Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If anybody has any advice here, it would be greatly appreciated, I already suffer with pre-existing disabilities & have struggled with this so far. 
    • so return of goods order etc etc read upload  scan pages to jpg, redact in mspaint. the convert to and merge to one mass PDF  read upload and use the online listed sites for all 3 stages. do you want to keep the car? i will guess this was a manual paper claimform direct from the co.court or was it org sent from salford bulk processing and has just got reaq ssigned?      
    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue –  29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached  2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00. The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month. 3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement, Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us. Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement 9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate 4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:- a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement  number xxxxxx. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     The total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by First class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges 5.  At the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage. Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024  What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg  
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Asda security staff bullying customers


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3264 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

For what it is worth were you to attempt such an arrest, and especially if the victim was innocent, it could well be you finishing your shift early, and going home via a night in the cells.

 

You are NOT allowed to arrest on suspicion. a decent Lawyer would demand the CCTV, and if for example you are on it, not looking at the OP, only reacting to the bell going off, you would be stuffed.

 

Questions would be asked like, why did you not respond the moment you "saw" something get put in the bag, why you werent following the OP until the bell went off and so on.

 

And even if you could successfuly argue an honest mistake, should you have picked on an innocent party who then resisted your attempt at arrest and put you in hospital, you would have no comeback, legal or civil. We have the right to resist wrongful citizens arrest, because if no crime has been comitted, it is not an arrest but assault.

 

Said half decent lawyer upon viewing the CCTV as above, would also probably want charges such as making false allegations brought in.

 

 

A Prosecution requires 5 points.

 

1) Selection of the product

2) Act of concealment

3) 100% Surveillance

4) No attempt to pay

5) Passing past the last point of payment

 

For that reason the guards would have to wait for them to leave the store and not act as soon as they see them.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes you right, I forgot about CCTV. This would show the security guard acting inappropriately and the op quite reasonably walking away. This would blow tony3x arguments out of the water.

 

 

 

 

For what it is worth were you to attempt such an arrest, and especially if the victim was innocent, it could well be you finishing your shift early, and going home via a night in the cells.

 

You are NOT allowed to arrest on suspicion. a decent Lawyer would demand the CCTV, and if for example you are on it, not looking at the OP, only reacting to the bell going off, you would be stuffed.

 

Questions would be asked like, why did you not respond the moment you "saw" something get put in the bag, why you werent following the OP until the bell went off and so on.

 

And even if you could successfuly argue an honest mistake, should you have picked on an innocent party who then resisted your attempt at arrest and put you in hospital, you would have no comeback, legal or civil. We have the right to resist wrongful citizens arrest, because if no crime has been comitted, it is not an arrest but assault.

 

Said half decent lawyer upon viewing the CCTV as above, would also probably want charges such as making false allegations brought in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless the 5 points are ticked, there is no grounds for detention. Although a Guard can *ask* assertively for a suspect to return to the store. They should still remember that until convicted the person is innocent and still deserves to be treated with respect.

 

And peeps

 

Lets keep this discussing the incident at hand.

Please refrain from personal attacks..

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't believe that most of you live in the real world but hey ho nice to see that there are plenty of gullible people about.

 

Life is not perfect, would be boring if it was. All because the OP was offended by someone shouting, how very sad!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What we have to remember is that op has done nothing wrong. She had every right to walk away when faced with a very rude and unprofessional security guard, regardless of what other people think about how she should have reacted.

 

I am aware of the problem with retail theft and how this can push prices up. However Security Staff have no more authority than a person in the street and it is in their own interest to act lawfully and professionally. Whilst people give rogue security guards more authority then they have and just give in to their demands like sheep, the industry will not raise its game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CAG is here to help people when things go wrong. Providing people with advice is not gullible or an indication that posters dont live in the real world just because they don't agree with you.

 

Most posters base their advice on their experience and knowledge and they should be respected for that. Just look at all the good CAG has done and all the sucessful outcomes of the advice given.

 

I really don't believe that most of you live in the real world but hey ho nice to see that there are plenty of gullible people about.

 

Life is not perfect, would be boring if it was. All because the OP was offended by someone shouting, how very sad!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't believe that most of you live in the real world but hey ho nice to see that there are plenty of gullible people about.

 

Life is not perfect, would be boring if it was. All because the OP was offended by someone shouting, how very sad!

 

The real world is law. The OP is enforcing their rights under law. Certainly not gullible. Certainly not sad as you proclaim.

 

It is your own personal choice whether you accept being verbally or physically assaulted by a security guard, as it is the OPs choice not to. From your posts it seems that you would be content with someone verbally assaulting / shouting at you and you would also be happy to illegally detain someone for 'something'.

 

It is a matter of personal choice whether you accept such actions. Though for you to make a personal attack against someone based upon their choice to use law to enforce their rights against the security / store is wrong on so many levels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 - it might

2 - who said you were to be searched

3 - Probably not and should be dealt with via a complaint as you are doing, although I would have done it at the time to stop any ambiguity

4 - Probably not , see above

5 - No, but you weren't being arrested

6 - stop being over sensitive

7 - see above

 

I hope that you don't know anyone that owns a shop that is targeted by thieves as I am sure they may not entirely agree with you.

 

The simple fact of the matter is that you could easily have gone back, showed your receipt (made a complaint about the guard if you so felt) and been on your way (possibly with a gift card as a way of compensation). But no, you decided that you were above that and started an unnecessary chain of letters/phone calls.

 

For what its worth if I were a security guard (thankfully I am not) and someone did not stop when the alarm went off I would follow them outside of the store and ask them to accompany me back. If they refused I would have no qualms about detaining them and calling the police because "I was sure that I see them put something in their bag".

 

By not acknowledging the alarm you places your self under suspicion.

 

simply by ignoring an alarm does not by itself cause suspicion and thankfully security staff cannot stop or abuse you simply because they may or may not have a suspicion, can you not see the contradiction in your stance,which seems to be, if you were a guard you would attempt to hold someone to account for as you see it breaking the law, and to facilitate this you would if i understand correctly break the law yourself which would at least make you as bad as any law breaker if not worse as you as a security guard should know better, thankfully laws are in place to protect us from abusive security guards and apparently YOU

Link to post
Share on other sites

To go back to your original complaint, have you taken it over the head of the store manager, perhaps to head office and inviting them to look at CCTV so they can see how the security guard acted?

 

 

 

simply by ignoring an alarm does not by itself cause suspicion and thankfully security staff cannot stop or abuse you simply because they may or may not have a suspicion, can you not see the contradiction in your stance,which seems to be, if you were a guard you would attempt to hold someone to account for as you see it breaking the law, and to facilitate this you would if i understand correctly break the law yourself which would at least make you as bad as any law breaker if not worse as you as a security guard should know better, thankfully laws are in place to protect us from abusive security guards and apparently YOU
Link to post
Share on other sites

To go back to your original complaint, have you taken it over the head of the store manager, perhaps to head office and inviting them to look at CCTV so they can see how the security guard acted?

I have complained to the chief execs office and recieved the usual bovine manure reply you know the usual sincere apology while attempting to justify the unjustifiable, what i will say is if the same thing happened tomorrow in the same way then i would respond in exactly the same way again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have complained to the chief execs office and recieved the usual bovine manure reply you know the usual sincere apology while attempting to justify the unjustifiable, what i will say is if the same thing happened tomorrow in the same way then i would respond in exactly the same way again.

 

Hence my point, deal with it at the time, in person and get a better outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CAG is here to help people when things go wrong. Providing people with advice is not gullible or an indication that posters dont live in the real world just because they don't agree with you.

 

Most posters base their advice on their experience and knowledge and they should be respected for that. Just look at all the good CAG has done and all the sucessful outcomes of the advice given.

 

CAG is a valuable resource but that is not to say that everything written about rights. laws etc is always the right way to deal with something. If, as in my first post, the OP had not taken offence at being shouted at the whole episode would have been dealt with straight away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The real world is law. The OP is enforcing their rights under law. Certainly not gullible. Certainly not sad as you proclaim.

 

It is your own personal choice whether you accept being verbally or physically assaulted by a security guard, as it is the OPs choice not to. From your posts it seems that you would be content with someone verbally assaulting / shouting at you and you would also be happy to illegally detain someone for 'something'.

 

It is a matter of personal choice whether you accept such actions. Though for you to make a personal attack against someone based upon their choice to use law to enforce their rights against the security / store is wrong on so many levels.

 

Its not that I accept being verbally abused, it just doesn't bother me as its only words. If someone were to physically assault me I would deal with it in what ever way I felt was necessary whether it were to walk away or fight back.

 

One thing that comes out of all this is that the rights of the person are deemed more important than the right of the business not to try to prevent theft. I sincerely hope that any of you that have businesses that are retail based do not have to contend with theft of goods which could ultimately effect profits, staffing levels etc. I am not saying that the person does not have rights but a little common sense and this would have been sorted at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hence my point, deal with it at the time, in person and get a better outcome.

 

evidently you need to re-read my post, one of my complaints was that the store managers statements was that "my security staff have the right to stop you inside or outside of the store" i also put in my letter about the managers total lack of knowledge on the law relating to limitations on the lawful actions of security staff to be so astounding as to be beyond belief, how can you complain to a person who is totally ignorant of the law, it would be like expecting you to accept the obvious, do you truly think i would have got a better outcome in the face of such ignorance

Edited by lonestardavid
Link to post
Share on other sites

The law trumps what big businesses think they can and cannot do. It is actually common sense to take heed of the law and good customer relations.

 

Your just going round in circles and it isn't helpful. Your free to act as you like, if your happy to be shouted at so be it, you can't impose your own rules on other people. The op acted as she saw fit, that is not only her perogative but perfectly legal. End of.

 

 

Its not that I accept being verbally abused, it just doesn't bother me as its only words. If someone were to physically assault me I would deal with it in what ever way I felt was necessary whether it were to walk away or fight back.

 

One thing that comes out of all this is that the rights of the person are deemed more important than the right of the business not to try to prevent theft. I sincerely hope that any of you that have businesses that are retail based do not have to contend with theft of goods which could ultimately effect profits, staffing levels etc. I am not saying that the person does not have rights but a little common sense and this would have been sorted at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

evidently you need to re-read my post, one of my complaints was that the store managers statements was that "my security staff have the right to stop you inside or outside of the store" i also put in my letter about the managers total lack of knowledge on the law relating to limitations on the lawful actions of security staff to be so astounding as to be beyond belief, how can you complain to a person who is totally ignorant of the law, it would be like expecting you to accept the obvious, do you truly think i would have got a better outcome in the face of such ignorance

 

Yes I do think that you would have had a better outcome as you would have been taken more seriously. There is also the fact that by not agreeing to the search, regardless of what any law says, you are placing yourself under suspicion. Try to see it from view of a store that probably has a lot of theft/attempted theft.

 

I sincerely hope that you get the outcome you want but as you will all have gathered I would have dealt with it differently and have been on my way home, probably with a nice gift card.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im beginning to think that the differences in opinion in this thread are now well and truly aired and neither side is going to budge from their standpoint.

 

I feel that to keep this thread useful we should progress along the lines of dealing with the OPs complaint.

 

As the OP has made a complaint to the CEOs office I do not see much more to do here.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The law trumps what big businesses think they can and cannot do. It is actually common sense to take heed of the law and good customer relations.

 

Your just going round in circles and it isn't helpful. Your free to act as you like, if your happy to be shouted at so be it, you can't impose your own rules on other people. The op acted as she saw fit, that is not only her perogative but perfectly legal. End of.

 

extemely well put i could not agree more

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im beginning to think that the differences in opinion in this thread are now well and truly aired and neither side is going to budge from their standpoint.

 

I feel that to keep this thread useful we should progress along the lines of dealing with the OPs complaint.

 

As the OP has made a complaint to the CEOs office I do not see much more to do here.

 

Fair enough

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't want to ignore the site teams last post, but I do have a funny story which might lighten things a bit.

 

My hubby and I had spent a day shopping in the city. On going through the train station barriers I had a sudden desperate urge to visit the ladies. Thrust my shopping bags at hubby a rushed toward the loo as quick as I could in high heels.

 

At the same time I noticed I was heading for the gents and stopped, hubby shouted "that's the gents". I was still stood still, my husband had joined me and was laughingly asking me why I was going to the gents, when a security guard stood between the gents and ladies, blew a whistle about 4 times and bellowed rather loudly into her Walky talky "major incident, major incident, all guards down to .............. as a matter of urgency". I immediately crouched on the floor thinking the station was in the middle of a terrorist attack.

 

The major incident, me nearly entering the gents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As the RLP forum is for those that have been accused of theft, this thread has been moved to the bear garden.

 

Making barbed comments of the RLP forum 'may' have the detrimental affect of putting vulnerable posters off from posting.

 

Also, this thread is in very great danger of being closed. The Bear garden allows some leeway with opinions but this still has to be used in a responsible way.

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

I'm sorry if my funny but true story has been seen by the site team as a barbed comment (barbed comment meaning saying hurtful and rude things). As the op was receiving so much unfair criticism from certain posters I was just trying to lighten the mood.

 

I cannot see what else the op can do, shes received an apology albeit a rather reluctant one. I suppose it would be different if she was actually physically made to go back in the store, hen legal action could be contemplated.

 

One thought, are the security guards directly employed by Asda or contracted. There may be another avenue of complaint.

 

 

 

As the RLP forum is for those that have been accused of theft, this thread has been moved to the bear garden.

 

Making barbed comments of the RLP forum 'may' have the detrimental affect of putting vulnerable posters off from posting.

 

Also, this thread is in very great danger of being closed. The Bear garden allows some leeway with opinions but this still has to be used in a responsible way.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if my funny but true story has been seen by the site team as a barbed comment (barbed comment meaning saying hurtful and rude things). As the op was receiving so much unfair criticism from certain posters I was just trying to lighten the mood.

 

I cannot see what else the op can do, shes received an apology albeit a rather reluctant one. I suppose it would be different if she was actually physically made to go back in the store, hen legal action could be contemplated.

 

One thought, are the security guards directly employed by Asda or contracted. There may be another avenue of complaint.

 

Check your rep!

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...