Problems with Primark

[ericsbrother]

So, they are claiming that breaching the DPA is now a necessity to stop you from shoplifting in the future? Dont forget, they are nothing but a small company making money out of rather misleading and certainly unprovable claims regarding their effieiency at crime prevention. Perhaps they ought to fund a university researcher to look at the subject more dispassionately

[fletch70]

I can't read the letters so I have no idea what they have said but sounds like a nightmare to me. Bloody RLP

[renegadeimp]

When will Jackie realise that she has NOTHING to do with the legal system and certainly has no authority to breach the DPA in order to stop a person from shoplifting.

[2Grumpy]

When will Jackie realise that she has NOTHING to do with the legal system and certainly has no authority to breach the DPA in order to stop a person from shoplifting.

Possibly after she has received a restraining order or a claim for damages following the breach ... ?

[renegadeimp]

That wont stop her. Read the judgement from the oxford case in 2012. Even though the judge was clear, she still tries to say he was wrong and the judgement was flawed. Even though she had no basis for a claim, and the basis she used was very shaky indeed. http://www.lossprevention.co.uk/Court%20Cases.aspx

 

have a read of that. its laughable.

[Mr.P]

Even though she had no basis for a claim, and the basis she used was very shaky indeed.

 

Reference to the Aerospace V Thames Water case. Found this page of interest: http://addleshawgoddard.net/view.asp?content_id=2785&parent_id=2781 (the full transcript can be found: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2007/3.html)

 

 

The Court of Appeal formulated a three point test:

• In order to succeed with its claim, a claimant must adduce all the evidence that it could reasonably adduce to show the extent of the diversion of staff;
  
• Further, the claimant must establish that the diversion of staff caused significant disruption to its business;
  
• If the first two elements can be established, it is reasonable for the court to infer that, had the staff not been diverted from their usual activities, they would have directly or indirectly generated revenue for the claimant in an amount at least equal to the cost of employing them during that time.
  

Previous cases had left doubt about how to make the link between staff costs and lost profit. The Court of Appeal's formulation confirms the position in R + V Versicherung and clarifies what is to be proved for a claimant to make a successful claim for wasted staff costs.

 

Security staff are employed specifically for duties relating to security (the clue is in the job title),

consequently, they do not contribute to profit of the business.

The cost of employing security staff is an operating cost deducted from the profit margins.

To claim that security staff had been diverted from their normal duties is disingenuous at best.

 

Para. 86 of the above transcript is the most salient section

- Perhaps Jackie would like to bring a copy along with her and demonstrate in what capacity security staff contribute to the profit of a retail business.

She may want to take qualified legal advice first.

[francescakay]

Basically this was the third letter.

 

We write with reference to the above matter and further to previous correspondence.

 

We have recently been aware of your postings on the Consumer Action Forum Group, in which you admit your actions at our clients premises, but do not understand why our client seeks civil recompense from you.

 

As you will recall, we have urged you from the outset to seek legal advice on this matter. seek legal and proper advice or from someone who qualified.

 

Thier clients claim is a civil claim for damages for compensation for its losses. it is entirely seperate from any proceedings in criminal law, criminal law is to convict where a civil one is to place the injured party in the position it would be in had it been for your wrongful act.

 

the monetary resolution that you paid to the police officer in attendance was in conclusion of seperate criminal proceedings only to arising out of this matter.

 

if you contacted us to advise us of the above criminal outcome, we would of negotiated with our clients instructions to an amicable civil matter which could of included a token of payment and/or a written apology.

 

Despite what you have been advised our client is commited to the negation of an amicable settlement, without information from you, we are unable to to advise our client of any representation that you wish to make, to prevent court proceedings being necessary.

 

From not hearing from you, our clients account of the incident may be relied upon accurate account and will be retrained for 6 years.

If we do not hear from you within the next 14 days with information regrading this matter we will be sought on commencement of formal proceedings, or the file will be passed to a specialist company which recovers DEBTS and UNDISPUTED claims for damages.

[francescakay]

Today i got another letter from them.

 

After failing to respond to our correspondence, we can only reasonably conclude that you have no intention of settling our client's claim against you.

 

In absence of settlement, or a Defence, we advise that the full value of the claim remains outstanding.

 

We now have to advise you that the file is ready to be transferred to our recovery agent, which specialises in seeking payment undisputed claims for damages, and for debt.

 

We therefore put you on notice of our intention to transfer the matter without further notification to you, if we do not hear from you within the next 21 days.

 

In order to prevent the matter transferred, contact our collections department to:

 

SETTLE THE CLAIM

 

ARRANGE AN INSTALLMENT PLAN

 

ADVISE OF ANY POTENTIAL DISPUTE

 

ADVISE OF ANY MITIGATING FACTORS YOU WISH TO BE CONSIDERED

 

Failing to contact us will result in the transfer of the matter without any further reference to you/

[dx100uk]

oh so they are going to send a doorstepper?

 

I like the way she continually uses the 'big important words like:

 

claim

defence

[francescakay]

i dont know, are they?

[fletch70]

Does she say what she wants to hear from you?

 

I can think of a few words that could be said or you could send the doorstep letter..then she would be screwed as she had heard from you . I know I am playing games so you could add something like

 

Further to letter dated XXXXXX where you state that if you didn't hear from me you would transfer the account .

As I have contacted you I assume that such an honest and reputable company as yourselves will be true to your word and keep the matter in house

[francescakay]

Does she say what she wants to hear from you?

 

I can think of a few words that could be said or you could send the doorstep letter..then she would be screwed as she had heard from you . I know I am playing games so you could add something like

 

Further to letter dated XXXXXX where you state that if you didn't hear from me you would transfer the account .

As I have contacted you I assume that such an honest and reputable company as yourselves will be true to your word and keep the matter in house

 

No. Just say if we do not hear from you within the next 21 days. Will.that work?

[francescakay]

Techinally if she says she hasnt heard from me she kind of have. By reading these

[renegadeimp]

Ignore her silly prattle. She has absolutely NO right to send those letters with that content and has no right whatsoever to tell you where you can get legal advice.

[renegadeimp]

IMHO you need to stop playing letter tennis. All that needs to be done is to send 1 letter to her denying liability. Then bin or return to sender any other junkmail she sends you.

 

Im waiting for the day she sends these letters to someone, and that person takes formal legal action against her and her company. It's going to happen sooner or later. Its just a matter of time.

[francescakay]

Ignore her silly prattle. She has absolutely NO right to send those letters with that content and has no right whatsoever to tell you where you can get legal advice.

 

 

Which letter? The one i got today? I knoe she cant. So will there be doorsteppers at my door seeing its being transferred to another recovery place?.

[francescakay]

IMHO you need to stop playing letter tennis. All that needs to be done is to send 1 letter to her denying liability. Then bin or return to sender any other junkmail she sends you.

 

Im waiting for the day she sends these letters to someone, and that person takes formal legal action against her and her company. It's going to happen sooner or later. Its just a matter of time.

 

 

What is IMHO? so basically all i need to write is "deny all libility to you" and that be it?

[Mr.P]

We now have to advise you that the file is ready to be transferred to our recovery agent, which specialises in seeking payment undisputed claims for damages, and for debt.

 

Ergo, send a simple one line letter:

 

I deny any liability towards yourself or any other person in relation to this matter. No debt exists, either imaginary or genuine.

 

If/when a letter from a DCA appears, ignore, or respond in the same manner.

[dx100uk]

after all this time

 

I would not be sending her anything.

 

they can keep sending you poke-in-the-dark letters

trying to make you respond.

 

but you've already does that when the police officer

told you to put that money in the charity book/box.

 

lookingback on the whole thing

 

i'm actually quite concerned about that action.

 

unless you pay £xx to their named charity, i'm going to give you a FPN?

 

dx

[fletch70]

I was playing silly beggars

To be honest I would wait until you hear from who ever they pass it to and tell them to go away.

[fletch70]

Just read Dx's comment about the charity donation and I was and am still very concerned about that. It sounds to me like blackmail which I know is a very ugly word but thats what it sounds like. They are also banking on you being to scared to make a complaint

[2Grumpy]

I would send the one liner denying liability to them or their clients. Then they can't legitimately pass this on to a DCA (which is what they are really saying that they will do as their next step)

[francescakay]

they expect me to respond then? yeah i paid that £80 fine that day. what is a FPN?

[renegadeimp]

A fine is when the police give you a caution and fine you.

[francescakay]

so ill send that one liner on monday and then they cant say they havent heard from me, wont they just ignore the one liner and then carry on and then the DCA are debt collectors wouldnt they come to my door and demand it