Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No, I think UK will get same deal as EU.  Main reasons for this are two sectors,  Defence and Financial Services.  US have huge levels of money invested in the UK, so they have a self interest in offering a trade deal as good as the EU.
    • @labrat I'll bet it isn't the subframe itself that's broken. It'll be the subframe mounting bolt(s) that have sheared off inside it. Because the bolt is seized inside the subframe, it effectively renders the subframe scrap. I suspect the garage are simply talking in terms the average customer is more likely to understand than going into the detail of it. The Golf, Jetta and Beetle, which are all mechanically identical, are notorious for it.    A smaller independent garage may have tried to get the bolts out, but you very quickly reach the point where time/effort/cost is simply not worth it and replacement of the whole subframe is the better choice.   Of course the OP could approach a salvage yard, either local or online, and ask about the cost of a good used item, which would be substantially less expensive than what I assume is the price VW are charging for a replacement.
    • Applied for and awarded by BY in Sept 2020 still not received it yet Comments appreciated
    • Hi Slick   I am not as experienced as you is there any thing in sar that i can identify. It does not state £2.5k debt in sar. It mentions new add ons.
    • So long story short.   I had a number of re-occurring loans with Unclebuck, I made a complaint in regards to my latest one back in 2019, got to an agreement to remove default markings and charges etc and just pay the principal. Didn't pay the outstanding amount due to personal reasons, being put on Furlough was one of them.   Saw that Unclebuck went into administration, made a redress application a couple of weeks ago, got awarded £807 for previous loans (not the latest one). So I contacted the administration to confirm they would pay the redress amount towards my outstanding balance, but they said they cannot do so?   How is that fair? I get they they can't pay me any cash, but surely they should be able to write off the current outstanding amount, it has to work both ways right? This was the latest response I got, so far no reply from their solicitor yet.   "Whilst I note your comments concerning your desire to set off Redress due in respect of unaffordable loans against your current loan that was not eligible for Redress, unfortunately the Administration precludes the position of set off until the Administrator makes a declaration under Rule 14.29 of the Insolvency Rules 2016. This declaration has not been made by the Administrators and will not be made as there is no distribution or intended dividend to be made to creditors in this particular Administration. Whilst I sympathise with your position, you will appreciate that the Administrators are governed by statute and cannot contract out of it.   I promise to speak to our solicitors to see if there is any room for manoeuvre on this matter and will come back to you afterwards, however I feel that it is unlikely. As you will appreciate making an exception for you may open the Administrators to claims from other customers in a similar position to yourself and indeed from other customers that do not have the benefit of another loan to set their Redress off against."   And to further add to it, I got an email today saying they transferred the loan to a collection field agency "Conexus Recovery and Field Services Ltd "  
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2502 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

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

14438xs.jpg

 

Similar to that

 

 

Disclaimer: Image taken from another forum, but redacted.

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
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

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 :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

scan the letter up

 

we need them please

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you convert them to PDF's please

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...