RLP / TK Max - Several Letters

[telfordswan]

Hi there, friend of mine is also enduring several threatening letters from RLP.

Incident arose at TK Max which police attended but took no further.

At that point, it was mentioned that some civil recovery would happen.

Total value being chased is £50 - value of items in question on the day - less than £10

Two letters sent in reply asking for evidence on which RLP will rely and denying any contract with RLP and liability.

Latest reply, RLP have provided a description of their understanding of events at TK Max and carefully word the involvement of the police that they took the civil claim into consideration.

RLP are referring to an admission of guilt at the time and justifying the civil claim. In the latest letter they say their client will be entitled to issue a claim in the county court and the £50 currently claimed will jump due to fees.

Read plenty on this site - how likely is it that this will go to court and what sums / fees are possible worse case.

If my friend signed something - I dont know this - at the time, would this be used in a civil case at court?

Also the letters seen are unpleasant, latest letter mentions tortious actions.

Any advice would be appreciated.

Not sure whether to advise my friend just to pay the £50 or keep going with not paying.

Thanks

[rebel11]

Hi telford

 

Welcome to CAG

 

What RLP have sent your friend is a speculative invoice, it's not a 'fine'. It has no breakdown, even if it did have a breakdown, TK Maxx haven't got any losses to claim as costs are built into their operating costs. Only the retailer can take your friend to court. RLP have been to court and were embarrassed. All they can do is send ever embarrassing letters demanding monies. When you receive a letter just summarize it on this thread.

Try not to worry.

[telfordswan]

Hi thanks for this.

This is the line I have advised up until now.

It was just the last letter I have seen which describes in detail what they understand happened on the day- in significant detail.

The concern is that if it went to court for a civil claim of losses, could any of their so called evidence be used to justify a £50 loss and of course the court fees topped up on top.

Cheers

[rebel11]

Hi telfordswan

 

They would have to provide a breakdown of their losses, which is difficult as the goods were returned and everything else is factored into their operating costs. It's best to pay for goods or just do without.

 

Hi thanks for this.

This is the line I have advised up until now.

It was just the last letter I have seen which describes in detail what they understand happened on the day- in significant detail.

The concern is that if it went to court for a civil claim of losses, could any of their so called evidence be used to justify a £50 loss and of course the court fees topped up on top.

Cheers

[2Grumpy]

Send the one-line denial of liability and refrain from any further letter ping-pong - all it does is encourage them

[renegadeimp]

Agree with all the above. jackie LOVES to go on and on and on and try in vain to convince you that she has some sense of authority, when in reality she has absolutely NONE.

 

As advised, send the one line letter, sit back, wait for the multiple laughable letters she will send, bin them and move on with your life.

[telfordswan]

Appreciate all the replies but I am still concerned at giving wrong advice if RLP actually pass this on to a recovery agent who then takes my friend to court.

Do we know how often/successful they are when going to court and do they use any so called evidence from the day?

Cheers

[silverfox1961]

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

RLP may pass this on to a pet DCA BUT, they will be acting on behalf of RLP so cannot take court action in their own right. Only if they bought this amount (Can't call it a debt cos it ain't one) and they know that as it is an unenforceable claim, they wouldn't bother.

 

RLP cannot do court!

 

TKMAXX do not do court!

 

Jackie likes to bamboozle people with legalese but in reality, she has as much power as I have. None!

[renegadeimp]

NOTHING will happen. Read these forums. She can't do ANYTHING without the say so of the retailer and they wont allow her to go to court after what happened in 2012.

[rebel11]

Hi telfordswan

 

Don't laugh, but in the past RLP's letters have mentioned the Magna Carta signed in the year 1215, they even got facts wrong, that should tell you everything you need to know. We don't condone theft, but we also believe companies should act within a legal framework.

[telfordswan]

An Update - latest is that a letter arrived from a company called Scotcall chasing what they refer to as an outstanding payment of £50. My friend did write a letter back saying that nothing is owing as no contract exists with them or RLP and that all liability is denied and the sequence of events RLP refer to is also not accepted. Scotcall replied saying RLP will reply - which they have done. Once again they go through what they believe to have happened on the day, they say the evidence they will rely on is a witness on the day and that this is a civil case and the matter will be put through the courts i.e their client will not drop it. Advice anyone? Thanks in advance. Have they taken people to small claims or civil courts?

[renegadeimp]

If scotcall are involved then thats it. They are the lowest of the low and only chase lemon debts or debts that dont exist.

 

Keep ignoring them and stop responding to them. Every time you respond to them they mark you as gullible.

 

How many times do we need to say the same thing? The only reason they are still chasing you is because you continually respond to them.

[telfordswan]

Thanks for the response, much appreciated. Do we know if they do take civil action, I said before, I don't want to be responsible for my friend being taken to court, on my advice to leave it. Cheers

[renegadeimp]

Read post #8

[Sidewinder]

Snotcall will write a limited number of letters. RLP will then write another which says that they will recommend to their client that they issue proceedings. You will hear nothing after that. This is the end of the paper trail and TK Maxx will do nothing more as it would cost them a huge amount more than they could hope to recover IF they were to win, and that in itself would be nigh on impossible.

[old bill]

If RLP seriously think an alleged "admission of guilt" is grounds for issuing a civil claim, they really have lost the plot. The police took no action and this indicates to me there was no evidence to substantiate allegations being made by TK Maxx retail security. Also, you cannot make a claim against another for losses arising out of the ineptitude and/or incompetence and/or misconduct of yourself, your employees, servants or agents.

 

What needs to happen is for someone to serve a Part 8 injunction on RLP/Cireco, their retailer clients and pet DCA. From conversations I have had with legal professionals who have obtained such injunctions, DCAs, often, cannot settle fast enough once the injunction is served on them. Not surprising as if the regulator gets wind of it, the DCA's licence is at risk.

 

Telfordswan's friend would be best approaching the police solicitor's department and asking for details of the incident and the officer's reasons for taking no action.