Problems with Primark

[francescakay]

What would a claim form be like?

[renegadeimp]

 

Similar to that

 

 

Disclaimer: Image taken from another forum, but redacted.

[francescakay]

Okay thanks ill worry when or if that comes to mind lol

.. will it lol

[ScarletPimpernel]

You ignore EVERYTHING unless its a genuine claim form. As already stated, RLP cant get the police involved at all. ONLY the retailer can.

 

 

 

What makes RLP's threat even more risible than usual is that the police have already been involved, and have dealt with the matter. It is difficult to imagine what might be gained from reporting it again, apart from a warning about wasting police time.

 

All these threats, like everything else RLP does, have one object - to persuade and pressure people into giving RLP money, and nothing else. It's not about crime deterrence, or crime reduction, or stopping thieves getting work, or compensating retailers - it's only ever been about RLP making profit.

[francescakay]

Oh right i see it now well tough i have christmas and birthday presents to buy haha. Ill wait for the genuine form to come through and worry about that lol

[andydd]

Even IF (and as we have seen it is highly unlikely) a genuine claim form was sent

and you didn't want to defend it you could simply pay the amount they demand plus

the very small court fee (there should be no extra costs for solicitors, etc) and that would be the end of it.

 

Paying outright as soon as they send you a demand is without a doubt the most foolish thing you can do.

 

It would also be worth looking to see if they genuinely have followed the Pre-Action protocol rules,

RLP like to huff and puff and claim they do but the reality may be another matter.

[francescakay]

How were they genuine claims forms they were just letters,

which i posted on here and everyone has said their just sending childish threats and to ignore them,

 

they cant take me to court nor get the police involved because i asked my friends dad who is a police officer

and he just lsughd in my face and said wiuld be a wasted time.

 

why should I pay its only primark and the police were involved anyway

and like its been stated the matter was closed end of with that fine I paid.

 

And its been stated they cant take me to court so if they want to waste their time and paper on me then do so.

 

Im not paying anything as ive been told to ignore them.

[ScarletPimpernel]

How were they genuine claims forms they were just letters,

 

Andydd's post said that "IF they were genuine claim forms"... No-one has suggested that you have been sent a claim, or indeed that you are likely to get one.

[andydd]

How were they genuine claims forms they were just letters, which i posted on here and everyone has said their just sending childish threats and to ignore them, they cant take me to court nor get the police involved because i asked my friends dad who is a police officer and he just basically lsughd in my face and said wiuld be a wasted time. why should I pay its only primark and the police were involved anyway and like its been stated the matter was closed end of with that fine I paid. And its been stated they cant take me to court so if they want to waste their time and paper on me then do so. Im not paying anything as ive been told to ignore them.

 

Youll note that I mentioned the unlikely scenario of IF RLP decided to pursue the case in court.

 

It has nothing to do with the Police so I wouldn't take any notice of your friends comments,

RLP (and in fact anyone) still has the right to pursue a CIVIL case,

they can do this whether there were criminal proceedings before or not,

in fact whether or not there were police involved doesn't really make a lot of difference to RLP's case

(many/most shoplifting incidents don't involve the police),

although I guess that IF the police were called AND decided that there was no crime would be a good defence.

 

Technically speaking the fact you paid a fine is not the end of it,

RLP are still entitled to pursue you for a civil claim

although as we (and many others) have pointed out there doesn't appear to be a legal reason to claim damages.

 

Taking civil action after alleged criminal cases is quite rare

but there have of course been high profile cases

such as OJ Simpson and Stephen Lawrence but I'm going off topic somewhat here.

[francescakay]

I do apologise about that message wasnt meant to sound i was biting anyones head of. I had a bad day and thought everyone was having a go at me. Sorry everyone ...

[francescakay]

So what your saying andydd is that there is no claim for damages

[francescakay]

Just wait and see what happens next lol

[andydd]

So what your saying andydd is that there is no claim for damages

 

You cant just claim damages willy-nilly,

there has to be a legal right,

RLP would argue that there is such a right

but they mostly rely on the Thames Water case

(basically Thames flooded a neighbouring factory who had to spend weeks cleaning up

thus not making work and losing money),

 

RLP would claim that Primark suffered a similar loss but in the Oxford case it was successfully argued

the two cases are not the same,

shoplifting does not interfere or stop till staff selling and security staff are paid the same whether they stop a shoplifter or not,

so where does the loss alleged by RLP come from ?

[andydd]

Reading Jackie's final tirade

 

"In view of your publications,

if this matter is not settled we will be returning the file to our client with a recommendation to issue proceedings.

 

Your publication may be put before the Court.

This decision is based solely upon your refusal to accept any responsibility for your actions,

notwithstanding our client's leniency in allowing the criminal matter to be concluded by way of Restorative Justice.

Put simply, the Restorative Justice appears to have failed."

 

In the very unlikely result of court action,

I would refer the above to the Judge and claim that the reason behind the claim is NOT any loss

that the store may have offered but it is because RLP believe that they have some right to claim money as Restorative Justice

and that they are annoyed due to lack of replying to their letters and the embarrassment caused to RLP

but this (and other) forums.

[dx100uk]

RLP cannot take you to court .... the retailer must.

 

dx

[ScarletPimpernel]

Though they are regularly guilty of misleading,

I don't think RLP are suggesting that their speculative invoices are an official part of restorative justice.

 

What they are claiming is that Primark would not have agreed to restorative justice (which does require the agreement of the victim),

unless the OP agreed to pay RLP as well.

 

This would clearly be wholly inappropriate, and I'm certain that restorative justice doesn't allow one party to impose additional conditions.

 

Of course, it could be that shop security have given RLP incorrect information

(remember the security guards in the Oxford case, whose memories of the time taken proved to be unreliable, even under oath).

 

I think it safe to conclude that RLP are talking bolleaux again.

[francescakay]

Thankyou for your comments just wait and see what happens.

[francescakay]

Inncorrect information?

[francescakay]

Hi Guys need your help or something please. sorry again, thought this was forgotten but clearly i was wrong. Got another letter.

 

saying that they know ive been on here which admits my actions at primark but doesnt understand why their client seeks civil recompense from me.

 

they urge me to seek advice proper advice, may i add to that.

 

Advising me that this is a clients claim is a civils claim for damages and is compensation for its losses.

and its seperate from any proceedings in criminial law.

so like a civil is is compensatory example given an a place injured party in a position it would be in had it not been for your wrongful act.

 

the police officer was a conclusion of a sepearte criminal proceedings only arisiing out of this matter,

as the payment is in no way compensates our client for the disurption to deal with thi inciendent and the aftermath at the place.

 

their clients instructions is in negotion with a settlement og the civil matter which could include a token of payment or a written apology and undertaking from myself (what does that mean?)

 

both parties need to exchange inforamtion in order to promote the outcome to prevent court. however by me not making any contact they are unable to advise their client of any representation that you wish to make.

 

they use RLP for future incidents.

 

which if they are personal cirminstances or factors that i have been advised by the internet their client had ethicla

and moral comapny will take these into considerstation. and the evidence along shows any remorse and shows a result in their client deciding upon the

indefinite suspension of this case that you are not invloved in any more incidents not just with this store

but those retailers that are apart of National civil reecvoery programme.

 

they have not heard from me and their clients account of the incident may be relied upon an account and will be retained for 6 years.

 

they have given me one final chance to get proper advice and address this matter, and/or to make my own representative on the facts of this case.

 

if not hear from me in 14 days with resonsable settlements or with information, instructions will sought on thecommencement of formal proceedings, or the file will be passed to a specialist company which recovers debts and indisputed cliams for damages.

 

questions >

 

1. whats it mean by specialist companies and what willl they do?

 

2. should i contact the rlp and give a one liner?

 

3. why spy on here for and know that i have been writing on here?

 

4. 6 years for an account meaning what?

 

5. do i make a payment or written apology which states a token? - like their gonna accept that!

 

 

thankyou much advice given

[andydd]

Same old, same old. RLP staff seem to spend their whole time browsing this site, it isn't a very professional thing to do, but we are talking about RLP here.

 

They always say 'seek proper legal advice' but many solicitors would simply back up what we are saying here, that there is no legal basis for their claim, full stop. The closest legal precedent is the Thames Water case but that is very far removed from claiming damages from alleged shoplifters.

 

All of the points you listed above are totally irrelevant and only seek to show how desperate RLP are, they really are clutching at straws.

 

I'm sure you and us all know that the claim is separate from any criminal proceedings, we are not stupid. I'd though be asking them why then do they continually make references to claims of restorative justices and imply that the alleged shoplifters should show remorse, etc and making apologies ?.... This has nothing to do with a CIVIL claim !

 

Their talk of holding information for 6 years is utter rubbish and another scare tactic, they have no right to do so and one only has to look at the results of 'blacklist' used within the building industry to see what can happen.

 

So lets try and answer your questions (it would be very helpful if you could post a redacted version of the letter, scan to pdf and post).

 

1. This means a Dect Collection Company, totally irrelevant, they have no more powers than you or I, there is no 'debt'. They will write to you and..thats it.

 

2. Best advise is ignore, but feel free to respond * See below

 

3. Because they are desperate to try and prop up their weak cases, it is unprofessional but that's RLP for you.

 

4. We havn't seen the actual letter but ignore this, they have no powers to hold any information to supply to others.

 

5. DON'T PAY THEM. There is no need to aplogise at all, they are after a civil claim which is nothing to do with apologies.

 

 

Here's a letter if you want to reply.

 

 

Dear Sir.

 

I have received your letter, the contents have been noted.

 

I do not acknowledge any debt to RLP or the Store.

 

I do not believe that your claim for damages has any legal basis and if tested within a court of law would fail, I refer you to the decision in the Oxford court case of May 9th 2012, where HHJ Harris dismissed the Claimant’s claim on the basis that it had not established any loss arising directly from the shoplifting incident. In particular, it was held that the shop had not established any diversion of staff time and that there had been no “significant disruption” to business.

 

I am well aware that your claim is a civil claim and separate from any criminal proceedings, however I am somewhat puzzled why you wish to seek an apology from me or that I show remorse, this has absolutely no relevance to any civil claim.

 

I also refer you to the two published reports by the respected Citizens Advice Bureau criticizing RLP and the tactics you employ.

 

Please explain the basis of any legal claim for damages and the relevance of seeking an apology in a civil claim or as part of the CPR Pre-Action Protocol ?

 

 

 

There ya go

 

Andy

[dx100uk]

scan the letter up

 

we need them please

 

dx

[ScarletPimpernel]

Of course, where an individual seeks advice - whether from a website, CAB or a lawyer - is nothing whatever to do with RLP. RLP have form for trying to stifle any criticism of their misleading and aggressive* tactics, and that is undoubtedly what they are seeking to do in the latest silly letter.

 

*according to the Law Commission.

[2Grumpy]

Hi Guys need your help or something please. sorry again, thought this was forgotten but clearly i was wrong. Got another letter.

 

saying that they know ive been on here which admits my actions at primark but doesnt understand why their client seeks civil recompense from me.

 

they urge me to seek advice proper advice, may i add to that.

 

Advising me that this is a clients claim is a civils claim for damages and is compensation for its losses.

and its seperate from any proceedings in criminial law.

so like a civil is is compensatory example given an a place injured party in a position it would be in had it not been for your wrongful act.

 

the police officer was a conclusion of a sepearte criminal proceedings only arisiing out of this matter,

as the payment is in no way compensates our client for the disurption to deal with thi inciendent and the aftermath at the place.

 

their clients instructions is in negotion with a settlement og the civil matter which could include a token of payment or a written apology and undertaking from myself (what does that mean?)

 

both parties need to exchange inforamtion in order to promote the outcome to prevent court. however by me not making any contact they are unable to advise their client of any representation that you wish to make.

 

they use RLP for future incidents.

 

which if they are personal cirminstances or factors that i have been advised by the internet their client had ethicla

and moral comapny will take these into considerstation. and the evidence along shows any remorse and shows a result in their client deciding upon the

indefinite suspension of this case that you are not invloved in any more incidents not just with this store

but those retailers that are apart of National civil reecvoery programme.

 

they have not heard from me and their clients account of the incident may be relied upon an account and will be retained for 6 years.

 

they have given me one final chance to get proper advice and address this matter, and/or to make my own representative on the facts of this case.

 

if not hear from me in 14 days with resonsable settlements or with information, instructions will sought on thecommencement of formal proceedings, or the file will be passed to a specialist company which recovers debts and indisputed cliams for damages.

 

questions >

 

1. whats it mean by specialist companies and what willl they do?

 

2. should i contact the rlp and give a one liner?

 

3. why spy on here for and know that i have been writing on here?

 

4. 6 years for an account meaning what?

 

5. do i make a payment or written apology which states a token? - like their gonna accept that!

 

 

thankyou much advice given

Save some ink & stick to the one-liner. Then they can't say that they haven't been informed should they try farming out to a DCA. (their option 2 "for cases where there is no dispute")

 

They read this forum so they know the rest.

 

Any reference to 6 years is probably how long they will keep your details if you do pay up, after all, they will take your paying as an admission of guilt.

 

If Primark had any claim then they would have informed the CPS & it would have been included in the court's determination.

 

Unfortunately for RLP, their "client's" losses were zero. Primark knows that. RLP knows that from the Oxford case.

[francescakay]

Hiya Guys, firstly happy new year and hope everyone had a good one. - been a bit hetic with christmas and new year and havent had time to be on here, this is the letter i got last month regrading the matter and someone asked me to post it sorry its a bit late.

[renegadeimp]

Can you convert them to PDF's please