Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is it just that? Oh I thought it was because of all the effort he and others made to rightly bring DCBL to court. But he just got lucky there I suppose. Lucky he didn't bring his complaint to this forum first because if he had of done, he'd be £10K poorer right now. And for something that Peterbard describes as benefitting from being newsworthy, I am struggling to find all the news reports that refer to it.       Confucius  say "he who backpedals, falls off bike."    I'm not surprised in the least that you, a gold account holder on this forum, would adopt a dismissive attitude to this well deserved victory in court against DCBL, however I'm curious as to why you opted to reduce the issues at stake to being 'simply' about ' the EA fell foul of the regulation which defines "relevant premises".   That certainly wasn't any argument that Iain Gould furthered and he's a civil actions lawyer whom, dare I say it, know a hell of a lot more about trespass and misuse of private information than you do. The judge never mentioned "relevant premises" either. Not during the hearing or in his judgement. And you never mentioned it either prior to know. In fact, in the original  in the original 2018 thread you even went so far as to suggest that whatever address was on the writ was irrelevant because, "interestingly, if the address is not  a requirement it would not be possible to sue the bailiff for wrong attendance under section 66." Not that your wrongfully held opinion that non debtors are also subject to the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 matters, because as I had already pointed out in the first video because the claimant wasn't suing for wrong attendance under section 66. He sued for trespass. Part 66 never applied to him because he was not the debtor and never had been. You and the likes of DCBL can disregard that obvious point as much as you like, but bailiffs do not have a blanket immunity from trespass.   Have a look at the article Iain Gould has written on his blog about the case. It might help you understand the tort of trespass in some small way, and might help you adopt a more balanced approach to those poor sods who owed no debt and have had their homes raided and their privacy breached by EAs, and then - to add insult to injury - they come to you looking for help. What makes it worse is that your defective understanding of when an Enforcemnet Agents action can give rise to trespass is backed up by your site team members who think it's their job to echo your mistakes not by justifying what you say - because they can't - but by making defamatory remarks at the expense of those who give the 'correct advice'. Unlike you and your team members I don't hide behind the protection of anonymity. Nobody can hold you to account if you get it wrong, or heaven forbid, if it turns out you  have been working for a firm of debt collectors all along. To add to this, you don't seem to care much about removing libellous remarks from your forum when a legitimate complaint is raised.   To respond to Bank Fodders comment that "At some point in the video it has screenshots of this forum and the narrative suggests that some people agree that an enforcement agent has the power to enter into a property to check on identity. I think that it is intended that the CAG is associated with this belief."   Seriously? I have to point it out to you.   Maybe it has something to do with key members of this forum smearing me on the original thread by saying how wrong my narrative was and then implying I was a Freeman of the Land.   Maybe it had something to do with Gold Member Peter Bard leaving this comment on the same thread that stated:   "The point I was trying to make is that the EA will not be as interested in paperwork as in physical proof that the debtor does or does not live there.   As said there is no requirement for an address on a warrant, in fact the debtor may live at several addresses and the bailiff may attend to serve at any of them. The warrant is against the debtor, not the debtor at an address. It requires only enough info to identify the person.( see CPR wherever it is).   The bailiff will be much more interested in getting in and checking for clothes in wardrobes, sleeping accommodation, letters etc."   I'm sorry if that wasn't enough for you to justify me bringing that point up in the video. I did consider coming here before I completed it and asking those members if they intended to maintain their position that the Enforcement Agent had acted within the law but strangely the forum account I had used to make my first and only posting on this forum in 2018 - to counter the smears - would not allow me to sign in. Far be it from me to draw any conclusions about my input not being welcome here, I figured Peterbard and some of the key members here would use their creative skills at providing a blanket immunity from civil liability for all EAs by misinterpreting key legislation in their behalf.    It looks like I was right about that also. Unfortunately I have given in to temptation, and am choosing to respond, even though I know how utterly futile it is.                  
    • There was another poster (Hammy1962) who understood (#3) the distance selling point you were trying to make, but you may have inadvertantly put him off in your subsequent post.  He may still be following this thread.  Wonder if he has any ideas that could possibly help you?    I'm concerned about how you continue if the TS route is not helpful...
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 5 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1914 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

Hi,

3 days ago I were detained for "an offence of theft".

 

I left the store (a Debenhams) with a small perfume bottle + watch in my pocket.

 

I'know that i have done a big mistake in my life I can't deny.

 

2 men along with a security officer was outside and brought me inside a small room

 

.They took the products back and they threatened me of calling police and finally they asked my ID (I'm not english, I'm from another country in EU), asked me for proof of identification

 

,I gave my DL and they took my EU address and asked me to sign the papers.I said them a correct address

 

. They didn't call the police and they told me that i am banned from the entire shopping mall as well as they gave me a banned letter along with a RLP copy.

 

Finally they told me that i wil be receiving a letter from RLP within a week.

 

I have no excuses for what I did but I'm worried and I don't want to destroy my life in UK.

 

So, I have many questions:

1) Will they give my details to police?

 

2) Will be leaving to my country,next week --> Will there be any detention in airport ?

 

3) Since i am for a short visit to UK,Would I have any problems to return in UK in the future(Related to VISA and UK on arrival verification)?

 

4) could I have any problems with a job?

 

5) the value was around £108 thats what they had mentioned,

how much could be the fine?

if it isn't too much I could pay and close the case (so I punish myself for what I did)

 

Please help me on this,

 

Since I am really tensed and

Please let me know about RLP(Since they have taken the product back,Will they impose a hefty fine and will they put me in jail ??)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They did not call the police, so don't worry, you will have no problems

 

as for RLP when they do write to you, ignore them, they can do nothing to you

 

so forget about it and get on with your life :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot, Colin

But I have suffered a lot(mentally) from past three days , I will never ever do this in my life again

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to CAG

 

You have found the right place and the right advice however, if you are under 18 we may need to advise differently.

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

Now that I am fed and watered I can fully respond.

 

As you are from a country wuthin the EU, there shouldn't be any issues of you leaving and coming back (well not until the UK votes to leave the EU) If you need a visa to come back to the UK, this will not affect that as you have not been convicted of a criminal offence.

 

The police were not called and now the security staff OR Debenhams have lost that opportunity so nothing to worry about there.

 

What can RLP do? Nothing. All they can do is send the scary letters which have no meaning whatsoever, they rely on your ignorance of UK civil law to make you believe that they have a case. They don't

 

After a few less scary letters (as you will now know that they can do nothing) they will pass this 'liability' (they don't say debt as there isn't one) onto their pet debt collector.

 

What can the debt collector do. Nothing! In fact they have even less power than RLP

 

Will it affect your job? No! RLP say they will keep your details on a dishonesty database but as you haven't been convicted of a crime, they would cause themselves immense difficulty in disclosing personal info to any employer. Also, they cannot disclose anything without your express written permission. you are not going to give them it are you.

 

This NOT a fine nor will it ever be. This is a civil demand for compensation which they cannot justify. I suggest you do not bother with RLP at all. Don't even bother writing to them or ringing them.

 

Treat them with the contempt they deserve. Please have a read of other RLP threads to see what they can and cannot do.

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

Thanks Silverfox, On your assurance I am believing that nothing is going to happen when i fly back to my country as well i need small info suppose if i need to visit this country once again,RLP doesnot affect me in getting my VISA nor it will detain me suppose if i get VISA and reach this country once again.I think that no civil record will be lodged against me

 

I am sorry for asking this again since it is bugging my mind from past three days,I have been in immense distress for what i have done

Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally forget it ever happened.

 

The police were not and now cannot be. Involved

 

So end of the matter

 

Rlp dca.s etc etc have no legal powers to do anything

 

Only a court can do any of those things

 

Go get on with your life

 

And don't ssteal again...

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

There are a couple of threads within the RLP forum where people were worried about the visa aspect.

 

This is one where the OP didn't update us

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?442113-Caught-shoplifting-now-require-a-visa-will-there-be-a-problem

 

and this one which was updated.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?430028-shoplifter-TXMAX-visa**Got-a-Visa**&highlight=got+visa

 

Again, as the police were not involved, there will be nothing on any criminal database which the Border Patrol have access to.

 

The ONLY database where this will be stored is on RLPs own which the authorities have no access to.

 

As mentioned by DX (who also knows what he is talking about) forget this episode, learn from your choices and move on. When you get the letters, please come back as I'm sure they will worry you. DON'T WORRY. The letters are threats, nothing more.

 

The ONLY people who could take court action are Debenhams and to be honest, they got the goods back so they can't be bothered.

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...