Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx for your feedback. That is the reason I posted my opinion, because I am trying to learn more and this is one of the ways to learn, by posting my opinions and if I am incorrect then being advised of the reasons I am incorrect. I am not sure if you have educated me on the points in my post that would be incorrect. However, you are correct on one point, I shall refrain from posting on any other thread other than my own going forward and if you think my post here is unhelpful, misleading or in any other way inappropriate, then please do feel obliged to delete it but educate me on the reason why. To help my learning process, it would be helpful to know what I got wrong other than it goes against established advice considering the outcome of a recent court case on this topic that seemed to suggest it was dismissed due to an appeal not being made at the first stage. Thank-you.   EDIT:  Just to be clear, I am not intending to go against established advice by suggesting that appeals should ALWAYS be made, just my thoughts on the particular case of paying for parking and entering an incorrect VRN. Also, I continue to be grateful for any advice you give on my own particular case.  
    • you can have your humble opinion.... You are very new to all this private parking speculative invoice game you have very quickly taken it upon yourself to be all over this forum, now to the extent of moving away from your initial thread with your own issue that you knew little about handling to littering the forum and posting on numerous established and existing threads, where advice has already been given or a conclusion has already resulted, with your theories conclusions and observations which of course are very welcomed. BUT... in some instances, like this one...you dont quite match the advice that the forum and it's members have gathered over a very long consensual period given in a tried and trusted consistent mannered thoughtful approach. one could even call it forum hi-jacking and that is becoming somewhat worrying . dx
    • Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant .... I said DCBL because I was reading a few threads about them discontinuing claims and getting spanked in court! Meant  YOU  Highview !!!  🖕 The more I read this forum and the more I engage with it's incredible users, the more I learn and the more my knowledge expands. If my case gets to court, the Judge will dismiss it after I utter my first sentence, and you DCBL and Highview don't even know why .... OMG! .... So excited to get to court!
    • Yep, I read that and thought about trying to find out what the consideration and grace period is at Riverside but not sure I can. I know they say "You must tell us the specific consideration/grace period at a site if our compliance team or our agents ask what it is"  but I doubt they would disclose it to the public, maybe I should have asked in my CPR 31.14 letter? Yes, I think I can get rid of 5 minutes. I am also going to include a point about BPA CoP: 13.2 The reference to a consideration period in 13.1 shall not apply where a parking event takes place. I think that is Deception .... They giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other! One other point to note, the more I read, the more I study, the more proficient I feel I am becoming in this area. Make no mistake DBCL if you are reading this, when I win in court, if I have the grounds to make any claims against you, such as breach of GDPR, I shall be doing so.
  • 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

HELP PEASE!! caught for shoplifting in TESCO


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3076 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

thanks Dear sewingkit , may plz ask you what happened to your Gf after all? if police involved finally after she ignored the RLP letters?

 

She got the letters but did not tell me soon enough and unfortuanely paid them, it was not until after that that I researched it and found out it was all a joke really, basically.

 

She has put it down to a learning experience, it gave her the necessary shock but we are a bit wiser as a result but a shame she paid them, thankfully it was not too much

 

no police involvement

Link to post
Share on other sites

the POLICE can never be involved AFTER the event.

so forget about that

 

 

you've not read that here or anywhere

so don't start inventing things.

 

 

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

Just be prepared for letters.

 

The police will not now be involved at all. Tesco chose not to involve them but the reason they have taken your name is because this will be passed to a Civil Recovery Company called Retail Loss Prevention. They will almost certainly write to you stating that you owe Tesco for the cost of detecting and dealing with your offence. They will tell you that you must pay £130-£150 or Tesco will take you to court to get the money that way.

 

PLEASE NOTE THAT TESCO WILL NOT TAKE YOU TO COURT. IF YOU IGNORE THE LETTERS THEY WILL EVENTUALLY STOP WRITING TO YOU

 

They are talking about civil court and not criminal court and there have been no cases taken to court since another of Retail Loss Prevention's clients lost heavily when the judge decided that the money could not be repaid. RLP will then get a debt collector to write to you. IGNORE ALL LETTERS and they will eventually stop. DO NOT PHONE OR WRITE BACK TO THEM.

 

Tesco had the option to prosecute you but chose not to. They made you pay full price for the goods and lost no money or stock. Nothing more can happen to you. Stop worrying and move on, but please do not make the same mistake again either at Tesco or any other store. If your illness needs managing in this way then you must speak to your doctor.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for all complete and useful information sidewinder- i will sleep well tonight- I will definitely do what you guys advised me and Im really thankful - i will let you know whenever receive the letters. you guys saved me and made me feel better.

Edited by F9d
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I apologise to the site team who are already on this thread for jumping in (too many cooks etc.)

 

f9d, you are in the right place now. We will try to help as best we can if RLP do get involved. I do have to say that on occasion Tesco don't involve RLP (but not that often)

 

Before any letters arrive, can I suggest you see your GP or if you have one, a mental health worker just to discuss your health at the moment. This may come in useful at a later date.

 

I see you have looked at this:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?448994-RLP-FAQ-s.-What-do-they-mean-Reviewed-September-2015&p=4762870&viewfull=1#post4762870

 

but it can do no harm to read it again when you are a little calmer.

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

Billion thanks Silverfox.

 

 

I will see my psychologist tomorrow and will discuss the matter,

l logically know that nothing very important will happen to me after reading all your comments

and reading all those information on the website and l really appreciate it

 

 

but you know because of my very severe mental illness and huge amount of medicines which l take daily

and because of tesco security guards' very very humiliating behaviour

( they spoke to me very badly and laughed at me when l was crying and begging them to let me even pay ten times for the items

but not telephone police and taking video of me when l was sitting on the floor like a child and crying)

 

 

l can't stop thinking about, I had all nightmares in last nights and even can't look at my children eyes, felt ashamed

 

 

- anyway l trust you and very thankful for your support and help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

bless you. you did a silly thing but hey - dont we all make mistakes? you are in the clear but no doubt barred from tesco's, hey theres always asda! stay calm and forget about it - its over and you are in the clear. as mentioned it costs these companies far too much to prosecute. stay cool and move on. good luck and best wishes to ya!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't just the cost of taking cases to court that discourages retailers doing so. It is also the potential for bad publicity, especially in cases where someone has made an honest mistake, or security guards have overstepped their duties. RLP and the like con't care about the circumstances - they just want money - but a large retailer would be concerned if stories about how people with poor mental health were being pursued in court, for example.

 

The classic case, of course, is the one where RLP advised a major retailer to bring an action against two girls who had already been dealt with by the criminal justice system; it resulted in a humiliating defeat for the retailer. We can't name the retailer, because they asked the judge for anonymity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...