Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks very much BankFodder, your help is invaluable and I will read through it more carefully this evening.  At this time I am not aware of any information I have left out. And thanks to jk2054, I realised after sending it about the third party rights, you are absolutely correct and I will proceed as standard BOC claim. I'll come back with any questions once I've had a thorough re-read and so I hope to get the letter emailed and posted early this week so I can start the 14 day clock. Thanks again, M
    • The original LOC is wrong. You are nothing to do with third party rights.   you placed the order on EVRi's website so there is no third party rights in it, its a standard BOC claim
    • nike pre provide the labels arguably here the easiest target is nike because they will give in very easily.  
    • @BankFodder have you seen the first paragraph of this defence on the name. Am I missing something?
    • TBH: it does matter whats asked of you. you goal here is not one of denial nor say incorrect/missing paperwork, which is the usual reason to refuse mediation when they ring 9/10. you goal here is to achieve a consent order. i would pers outline this ASAP to the mediator so you dont waste eveyones time. have a figure in your head £PCM that you are agreeable too, halve it, then offer that, but be prepare to jink upwards slightly toward you org £PCM figure. do nOT be bullied stick to your guns. if it doesnt look like your £PCM is going to be accepted, then close mediation and await it to be allocated to a judge, as he wont be too please lowell refused the consent order over £5/10PCM more. have you done a budget sheet? dx   dx  
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Refund fraud mistaken return tk maxx, what happens after police interview?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3488 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Refund fraud mistaken return tk maxx,

 

bought lots of items in august, returned new jacket/jeans from my wardrobe which tk maxx claim is not theirs. Seen cctv and i have returned an item with a tag from another. I have been under a period of stress with baby/uncertain job/family member advanced cancer. It was an innocent mistake as i thought the tags belonged to those items. in actual fact, there is no distinction on the label between a jacket and another jacket. and this is the case i put forward at 'police chat' with solicitor, it was strange debating wether TK M sold 'Superdry' stuff. I left without caution.

 

What happens after police interview? Office mentioned he will call tk maxx and have a chat. Any ideas??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Timeline is quite short

 

End of August bought items/returned sept

Phone call Police 2 weeks ago (end October), voluntary interview 2 wks later (Sunday just gone).

 

 

I got a phone call 2 weeks ago from Police asking me to visit station, i turned up voluntarily on Sunday and had a 'chat'. Thanks to the forums, i ensured that i got advice and used a duty solicitor. The allegation is 'fraud'. I was versed by the solicitor before the interview and i left without caution. Officer advised he would contact TK Maxx, i think Audrey or Jackie (he was talking at this point to the duty solicitor).

 

 

I did not know of the exact allegation until just before the interview. Incident of returning items in August, shown on CCTV footage buying an item and returning another item 10 days later. Thing is, i bought lots of clothes around that time and many did not have tags. I thought i was returning the correct items because the receipt and tags say 'mens jacket' and 'mens jeans'. Why can they not advise me of this at the till point that it is the wrong item...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to CAG. If your details were taken by the security staff then it is fairly likely you will receive a letter from RLP in the near future.

 

As for what the police may do is anyone's guess. My gut reaction is that this will be treated by the police as a genuine mistake.

 

It is a case of wait and see what happens

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi axelcruze

 

You haven't been arrested or charged with anything as it stands. So it sounds like you have nothing to worry about. If as you say it's a genuine error and you think that the store should have brought it to your attention at the time, then write a Letter of Complaint to the CEO of TK Maxx. You might get letters from RLP, just file. In a couple of weeks ring the police to find out what's going on, just to confirm that no action will take place in this matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the police / CPS to do anything, they would have to prove intent.

 

I think that more would need to be involved to prove fraud

 

You didn't remove another store's labels from the items that you were returning and replace them with TKMaxx labels.

 

I understand that TKMaxx receipts do not have a description of the goods.

 

 

 

Beware of the police offering a caution - it might be an opportunity for them to increase their solved crime statistics, however if you don't accept one they will either let the matter drop or prosecute.

 

Take advice before making your mind up if they do go down that road

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Was it just one allegation ?

 

 

Always used to be the case when I worked doing this for them, that there was to be no less than TWO allegations of fraud, different purchases and different returns of items, to prove a pattern, and that is wasn't a one off mistake.

 

 

Also, the price ticket had to be attached to the 'wrong' garment, again, so there was no chance of a mistake, as the customer would of had to remove it from the purchased item, and attach it to the 'wrong' item. Again, proving dishonest intent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was it just one allegation ?

 

 

Always used to be the case when I worked doing this for them, that there was to be no less than TWO allegations of fraud, different purchases and different returns of items, to prove a pattern, and that is wasn't a one off mistake.

 

 

Also, the price ticket had to be attached to the 'wrong' garment, again, so there was no chance of a mistake, as the customer would of had to remove it from the purchased item, and attach it to the 'wrong' item. Again, proving dishonest intent.

 

It is difficult to disagree with such a reasoned post but I will try :|

 

If I bought various items, took them home then removed all the tags then reattached a wrong tag to the wrong item without intent then surely that would be classed as a genuine mistake, wouldn't it?

 

I can see the scenario where two different jackets were bought and the receipt didn't make it clear which was which.

 

I know that is a bit vague but I just wanted to throw it out there.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is difficult to disagree with such a reasoned post but I will try :|

 

If I bought various items, took them home then removed all the tags then reattached a wrong tag to the wrong item without intent then surely that would be classed as a genuine mistake, wouldn't it?

 

I can see the scenario where two different jackets were bought and the receipt didn't make it clear which was which.

 

I know that is a bit vague but I just wanted to throw it out there.

 

 

If the 'genuine mistake' was done once, then no action would be taken. Its only when someone does it more than once, that eyebrows are raised and case files are started.

 

 

If someone was to swap over a number of price tickets at home, carelessly putting the wrong one on, then the whole thing of 'more than one occasion' would then come into play.

 

 

There are things which give away the game, like are the garments returned actually sold by the store ? were they clearance or lower priced stock (lots of people we used to catch purchased a high price item, and a lower priced one, then returned the lower priced one with the higher priced ticket on it).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One of the things to consider, is that if the police go back to the store, the Loss prevention team will usually be able to produce more examples of fraudulently returned items from the same customer. Even if they don't have the garment any more, the cctv will show one colour item being purchased, and an other returned. Food for thought when presented with this in court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...