Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Different statements. One has “at 59 mph overtaking on the approach” and the other “it was overtaking on the approach and in ....... at 49 mph”. So not the same statement (same ethos, different sentence structure).   perhaps they chose that site for the officer because it is an accident hotspot, and they know people do dodgy overtakes (while speeding) there .....??  
    • Hi.   I've moved your thread to the Bailiffs forum. People should be along to advise later.   HB
    • So a little update;   Of the 6 letters I sent 3 were acknowledged. One accepting £1/month for now and two from the same creditor trading under different names asking for full I&E which I haven't done.   In a moment of madness I managed to depsoit 5k to a gambling site I didn't have due to paypal's crazy policy of allowing payments which are to be collected by direct debit after a couple of days to gambling sites! Mad they allow this but this will show as a negative paypal balance (in a different account to the original "debt"). The first paypal -£5k account has been closed and passed to a DCA now. I have ignored them.   My council has appeared to have stepped up their collection efforts for £2.5k in alleged housing benefit overpayment from 2015/16. I have acknowledged their letters over the past 3 years each time by email but they rarely respond to my pleas. I truly think if there was overpayment then it was for less than half the amount they claim. At the time I didn't think I was being overpaid because I wasn't really working but I had stopped claiming JSA/ESA (and told them as much) but earned a couple of hundred pounds a month from sporadic work.   Also what I thought was a dormant debt from 2016 to Halifax has been actually sold ( to caboot? I think. Hard to keep track of everyone)   I've been getting phone calls daily but ignoring them for the most part. I did request all communication in writing in my original letters.   I feel incapable of dealing with these creditors and whilst initially I was feeling that I would be happy to just ignore all the letters (arreas, defaults and the like) and phone calls for an indefinite amount of time and  hope to make it 6 years to statute barred-ness and accept or defend any CCJ attempts that did arrive. I figured that avoiding these creditors for 3 months so far is 5% of the way there to statute barred! But I figre for these fairly sizeable amounts they probably won't all let it go and I will get some CCJ docs (never had to deal with that) However now my mood and thinking has changed.    I am looking again at insolvency. I'm over the DRO limit now so its BR or nothing. I was wondering why you said to not consider this and it would be stupid @dx100uk? Although shirking my debts/responsibilities it does seem like an "easy" way out at the moment. It would be so nice to know that what's done is done and to be able to draw a line in the sand and start again in a year or so and not have to avoid creditors or worry about what's coming next...   It certainly would help the environment what with the amount of letters that are arriving already(!) considering the first payment I missed was october/november (excluding the old halifax and council debts). I am exordinately stressed about it now even though I thought I would be already . Any advice would be great if it was to get my head out of the sand and contact people/do the ignoring thing and seeing what happens/reasons  to do or not to do bankruptcy for these unsecured debts?   Thanks      
    • Hi everybody   Had a knock on my door and was confronted by either a Bailiff or enforcement agent (not sure about the specific job title). When I opened the door he stuck his foot in so I couldn't close the door. I was video taping him so I took a few steps backward (to get him in shot) and he just fully entered the property despite me saying that I was denying him entry and he refused to leave thereafter.   Turns out that he was there to collect a court issued fine. I think from a Magistrates Court. He worked for this outfit:   www.marstonholdings.co.uk   The reason for the fine was something to do with "driving without car insurance". Now I had a cheap car a few years ago but it broke down and would cost more to fix than it was actually worth. So I sold the car for scrap and cancelled the insurance. Turns out you have to inform the DVLA when you scrap a car and them that it is no longer on the road (I was unaware). So this was the circumstances of the visit.   My question is did he have the lawful right to enter the property? I always thought these people were like vampires i.e. they can only come in if you invite them in.   tia Bear  
    • oppss again then if its the same person.   knows the road well so should know what the speeds are and where they apply..      
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 221 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

Hello.

About 3 months ago i had a very bad experience and was caught taking a box of bars from the range.

It was approx £8 worth.

No police were involved.

 

My details were taken and I received a letter from RLP in the post a few weeks after.

I know I shouldnt have, but I paid the money as I just wanted it all to be over.

My mental health was not in a good place at the time and I did not need this on my shoulders.


I have just been given a new job (my dream one infact!).

Today I received all the information through, and was asked to sign a form so that they could do 2 checks:

The identity check and the enhanced civil recovery check.


I am very scared about this.

Will I be on the database for Cireco?

Will I lose my job offer?

It was a complete one off and as i say, i was in a very bad place mentally.

I have had treatment etc and it has now resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no it wont.

 

go do a chargeback with your bank

get your moneyback !!

 

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

no it wont.

 

go do a chargeback with your bank

get your moneyback !!

 

 

Thankyou for your response. I definitely will consider it, however at the moment its not the money which im stressed about. Ive been given a really good graduate job in healthcare and if they see this on a so-called database, its unlikely theyll keep the offer. Apparently Cireco get all the data from RLP and store it :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did you sign anything when the incident happened in store?

 

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, i wasnt taken to a security room or anything. I was just taken to the till. The woman asked me to write my address down and looked at my ID. She then said id be getting a letter from third-party to claim back expenses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

In the 16 years I’ve been involved in Loss Prevention, I’ve never heard of an ‘Advanced Civil Recovery Check’ - I don’t mean to sound patronising, but are you sure that’s what it’s called? Do you have the form for this check that you could redact any personal details and post? 

 

From what I understand businesses are being advised to steer clear of this Cireco database for a number of reasons - firstly, the majority of names on it have NOT been convicted of a criminal offence - just reported by LP and security staff without police involvement. The majority are low level thefts in which the offenders could give the details of anybody they want to. And as an LP Investigator - I could report my neighbour if I wanted to. There is no oversight.

 

Secondly, Cireco are believed to be getting into trouble for the retention of their data. I.e they still have details of alledged shoplifters going back 10 years. Even the police have to ensure that certain information is expunged from their systems after a period of time, and it appears that they have tried to just create a database to rival the Police National Computer, just without the oversight. GDPR should hopefully kick them in the nuts. 

 

A side note, you said you were taken to the till - did you end up paying for the items you stole? If you did - Civil Recovery should not have been actioned. 

 

Im sorry this doesn’t really answer your main question. But without seeing the check form, I couldn’t tell you. I would be very surprised if this has any negative bearing on your proposed employment. 

 

Best,

 

LPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you did not sign anything to consent to them using your data

you wont be on the database.

 

go get that moneyback.


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@IM569

Hello, thankyou for the helpful reply.

 

The employment form simply says 'we do identity checks as part of our pre-employment screening for everyone working at **.

We carry out random checks using Cireco, there are two types:

advanced civil recovery,

and basic criminal record.

 

We reserve the right to terminate your employment if any findings come out of these checks.

You will receive an email if chosen for an advanced civil recovery check'

 

No, i did not end up paying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you didn't sign the consent form.

there cannot be anything on the database

 

if there is you are in for one hell of a lot of compensation and it will be the end of RLP etc.

you could also hit the prospective employer too. IMHO


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou for the reassurance. This is greatly appreciated. I just hope this hasn't ruined my career forever!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you sue the world and his boss if it does

rlp cannot process your data without your WRITTEN and signed consent.

 

dx

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dx100uk said:

you sue the world and his boss if it does

rlp cannot process your data without your WRITTEN and signed consent.

 

dx

 

Thanks. I dont understand much about this but youve made it clearer. Out of interest, my job are asking me to sign to enable them to look up my identity/employment checks with Cireco if required (e.g. chosen by their 'random checks). If i sign this, which i feel like i should, would this still be against DPA on RLP's behalf? As i would not have signed a document from RLP?

 

Hopefully that makes some sort of sense!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that has been answered several times already but for some reason you want to read the answers already given differently. The law is now the GDPR, not the DPA and it is much stricter

relax, they will get your basic DBS data, which may be as blank as toilet paper as well.

What the company is interested in is did you steal from the till  at a previous employer and that wont be answered by RLP's computer

I feel sorry for the prospective employer for believing the rubbish that RLP sold them as tey are paying a continuous fee to get nothing but potential trouble in return.

Edited by ericsbrother

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just been digging into what RLP/Cireco access to confirm identity, risk etc. Esentially it is open source data where the database holders admit that it is not vetted and relies on limited sources anyway.

So are you a company director? are you a politician? if you can answer no to these to questiosn the chances are that any entry on their database is potentially wrong.

Snake oil salesmen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou. Yes, Ive paid for an enhanced DBS certificate and that completely clear.

 

I guess my fear is that it specifically states 'we do random enhanced civil recovery checks via Cireco'.

 

I know that I have no criminal record at all, but am still concerned this will affect my employment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/07/2019 at 08:53, ericsbrother said:

just been digging into what RLP/Cireco access to confirm identity, risk etc. Esentially it is open source data where the database holders admit that it is not vetted and relies on limited sources anyway.

So are you a company director? are you a politician? if you can answer no to these to questiosn the chances are that any entry on their database is potentially wrong.

Snake oil salesmen.

 

I think it's certainly snake oil, and may just be an enormous bluff. Cireco is not registered with ICO, nor is it named as a trading name of RLP (which it should if they claim it's under their registration).  They can't process data without consent, and I don't think their silly 'shoplifting register' falls under the data processing exemption for crime prevention or legal reasons, since all are just unsubstantiated allegations. 

 

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...