DWF and Sainsburys - slightly different problem to everyone else

[jnix]

Hi there,

 

I have a slightly different issue with DWF than the other posts that I have read this morning:

 

I reused the same nectar voucher at Sainburys several times and didn't put it into the self serve pay machine.

 

I was subsequently taken to the back of the store with staff and security and had to wait for 2 hours for the police to arrive where they let me go.

 

I received 2 letters from DWF asking to pay £150

which I assumed was for security costs having already read these forums after the incident.

 

Looking back to the first letter it doesn't sate what the £150 is for as the value of goods stolen,

damaged etc and the security costs section on the breakdown all read £0.

 

I just wanted to move on from this and put it behind me so I paid the £150 so that I wouldn't have to deal with these people any more.

 

 

However I have since received another letter from DWF,

quoting a different reference number, s

aying that I owe them £1000.

 

This £1000 is supposedly the value of cash stolen according to their letter.

 

Obviously I cannot pay this,

I only paid the £150 as I just wanted the issue to go away.

 

I have the first letter from them with clearly states that the value of cash stolen is £0,

but due to the excessive amount they are now asking for I am worried.

 

Any advice you could offer would be greatly appreciated.

[reallymadwoman]

I am fairly sure someone will be along shortly who will tell you either to ignore or to write a straightforward denial letter and then ignore.

 

I have to ask, does £1000 bear any relationship at all to the amount you might have saved with your voucher?

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

I expect the forum guys will be along later with advice for you. I certainly wouldn't be paying any more to these people. They seem to be doing what other firms in this area do, in getting money out of you and then demanding more. Not much of this money will go to Saiinsbury's, as I understand it.

 

If the police aren't involved, I don't think you have a problem despite what DWF might claim. [but don't try anything like this in future.] The guys may suggest that you send the standard one line letter denying liability, but I'll let them tell you.

 

Don't worry.

[jnix]

The voucher was for £2.50

 

which I reused instead of putting it into the machine.

 

I don't know how much I saved in total but it would be nowhere near £1000.

 

I also find it strange that if they thought I did owe £1000 in stolen cash

 

then why didn't then put that on the initial letter?

 

It feel like since I have paid they are just trying to get as much as they can out of me.

[honeybee13]

The voucher was for £2.50 which I reused instead of putting it into the machine. I don't know how much I saved in total but it would be nowhere near £1000. I also find it strange that if they thought I did owe £1000 in stolen cash then why didn't then put that on the initial letter? It feel like since I have paid they are just trying to get as much as they can out of me.

 

Sadly, it does sound that way, yes. The guys should be along later, we'll sort you out.

 

HB

[renegadeimp]

Regarding the 150 you paid? Get your bank to do a chargeback. You paid a speculative invoice that has no legal standing at all.

[Sidewinder]

Seems as though having paid up once they are looking at you as a cash cow.

 

Should not have paid them a penny

[jnix]

I paid the £150 because I did fraudulently obtain discount from Sainsburys.

 

I admitted that at the time and

 

I felt that by paying I would be able to draw a line under this and move on.

 

I had read up about DWF and Sainsburys on here before I paid

 

but like I have said I just wanted to sort it out and put it behind me.

 

In hindsight I would have not paid if I knew they were going to come back saying I owe them more money.

 

It's the amount of money they are asking for that worries me.

 

The first letter I have from them clearly refers to the incident on the day it happened and states that the value of cash stolen is £0,

 

the most recent letter I have received refers to the same incident by date and now states that the value of goods stolen is £1000.

 

It seems as if they have just plucked that figure from nowhere.

 

The fact that I have the first letter saying the value of cash stolen is £0 gives me confidence but I am still unsure as to where

 

I would stand legally if they did try to pursue me for the £1000 they now think I owe.

 

Thanks for your help so far.

[dx100uk]

you are being taken for a ride because you fell for the speculative invoice that

you THOUGHT you rightly 'owed' ... 'someone'... £150 for the time the process took to process you.

 

you don't OWE anyone ANYTHING

 

the ONLY people that can FINE YOU are the COURTS or the POLICE>

 

 

I strongly suggest you go get you money back by CHARGEBACK on your card.

 

all you have done if FUND the harassment of other people like yourself.

 

sainsburys DO NOT SEE ANY OF THE MONEY YOU PAID DWF.

 

dx

[jnix]

Just an update as to where I am with this.

 

I have received 2 letters since Christmas, the first being a reminder that I haven't paid the £1000 and that I needed to pay within 7 days. And another letter yesterday saying that I have 7 days to pay or DWF will "consider commencing court proceedings to recover the sum outstanding"

 

Do you think I should keep ignoring these letters or should I send them a letter denying responsibility?

 

Thanks for your advice.

[Sidewinder]

Your call - personally (since this is one step removed from a shoplifting case where goods are recovered intact), I would send a letter stating clearly that the matter was concluded in accordance with their initial demand and that you you vigorously deny any further indebtedness to either DWF or their client.

[jnix]

Thanks for your reply. I will try and send them a letter saying that today.

 

Do you think that if this continues they will try and take me to court? I obviously have no intention of paying they money they now claim I owe, I just want to try and get an idea of what I will have to deal with.

 

Thanks

[renegadeimp]

They wont take you to court. They cant. It would be laughed out. Notice how they say "consider". They cant consider anythign as it isnt up to them. What has happened is you paid them the money originally because you didnt know any better, they have you marked as gullible, so they are trying to get more from you. It's borderline criminal, btu since it never gets reported and people pay them, nothing ever happens to them.

[jnix]

Yeah this is what I have been telling myself, it's just that as it's now such a vast amount of money I am slightly worried. There is no way I could afford to pay that even if I wanted to.

 

With regards to the letter should I address that to the person who has been sending these letters to me? Or just to DWF as a whole?

[renegadeimp]

Its a vast amount of money that has no basis in reality. Ignore it or follow the info posted by sidewinder. Address it to DWF or "whom it may concern".

[Sidewinder]

Just think about it. They could only sue for actual loss (ignoring for a moment that you have already paid what they stated you 'owed' as a result of your actions, so settled in that respect), so a £2.50 voucher? £1000?

 

I make that 400 uses of the voucher and I seriously doubt that you could have used it anywhere near that many times.

 

As above - it would fail miserably if it went near a court, and that is why you should not worry, it won't go that far!

[jnix]

Thanks for all of your advice so far. I will keep you updated as to how this progresses.

[Grotesque]

Yeah. Problem is, you pay em £150 and they take that as some kind of legal admission of wrongdoing.

[renegadeimp]

Not really. As they have no authority to decide on admission of guilt or anything similar. ALl that happens is that DWF mark the person as gullible, they demand more money and lie to try and get the money from them. It's no different to any phone call conman or similar.

[Grotesque]

Yet again you misunderstand, imp. Although iit's a good way of boosting ones post count I guess!

 

I didn't say that it was an admission, merely that it would allow them to convince themselves that it was- so justifying themselves!

[renegadeimp]

less of the personal attacks please. I know what you meant but i was answering you in a general term. remember we have a Lot of people that view this site that dont register and are looking for info. it is best to be factual and straight to the point when giving advice. Especially in regards to DWF/RLP and other companies like them.

[Grotesque]

It was not a 'personal attack' and defies definition of one.

The former post was as clear as it could be.

[citizenB]

 

Enough, the both of you.