Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, welcome to CAG. I imagine the letter that the security guards talked about will be a letter from a company or lawyers who specialise in trying to extract money from shoplifters. I think Sainsbury's use DWF solicitors, otherwise it could be a company like RLP. It won't be a 'fine', only the police can do that. Look at this as a parallel 'justice' system that doesn't involve the plice. If you read around the forum for other cases of shoplifting, you'll get the idea of how this all works. If you think your behaviour has become compulsive, we suggest having a chat with your GP who should get you help for this. Best, HB
    • despite our wettest 18 months on record,  Low levels of rain and snow have cut Canada’s hydropower production, forcing it to increase electricity imports from the U.S.   - NYT
    • Hi all…. i was wondering if someone could help me. I am ashamed I have been caught shoplifting from Sainsbury’s by two undercover security guards who I suspect have been following me for a week now… I have been impulsively shoplifting due to what I think could have become an addiction of some kind. I am ashamed of what I had been doing and I do believe being caught has been for the greater good. i was taken to a room and asked to empty my bag, the guards were slightly rude but I complied with them politely as I know they are just doing their job and I am in the wrong. They retrieved my address, name, birthdate and took a photo of me, they asked me how many times I had shoplifted and I said twice and I didn’t want to be foolish and say just once. They issued me a letter of ban from the store and if I was caught in the store again the police would be called. They told me I would be paying 2x what I had stolen today as the goods had been damage which I am guessing is stole around £65 worth roughly. I did offer to pay for the items I had stolen on the day but they declined. They did not call the police but let me leave after claiming I was a lucky person. They told me to expect a letter in the post and that I “would be smart not to ignore it”  what should I be expecting in the post from them? I am aware from reading a lot online about security costs.. people mentioned to ignore these costs however as I had damaged the labelling on the goods should I still comply and pay the fines ?  kind regards awful shoplifter
    • If you're sat there wondering how to attract and retain young talent, look no further. Find out what young people want from employers.View the full article
    • Toyota has apologised for providing incorrect or manipulated data for safety certification tests.View the full article
  • 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

Sign The Petition


martdj
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6117 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

Zoot,Gizmo

 

Are we allowed this petition? I aaw this in the bear garden and am concerned as I have the link in my signature??

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/76280-petition-pm-re-bank.html

 

AFAIK it is allowed in here (unless admin come in and say different )

 

we do not want it duplicated all over the site so posts containing it are getting edited or if thats not possible removed completly

When you want to fool the world, tell the truth. :D

Advice & opinions of Janet-M are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any

doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Signed

:grin: WON

GOLDFISH £291.90

MARBLES £174.47

RBOS VISA £232.19

AMEX (BLUE) £148.40

BARCLAYCARD £251.31

AMEX (BA) £151.50

RBOS M/C £222.00

RBOS (MY ACC) £430.00

BARCLAYS £505.00

MBNA £250.00

RBOS (JOINT) £2975.00

:grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Signed

 

Now 137 signatures

If my advice has helped, please click on my scales. Thank you!

MBNA - CRA file to be cleared then finished!

__________________________________________

Abbey Personal - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court

__________________________________________

Capital One - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court

__________________________________________

GMAC - Sent DCA SAR 9th March 07 - confirmed not legally assigned.

Waiting for GMAC to provide breakdown of charges and CCA under s79

__________________________________________

Alliance & Leicester - Final LBA 28/5/7 - then Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Government Response:

 

 

A new statutory regime for the regulation of mortgages took effect in October 2004. The Financial Services Authority (FSA) (new window) is responsible for ensuring that all firms that provide or advise on residential mortgages observe high standards of business.

The FSA has specific rules in place in relation to Early Repayment Charges (ERCs), requiring that these should be expressed as a cash value and be a reasonable pre-estimate of costs as a result of a consumer repaying the amount due before the contract has terminated.

Earlier this year, the FSA published the findings of a review of ERCs, in response to complaints received from consumers under Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. It concluded that an ERC may be in breach of these regulations if it is not expressed in a plain and intelligible way, or if it requires a consumer to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation for exiting a mortgage early.

The FSA did not find widespread evidence of unfair terms at that time. It will continue to consider individual complaints about ERCs and follow up with firms as appropriate.

If consumers feel that ERCs are not in accordance with their mortgage contract or that the effect of the charge was unclear, it is open to them to complain to their lenders. If they are not satisfied with the outcome of the complaint, consumers may also approach the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), which provides a free and independent means of adjudicating consumer complaints that fall within its scope. Consumers also have recourse available through the courts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

signed by me an undersigned:confused:

"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education." Albert Einstein

 

"No-one can make you feel inferior without your consent" - E. Roosevelt

 

 

Don't lie, thieve, cheat or steal. The Government do not like the competition.

 

 

All advice is offered without prejudice.

We are being sued for Libel. Please help us by donating

 

Please support the pettition to remove Gordon Brown as he was not elected primeinister. He was elected Party Leader something completely different.

 

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/gordan-brown/

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...