Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

[thepinkranger]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

Get your parents to write to Boots for this information or the name of the security company he was employed by. If they refuse, they are in big trouble for allowing him to act in an unlawful manner on their premises.

Wouldn't it be better if I ask the police? Because what if the officers have shifts/rota?

And are there other security firms retailers could employ or is it just SIA?

[bluebottle]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

I don't know the security officer's name or whether he is licensed by SIA.

Get your parents to write to Boots for this information or the name of the security company he was employed by. If they refuse, they are in big trouble for allowing him to act in an unlawful manner on their premises.

[thepinkranger]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

They already shared your data with police, as for civil recovery purposes, they can only use your data to send you more letters they can not share it with cireco (their sister company) or with prospective employers etc. As that would be a breach of data protection act 1998. Their trying to pass of their sister company as a crime prevention body, which it is nothing of the sort nor is it recongised as such by any law or government body. And if memory served me correctly, last time i checked, cireco were not registered with the ICO, though i would have to recheck that to be certain. But if they are not registered with the ICO then they can not lawfully access, hold, or process your data in anyway!

I just checked ICO (if I found it properly...) and cireco is not registered, but RLP is: Z8131406

Also can you clarify what you said? I'm a tad confused... (sorry!)

[thepinkranger]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

wow all those red annotations thanks bluebottle!

[bluebottle]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

Um... also this bit:

The Company is entitled to seek compasation from you through Civil Recovery to recover its losses, being the cost of the disruption to its business in the investigation, apprehension and administration costs caused as a direct result of your actions. These costs include, but not limited to: Cobblers!

Losses

• Goods not recovered/not fit for resale If matter goes before a criminal court, a Compensation Order is made.
• Goods/packaging damaged/destroyed If matter goes before a criminal court, a Compensation Order is made.
• Cash stolen/Pecuniary advantage If matter goes before a criminal court, a Compensation Order is made.
• Fraudulent acts/Price swapping If matter goes before a criminal court, a Compensation Order is made.
• Services taken without remuneration If matter goes before a criminal court, a Compensation Order is made.
• Criminal damage If matter goes before a criminal court, a Compensation Order is made.

Investigation costs

• Staff & management time to observe, apprehend & detain suspects Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Investigation into the offence Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Reviewing CCTV/Till data Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Producing witness statements Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Preparing evidence & writing reports Not permissible, as per Oxford Case

Security costs

• CCTV system & operator time Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Reproducing images for evidence Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Electronic security devices Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Maintenance of security devices Not permissible, as per Oxford Case

Administrative Costs

• Data processing & case reviews Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Mileage Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Photocopy/postage/telephone calls Not permissible, as per Oxford Case
• Legal fees & court costs Subject to judgement, if obtained. A judge could quite easily refuse costs.

What RLP has stated is, at best, being economical with the actualities.

[teaboy2]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

there's this bit in the leaflet which says:

In principle the Data Protection Act 1998 does not prevent the use of data for civil recovery purposes provided that the data protection principles are complied with. You are notified that the personal information held about you may be passed to the Police for criminal proceedings and to Retail Loss Prevention Limited for civil recovery proceedings.

We will pass this personal data to Retail Loss Prevention Limited where it may be shared, in accordance with data protection law, with the Police and crime prevention bodies. The use of this data will at all times be in compliance with the Data Protection Act 1998.

That was the bit which was worrying me.

(I think my 'we' they mean Boots)

They already shared your data with police, as for civil recovery purposes, they can only use your data to send you more letters they can not share it with cireco (their sister company) or with prospective employers etc. As that would be a breach of data protection act 1998. Their trying to pass of their sister company as a crime prevention body, which it is nothing of the sort nor is it recongised as such by any law or government body. And if memory served me correctly, last time i checked, cireco were not registered with the ICO, though i would have to recheck that to be certain. But if they are not registered with the ICO then they can not lawfully access, hold, or process your data in anyway!

[thepinkranger]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

Report the security officer to the SIA, if he is SIA-registered. He has acted unlawfully and the SIA do not take kindly to anyone licensed by them behaving in the way he did.

I don't know the security officer's name or whether he is licensed by SIA.

[bluebottle]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

The database RLP refer to is in the same league as the illegal databases TB refers to in one of his earlier posts. You have not been convicted by a court and, therefore, no-one has the right, other than the police, to hold any information of any incidents you have been involved in and pass it around claiming you are dishonest or a thief. Not only would RLP be liable for civil damages, they could be prosecuted under the Data Protection Act 1998 and have their IT hardware fed through an industrial shredder by the police.

As TB advises, serve a notice on them and Boots under Section 10, Data Protection Act 1998. Any arguments from either of them and the ICO gets a formal complaint.

Report the security officer to the SIA, if he is SIA-registered. He has acted unlawfully and the SIA do not take kindly to anyone licensed by them behaving in the way he did.

[thepinkranger]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

Um... also this bit:

The Company is entitled to seek compasation from you through Civil Recovery to recover its losses, being the cost of the disruption to its business in the investigation, apprehension and administration costs caused as a direct result of your actions. These costs include, but not limited to:

Losses

• Goods not recovered/not fit for resale
• Goods/packaging damaged/destroyed
• Cash stolen/Pecuniary advantage
• Fraudulent acts/Price swapping
• Services taken without remuneration
• Criminal damage

Investigation costs

• Staff & management time to observe, apprehend & detain suspects
• Investigation into the offence
• Reviewing CCTV/Till data
• Producing witness statements
• Preparing evidence & writing reports

Security costs

• CCTV system & operator time
• Reproducing images for evidence
• Electronic security devices
• Maintenance of security devices

Administrative Costs

• Data processing & case reviews
• Mileage
• Photocopy/postage/telephone calls
• Legal fees & court costs

[wales01man]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

Pinkranger
Reading your posts its plain that you are getting into a stress over this please take a deep breath,
Take note of the Advice the 2 LBers are given they know how to deal with this you may have been silly and made a mistake but by acting in the way they have Boots and their security Goon are worse their actions are at best stupid and at worst for them Illegal.

[thepinkranger]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

there's this bit in the leaflet which says:

In principle the Data Protection Act 1998 does not prevent the use of data for civil recovery purposes provided that the data protection principles are complied with. You are notified that the personal information held about you may be passed to the Police for criminal proceedings and to Retail Loss Prevention Limited for civil recovery proceedings.

We will pass this personal data to Retail Loss Prevention Limited where it may be shared, in accordance with data protection law, with the Police and crime prevention bodies. The use of this data will at all times be in compliance with the Data Protection Act 1998.

That was the bit which was worrying me.

(I think my 'we' they mean Boots)

[bluebottle]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

Any chance of typing the wording into a post, please?

[thepinkranger]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

I've decided not to because the writing would be too small when I resized it for the forum.

[teaboy2]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

It would be uinteresting to see yes, but it won't make any difference to the fact that RLP stand no chance in court.

I have found a link to the backlash RLP directed as legal Beagles and other consumer forums as a direct result of them losing the oxford test case. Note how they (RLP) claim to have many successful claims in court, yet fail to say how many and how many of them were the result of a defendant not defending and therefore resulting in RLP getting automatic default judgement in their favor.

Have a read here, you will find it interesting - http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...oss+prevention

[thepinkranger]

Re: Letter from RLP after caught shoplifting from Boots

okay.