Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
  • 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

Have not heard anything in over 3 months: Caught 1st time shoplifting at Tesco


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2022 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

This happened on June 19th, I was caught abusing a loophole in the self checkout where I scanned cheaper items to put in heavier, more expensive items down.

 

I had being doing this for a while quite often, but didn't take anything of high value, just food on my lunch breaks. When I was caught, they said they were on to me for the past couple months.

 

I had visited the Tesco only 2 to 3 times a week and at odd times during lunch (could be from 12pm to 2pm) and not everytime I did this, sometimes paying for a bag of crisps, etc.

 

The thing is, the security guard didn't even pull me into their office, he took me to the side and gotten my personal details and didn't even bother calling the police because what I took that day was such a low value. Told me I would receive a letter telling me what action they will take in 2 weeks or so. Just got down my details from my drivers license, paid for what I had taken on that occasion, didn't take a photo of me and said I'm banned from the store.

 

Did not mention civil recovery action.

 

He said it's likely the head office will review the CCTV footage of previous times I went in and will probably take it to the police.

 

I immediately wrote a letter to the store manager and head office, showing deep remorse and apologised, in which the customer service manager replied with a letter thanking me, but not saying what actions the head office will take due to data privacy laws. Not heard anything from the store itself.

 

I was expecting this to trigger a DWF letter to pressure fines on me, but it has almost been 3 months and haven't heard anything else, other than that one letter so it's making me so anxious and worried.

 

If it's taking so long, is it likely the are building a case and the police are getting involved? Or were they pressuring me into not going in again and have just left it at that?

 

Or should I expect a late DWF letter and nothing else? Does it take multiple months to see one of these letters?

 

People have said they're letting me sweat it: it's too much time to sit through hours of CCTV to see what I had took of relatively low value and it would not be cost effective to involve the police, but still a possibility, or it could have even been forgotten about.

 

I have been told it might be sitting in a pile with others, but a lot of people on this forum seem to have received DWF / RLP letters relatively quick.

 

Someone else had even told me there won't be any complicated background police investigation and my punishment would be very minor if I was to receive one, but I am still unsure and very very worried about it still, I stress about it often.

 

I had also been told waiting this long could have potentially harmed any chances of a case, since it would have been proceeded with sooner after the incident? Would they still hold onto CCTV from April to June?

Link to post
Share on other sites

go forget about it.

they have

nothing nor anyone can do

and no they wont bother with CCTV.

 

go enjoy your life

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

Why are you worried about letters? Thats all they are . letters. They cant do anything to you.

 

Focus on not shoplifting anymore and get on with your life.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually worried about not getting the letters because I'm scared they're pursuing further action, but the responses have been quite relieving but I don't know what makes you all so sure nothing further is to happen

Link to post
Share on other sites

they cant ignore

 

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

no,,, they cant [do anything now]....ignore.

 

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

Because its to late now

Stop worrying about nothing

On avg each store loses each day loses to this sca@m £100's

They dont bother with pennies just career stealers and even then they ignore 90%

 

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

They cannot do ANYTHING. ever. Stop worrying about it and move on with your life. We are certain because NO recovery company has taken action since one of them got slapped down hard years ago in court.

 

They have absolutely no basis to do ANYTHING. ALl they can do is send a few scary letters and hope people pay in a panic. None of the money goes to the store. It all goes in that shady companies pocket.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm well aware of what the civil recovery process is.

What I meant to say is, because Tesco have NOT resorted to getting them involved to send those intimidating letters,whereas other people in this situation have nothing to worry about since they only got the letters, I am stressing over the possibility Tesco have decided to persue the matter with the police instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times do you want me to tell you the same thing before you understand it? :)

 

Tesco wont pursue the matter with the police. Tesco forgot you existed the moment you walked out of the building. They certainly wont get involved for a small amount over 3 months later.

 

I can pretty much guarantee that all the security staff did was give you a telling off, gave you a banning letter and that was it.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

me thinks your grovelling letter worked

the police cannot now be involved

too muchtime has elasped

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

I had a hunch the grovelling worked. the security guard didn't say how long I was banned for, just banned without a banning letter or form as I didn't sign anything.

Not like I want to go back in there though, I was quite shaken up after that.

Edited by ProgLog
Link to post
Share on other sites

there you go

 

pers i'd not worry

just stay away from that store for a few months

theres nowt they can do bar asking you to leave anyway....

 

and no the pixs do not get circulated if they ever do get any....but they wont

and no they don't employ face recog software AFAIK.

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

:thumb::thumb:

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

Blimey! You have had some sterling advice so far so please understand what can and can't happen.

 

 

In other cases I have seen, letters usually arrive within two weeks so unless the security guard didn't get your details right and the letters are going elsewhere, they won't be chasing any time soon.

 

 

Far too late for any police involvement. It is possible your letter to Tesco did work

 

 

 

Concentrate on stopping the stealing, go to a different store for a year or so and get on with your life.

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

Thank you, I have actually just checked my drivers licence, which they actually wrote down my address from.

 

It has the number of the building, but not the flat number (when I moved in I didn't know because the flat number is the same as the building number) so I might have actually been getting letters and not known.

 

The fact that they only wrote my address down and told me to expect a letter and not ask for any other personal details like my phone number to contact me through, makes it seem like I'd only be expecting loss prevention letters.

 

I doubt it now, but if they did get a small claims court or police investigation and contacted me through mail, I would've thought they'd tried other methods to contact me if I have been ignoring their mail for over 3 months.

Edited by ProgLog
Missed a few points to explain
Link to post
Share on other sites

In this country, nobody is allowed to profit from a civil recovery claim so the losses actually incurred can be chased, not any amount stated by RLP.

 

 

Since 2012 no store has taken any action against shoplifters after 'The Oxford Case' concluded that the amounts claimed were not actual losses. The case is HERE

 

 

So, no need to worry about any civil recovery letter. The police will not get involved after this length of time.

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

Thank you silverfox, my apologies but my license actually says my apartment and the number for it, but the building and NOT the building number. However, the post code is shared with every apartment in this building though so as confusing as it is, can still be checked to match my flat. Seems like the confusion possibly had the postman sending it in someone else's mail.

 

 

Funnily enough, the letter I sent to head office they actually wrote back and was the only letter I recieved, had the full address details and my phone and email.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know what you mean about postcodes. Where I live there is 20 properties all sharing the same postcode.

 

 

The letter you sent to head office had your correct details on it so it's no wonder you got a reply.

 

 

Even if the letters are being misdirected, that's not your problem as no court case will come of it.

 

 

 

I would carry on being blithely ignorant of any contact .

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

The only thing is that as previously stated, if they took other action involving police, they've left it too late by now so it's nothing to worry about, but what if they had done shortly after I was caught but I didn't get the mail? But I am sure if that's the case they would have tried to contact me again through another method rather than sending more mail and leaving it this long

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the police were involved, they would have sent you a letter 'inviting' you down to the local nick for a 'chat' If they got no response then they would have made a personal visit. There is also the fact of police resources and that means that a lot of forces will not get involved with shoplifting cases where the value is less than £200. With the police, they have a short time in which to lay charges (I think about six months) so if they were going to get involved they would have done so by now.

 

As far as I am aware, Tesco (and many other stores) do not get the police involved as it is a waste of their time which is why they go the civil recovery route instead. Here on CAG, we only see a minority of cases where the other ones missed will have paid up to avoid action. We haven't been able to put them right. All you need to do is read other threads and see how many times the police were involved. I guarantee it's very few.

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...