relating to an old account. Why is this change not on my report yet? We get your credit report every month from Equifax, a credit reference agency. This update can be seen on your Equifax credit report now but will only be reflected in your ClearScore report when your report is next updated, which is on 2 January. If you apply for credit now, lenders will see this update on your Equifax credit report. Now, this looks very much as if Hoist have taken my agreement off and transferred it to whoever BAIA0090 are.  I've not seen any new notice of assignement or anything.  
    • Sorry i am Not putting details in here. This bank i did have an account with in 1993. That is the last time i used them.   I am going to let them ccj me.   I am not going to even think about this any more. My bin will get the letters and my door will be ignored.   Thank you for the interest but i will waste time for another 6 odd years while i get my mind right All the best
    • Particulars of Claim (for Reference - not to be submitted with defence)   What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? 1.The Claim is for the sum of £2722 arising from the Defendant's breach of a regulated consumer credit agreement referenced Under no xxxxxxxxxxxx   2.The Defendant has failed to remedy the breach in accordance with a Default Notice issued pursuant to ss.87(1) and 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.   3.The Claimant claims the sums due from the Defendant following the legal assignment of the agreement from Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd (EX BARCLAYCARD) Written notice of the assignment has been given. The Claimant claims 1.The sum of £2792 2. Costs Defence   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   2.The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is denied. Whilst I have had dealings with Barclaycard  in the past I cannot recall the specifics of the alleged agreement.   4. Paragraph 2 is denied .I have no knowledge of who the claimant is nor have I been provided with any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.   5.Paragraph 3  is denied.I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor or Legal Assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars of claim .   6. It is denied that any amounts are due under any agreement.   7. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Howard Cohen & Co Solicitors by way of a CPR 31:14 request sent via 1st class recorded post on 19/11/2019.Further to the above I sent Hoist Finance UK Holdings 3 LTD a section 78 request via 1st class recorded post on 19/11/2019.  To date, neither Howard Cohen nor Hoist Portfolio are yet to furnish me with the requested information .   8.Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to   a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; c) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to Sec 87 (1) CCA1974. d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   9. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   10. On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974.6.   By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. (Defence mainly taken straight from Micky the Hippo's similar defence)
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2207 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone, I'm new here, I've been lurking around for some time (it's always good to learn from all the smart people on here) but never did I think I would be in the situation where I would need help.

 

I was shopping in Sainsburys a few weeks ago and brought about £25 worth of items, anyway, after walking through the exit, one of the guards grabbed me and said ''I know what you did''. Took me to the back room, looked at my receipt and apparently one of the items did not scan, I was shocked, in hindsight, I know I was on autopilot mode and if the item doesn't scan, the self checkout alerts me via 'unexpected item' response, so I carried on unaware.

 

I explained that to the guard, but he wasn't having it, and looking directly over me in an intimidating manner whilst I was seated and said ''you purposely covered the barcode with your hard and waived it over the scanner!'' At this point, I wanted to headbutt him, but had to control myself. Anyway, they gave me a form, banning me and let me go. To be honest, I was glad to get out and didn't care if I was banned for life.

 

Today, I get a letter from DWF stating:

 

Dear Sirs

 

Our Client: Sainsburys Supermarkets

Balance Due: £150

 

This sum is broken down as follows:

 

Value of goods stolen £0.00

Value of goods damaged £0.00

Value of cash stolen £0.00

Security costs £150.00

 

 

From reading this forum, I would venture to ignore them, however I have a few issues, I am moving house next week and then relocating the following week again, but this time down south, so how do I respond back to their letters if I don't know what they send, what are their timeframes in sending letters? Since I don't want or need a royal mail re-direction service.

 

I also have a new job as a 'Immigration Officer' and was wondering if this would affect it, I have to hold a high level of security clearance.

 

Please Advise guys! Many Thanks!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore it. There are no "security costs". These muppets are doing the same thing as RLP. And RLP's basis of gaining money has already been laughed at by a judge.

 

Regarding your job, if the police were not involved, then nothing will ever appear on your criminal record.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi everyone, I'm new here, I've been lurking around for some time (it's always good to learn from all the smart people on here) but never did I think I would be in the situation where I would need help.

 

I was shopping in Sainsburys a few weeks ago and brought about £25 worth of items, anyway, after walking through the exit, one of the guards grabbed me and said ''I know what you did''. Took me to the back room, looked at my receipt and apparently one of the items did not scan, I was shocked, in hindsight, I know I was on autopilot mode and if the item doesn't scan, the self checkout alerts me via 'unexpected item' response, so I carried on unaware.

 

I explained that to the guard, but he wasn't having it, and looking directly over me in an intimidating manner whilst I was seated and said ''you purposely covered the barcode with your hard and waived it over the scanner!'' At this point, I wanted to headbutt him, but had to control myself. Anyway, they gave me a form, banning me and let me go. To be honest, I was glad to get out and didn't care if I was banned for life.

 

Today, I get a letter from DWF stating:

 

Dear Sirs

 

Our Client: Sainsburys Supermarkets

Balance Due: £150

 

This sum is broken down as follows:

 

Value of goods stolen £0.00

Value of goods damaged £0.00

Value of cash stolen £0.00

Security costs £150.00

 

 

From reading this forum, I would venture to ignore them, however I have a few issues, I am moving house next week and then relocating the following week again, but this time down south, so how do I respond back to their letters if I don't know what they send, what are their timeframes in sending letters? Since I don't want or need a royal mail re-direction service.

 

I also have a new job as a 'Immigration Officer' and was wondering if this would affect it, I have to hold a high level of security clearance.

 

Please Advise guys! Many Thanks!!!

 

The usual advice is "ignore", or "send one letter stating 'I deny any liability to you".

 

If you are concerned that they might issue a court claim to your current address, and get a judgement by default if you then didn't oppose any such claim because you didn't know about it : you could always get any such judgement "set-aside" if you weren't aware of a claim.

You might consider writing, saying "I deny any liability, oh, and by the way, I'm moving, here is my new address, in case you decide to attempt to pursue this", so that:

 

a) if they did follow it up, you'd know about it if they used your new address,

b) any "set-aside" if they used your old address would be easier to show you hadn't tried to evade the paperwork, and they'd had your new address and chosen not to use it.

 

You could send it by ordinary post & get a certificate of posting, or by recorded delivery. If sent by RD : if they didn't get a signature on delivery you'd get your postage back, and could resend it, but RD doesn't guarantee delivery, only a signature IF they deliver it.

The more expensive "Special Delivery" allows for both signature on delivery AND is a "guaranteed delivery" service : options for you for whichever will give you the level of "peace of mind" you desire!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for the quick replies!!

 

Regarding the 'I deny any liability' quote, is it better to send a letter stating that rather than just simply ignoring them. Does this give me some sort of security or protection?

 

Also, I have read on other forums/threads, they sometimes get your number and keep ringing you, how exactly do they get a hold of a telephone number if I have not provided one?

 

Also, does anyone know if they eventually begin to write 'final demand' or any other threatening remarks on the envelope? I only ask since I don't really want my parents or siblings to find my post when I am not home and get unnecessarily frightened.

 

Thanks for all your help so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would consider being more pro-active on this one.

 

  1. You used the self-scan and the equipment
  2. One of the items failed to scan
  3. You didn't notice the lack of a bleep due to the many other bleeps from other customers
  4. the equipment failed to register that item being placed in your bag (lets face it, it frequently goes off when you have scanned the item)
  5. the store personnel had noticed their equipment failure
  6. rather than resolving their problem by pointing out what had happened, they take you to a room and accuse you of theft, then claim money from you at a later date

 

I would be asking for a copy of any cctv that they have, including the room that you were taken to.

 

This is appalling really, they need to be stamped on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if many of sainsbury's customers know that this is the action that they will take if you make a mistake and their equipment doesn't register it?

 

Maybe somebody should be contacting the consumer columns in the newspapers / watchdog on TV

 

Maybe then they would think again about treating their customers so shabbily

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Supermarkets usually say it is the customers responsibility to ensure that all items are scanned. Even when going through a manned checkout.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would consider being more pro-active on this one.

 

  1. You used the self-scan and the equipment
  2. One of the items failed to scan
  3. You didn't notice the lack of a bleep due to the many other bleeps from other customers
  4. the equipment failed to register that item being placed in your bag (lets face it, it frequently goes off when you have scanned the item)
  5. the store personnel had noticed their equipment failure
  6. rather than resolving their problem by pointing out what had happened, they take you to a room and accuse you of theft, then claim money from you at a later date

 

 

In this case I agree. A polite but firm letter stating that this was a mistake with no dishonest intention, and if it had been brought to your attention more constructively it would have been resolved very easily. You do not accept that there was any theft, or any attempt or intention of theft, and you do not accept any liability towards the spurious charge they wish to make. I will not respond to further offensive accusations, will not be shopping in Sainsburys any more if this is how customers are treated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A polite but firm letter stating that this was a mistake with no dishonest intention

 

A polite but firm letter stating that this was an equipment failure on their part an with no dishonest intention or actions by you....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to know how long these supermarkets spend training their own staff on "How to Scan an Item". It appears that they expect their customers to manage with no training whatsoever. It would also be of interest to know what action they take if one of their own till staff fails to scan an item.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They actually go on a small course. the operators are told to help a customer if the light is on, the customer requests it, or the customer looks like they need help.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They actually go on a small course. the operators are told to help a customer if the light is on, the customer requests it, or the customer looks like they need help.

 

So if the customer doesn't know they have made a mistake no lights will go on, they will not request help and will not look as if they need help. Seems to me that supermarkets are going to have a very difficult time PROVING that it was a deliberate act rather than a genuine mistake. Shoplifters are going to have a field day!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Supermarkets train their staff in such an eventuality. As such it, each supermarket has different practices, but they dont release them to the public.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't scan an item at the self-scan then put it in your bag, there is an announcement along the lines of "unexpected item in bagging area" or equivalent that roughly translates to "that last item didn't scan too well". If it doesn't scan and you don't get the warning, that amounts to an equipment malfunction ...

I doubt that all of these actions are logged ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is always the possibility of things like that happening, but lately, the self scan areas seem to have been updated, so now they it is done by weight as well. This is to stop people having a 2 x 2litre bottles of coke and a bottle of JD. The person scans the coke 3 times and puts the JD in the bag. Saving themselves £10-20. Theres a LOT more to it than what you guys are discussing here.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is always the possibility of things like that happening, but lately, the self scan areas seem to have been updated, so now they it is done by weight as well. This is to stop people having a 2 x 2litre bottles of coke and a bottle of JD. The person scans the coke 3 times and puts the JD in the bag. Saving themselves £10-20. Theres a LOT more to it than what you guys are discussing here.

 

Indeed. Up to date versions of the software are VERY accurate!


Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all your help guys, I received the second letter which is pretty much the same as the first. I have responded with 'I deny any liability to the spurious claims made'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck arc-ryder,

 

Do not worry about anything showing up on your record, as the police weren't involved, as far as they or any of their records are concerned the incident never happened.

 

To be guilty of theft they need to prove that you were intentionally dishonest. If they get grumpy with you I would request a copy of the CCTV footage, by submitting a subject access request and if its nice and clear cut that it was a genuine mistake (i.e. your hand wasn't over the barcode when you were scanning) then I would invite them to take you to court as you refute the allegation that you acted dishonestly.

 

Quick question, did you pay for said item before you left at any point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good luck arc-ryder,

 

Do not worry about anything showing up on your record, as the police weren't involved, as far as they or any of their records are concerned the incident never happened.

 

To be guilty of theft they need to prove that you were intentionally dishonest. If they get grumpy with you I would request a copy of the CCTV footage, by submitting a subject access request and if its nice and clear cut that it was a genuine mistake (i.e. your hand wasn't over the barcode when you were scanning) then I would invite them to take you to court as you refute the allegation that you acted dishonestly.

 

Quick question, did you pay for said item before you left at any point?

 

Thanks, I would venture to guess most stores delete their CCTV, if they have any within a few months, by the time this is escalated, there probably won't be any footage left.

 

I did not pay for the item before I left, I was not aware it did not scan and was stopped outside as I left the premises.

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the late replies, I still don't have an internet connection at my new address and can only get on sometimes when I tether my phone, but this kills my data allowance, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi there something similar has happened to me recently and i have now got the same letter, my question is did you pay it? or what was the outcome? thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hi there something similar has happened to me recently and i have now got the same letter, my question is did you pay it? or what was the outcome? thx

 

Please start your own thread and give us some background info. Also, take some time to look around this forum and read the advice given to others.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thx

 

i was wondering on the outcome of the demanding letter that was received

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The letters are empty threats. As i said, have a good long read of the forums. Youll know what to do then.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your reply

 

i have only found this thread that relates to the info i need,,, i found info on a similar site,,,, its just worrying considering nothing was proved and in my case my partner and I have both received letters for £150 security costs despite the security team dealt with it as one offence,, let me state thou they did not even talk to us and listen to our side of the miss understanding before they called the police

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...