Jump to content


lgyms

Caught accidentally stealing from primark **Resolved**

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 288 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

Today I was caught accidentally stealing from primark.

I tried on a coat which not uncommon for primark didn’t have the price tag attached,

didn’t realise at the time that where I tried it on didn’t have a mirror and so I walked to the changing room where I tried on a couple of other things which I didn’t end up wanting.

 

Coat not concealed, over my own bag or arm as not to drop it went to pay for other things.

Replied to a message on my phone and forgot I had it over my arm,

genuinely just exhausted from work and the gym and had a scatter brain moment,

 

I was approached on my way out and got taken to the security office where I actually offered to pay for the coat as I had intended to in the first place and explained the situation

 

said it was too late,

I’d receive a fine if I did not want police involved.

Security have my name and address.

 

What kind of fine can I expect?

I offered to pay for the coat which they refused and they didn’t lose any of the stores goods?

Can they fine me at all?

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

moved to the RLP forum.

 

its not a fine and the staff should not have used that word...or did they ??

if they meantion restitution or RLP etc and you thought it will be a fine..

but anyway..its not a fine

 

 

there is nothing RLP can do to you.

they cant harm you or anything to do with you like credit file , records, visa's etc etc.

 

just simply ignore the letters you get from them.

 

if you use our search CAG box in the top red toolbar.

type in

 

primark rlp

 

you'll soon get the idea


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did use the word fine, when asked how much the fine would be he said “considerably more than the coat to be honest”

 

They did use the word fine, when asked how much the fine would be he said “considerably more than the coat to be honest”

 

They never mentioned RLP or Restitution

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well they need to be told its not a fine

but they probably say that to give themselves some kind of ego boost.

 

no-one bar the police/courts can fine you.

and neither of these were nor now can be used against you

 

just ignore the RLP letters

and get reading up


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither the police or courts? How come?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because they never came..no involvement.

 

you'll have a 1001 questions

its better you get reading as advise in post 2 bottom.


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to CAG.

 

 

Security guards seem to think that any payment is a fine. It is not. What will happen is that you will get a lovely letter 'requiring' you pay a form of compensation for the store security time spent on your case. This is rubbish as store security are paid whether or not they apprehend anyone. If they were paid on results, they would never be able work and earn the minimum wage.

 

 

Nobody but the police and the courts can issue a fine. What RLP rely on is peoples lack of knowledge in civil court matters. RLP would have to advise Primark to take action as RLP can not do it themselves. Primark do not do civil court as it is not cost effective. Civil Claims of this sort can only put the retai;er back into the position before the event occurred so if a coat cost £50, that is all they could claim BUT only if they didn't get it back. As they did get it back, there is no loss so what's the point of going to court.

 

 

RLP state in their letters that each event costs £300-£500 to process. Rubbish of course but they put it in to try and convince you that their claim has some legitimacy. It doesn't!

 

 

Put this behind you. Ignore RLP as they can do nothing to you-ever. 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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I deal with security guards and others on an almost daily basis and they all use the word 'fine'

 

It isn't however, but is merely an offer to pay an amount in settlement of the retailer's option to sue you in the County Court for what they deem to be a contribution to the costs of security. They will rarely, if ever, take that option as it has been proven in the past to not represent any genuine loss to the store, so you can safely ignore any demand for payment - and there will be several such demands, using increasingly alarming language, and maybe ultimately a letter from a debt collector, however since no debt actually exists they are even more toothless than RLP. Stand firm, do not pay a penny and ignore all letters and you will be fine


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!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not uncommon for the likes of RLP to contact those who have had their details taken after an alleged incident of shoplifting.

 

The whole RLP model was essentially dismantled and destroyed in 2012 in the case between A Retailer v Ms B & Ms K 2012 at the Oxford County Court, the whole model requiring those accused of shoplifting to pay "compensation" is flawed, and the judge found that there can be no provision for shoplifters to pay any contribution costs towards security, as this is merely an expense of running a business and that the security were actively involved in their duties, and not diverted from it, the same costs would've been incurred regardless of whether the incident occured or not, so long as the items were returned in a resalable condition.

 

You can ignore RLP by all means, nothing will happen, they have no capacity to issue proceedings against you anyways, and are essentially acting as a powerless third party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I deal with security guards and others on an almost daily basis and they all use the word 'fine'

 

It isn't however, but is merely an offer to pay an amount in settlement of the retailer's option to sue you in the County Court for what they deem to be a contribution to the costs of security. They will rarely, if ever, take that option as it has been proven in the past to not represent any genuine loss to the store, so you can safely ignore any demand for payment - and there will be several such demands, using increasingly alarming language, and maybe ultimately a letter from a debt collector, however since no debt actually exists they are even more toothless than RLP. Stand firm, do not pay a penny and ignore all letters and you will be fine

 

Would speaking to the store manager help or not?

Feel like the security guards had rather a large god complex and saw the situation as black and white which wasn’t the case.

I dont particularly want the aggravation of receiving the letters requesting the money and debt letters and so on.

 

I understand the basis of which RLP work, and why not to pay etc.

But I’m my case where it was genuinely an accident and misunderstanding,

is there no way to avoid them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it wont stop rlp sadly

they couldn't careless..


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking about this case over the weekend. You did not conceal the coat which should have made security think that it was a mistake. A genuine thief would hide the coat.

 

 

It is very difficult to say what may happen if you contacted the store. He/She may accept it was a genuine mistake but equally may ignore your response.

 

 

There is nothing you can do to stop the letters from RLP and then possible debt letters. Treating them as a a game is a better option. Have a look at the stickies on this forum to see what is lawful and what is not.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd disagree, from working in store security in the past, whilst generally myself and others used to work under the approach, select, conceal, observe, non-payment and exit principles, it's actually quite common people being obvious, because it's "unusual",

 

you wouldn't think of a typical shoplifter putting a jacket on and walking out, because it's "obvious", however that's the point, removing the element of concealment can make it difficult to prove intention to permanently deprive ownership.

 

Whilst it's a while since I did this line of work, there was no "referrals" to any third party companies such as RLP where I worked.

 

I wouldn't bother writing or contacting the store management, nothing will come of it, stores will always side with their staff, especially where assets are concerned, you're essentially guilty until proven innocent in these environments, not to mention management/head office will have probably received similar letters.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing/quote

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An update on this:

I received my letter from RLP yesterday, stating I had £150 to pay. I will attach a copy of this letter.

 

To avoid the aggravation I considered paying the fine,

however, decided on just trying them to see if they were understanding of my situation.

 

The man I spoke to was actually surprisingly understanding and helpful, offering to call the store to see if they would be willing to drop the case all things considered (in addition to personal circumstances which led to the error I dropped a few references to the Oxford case and the fact that they could not go to court to claim for losses they hadn’t incurred).

 

After around 8 minutes on hold, the claim has been “suspended indefinitely”.

I of course got them to put this in writing and email it over to me.

 

Thank you to any one who has helped with information on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not a fine!!


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An update on this:

I received my letter from RLP yesterday, stating I had £150 to pay. I will attach a copy of this letter.

 

To avoid the aggravation I considered paying the fine,

however, decided on just trying them to see if they were understanding of my situation.

 

The man I spoke to was actually surprisingly understanding and helpful, offering to call the store to see if they would be willing to drop the case all things considered (in addition to personal circumstances which led to the error I dropped a few references to the Oxford case and the fact that they could not go to court to claim for losses they hadn’t incurred).

 

After around 8 minutes on hold, the claim has been “suspended indefinitely”.

I of course got them to put this in writing and email it over to me.

 

Thank you to any one who has helped with information on here.

 

 

I am highly surprised at this. I would think the mentioning of the Oxford case wouldn't have made much difference as they could claim your case is different (it isn't) I bet you didn't record the call did you?

 

 

Make sure that before you upload anything, you remove all personal details.

 

 

I don't like the words 'suspended indefinitely' as it leaves them open to chase again but we will have to wait and see what comes out in the future.

 

 

A tentative well done.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your name will have been added to the mugs list for future reference.

They wot call the store because it has nothing to do with the store, just RLP inventing an amount and making a demand that has no legal basis so it wont matter to them what the store says unles the store suddenly decided to dispense with their "services" altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without Prejudice

 

We thank you for your communication of 7 November 2018 in response to our client’s claim.

 

We have considered the points you have raised regarding the incident you were involved in and further reviewed and investigated the facts and matters presented by our client.

 

In the particular circumstances of this case, and whilst otherwise reserving its position generally and considering the fact that you acknowledge your “mistake,” our client is willing, to not to pursue this matter further.

 

Please be aware and be under no doubt, that if a similar incident occurs in the future, either in one of our client’s stores or at any store which is a member of the National Civil Recovery Programme the same leniency is unlikely to be applied.

 

The details of the incident will remain on our system. All data will be kept in strict compliance with General Data Protection Regulation EU 2016/679 (“GDPR”) and Data Protection Act 2018 (GDPR & Data Protection Acts 1988 to 2018 ROI). Whilst this information will be passed to our client we will not process it any further or pass it on to a third party.

 

This incident is now closed and no further correspondence will be sent to you arising from this matter.

 

Yours faithfully

RLP | Tel: 0115 970 6231

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bet 'our client ' wasnt even consulted!!

 

Ruddy powerless fleecers!!


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that spells it out quite clearly and I hate to say it but RLP have done the right thing (for a change) I agree that it's likely that Primark had no say in the matter and RLP played Judge, Jury and executioner although not in this case.

 

 

I wonder if the statement on the GDPR applies to every case they deal with. I never thought that passing on personal details were lawful in the first place but that statement suggests that they wont.

 

 

I think it's safe to mark this thread as resolved.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...