Letter from RLA

[Lottieloulou]

Advice please.

Scary letter received from RLA stating that they have proof of a family member scanning cheaper bar codes. Family member was challenged in store, denied the incident and left the store abandoning all shopping.

They have not returned to the store since but have now received a letter stating that previous visits (can only assume they used the loyalty card to identify the person) have shown that they have proof of 20 till receipts with reduced items. Family member has admitted that they have on occasions used a cheaper barcode but they don’t believe it to be as often as they’re stating.

Family member is worried sick but more so that they’re unsure if the store will report to the police( incident in store happened 3 weeks ago), letter received 1 week after. Family member replied to letter disputing the claim but said they would consider paying a reduced fee (they regret replying now but panicked). The company responded requesting an offer is put to them for consideration.

When would it be likely that the store would report the incident to the police and when/ how would the police react?

[DE DOGS]

Why not wait and see, how can they go to Court without clear proof ?, they regret replying now but are panicked, and may as well walk to the road and throw money at it.

[des8]

forgive my ignorance, but who are RLA?

[Lottieloulou]

Sorry I may have got the initials wrong Retail Loss

[des8]

Retail Loss Prevention Limited most likely.

Have they detailed how much they are trying to recover, and if so have they itemised it?

[Lottieloulou]

Yes they have and it’s itemised. Does this make it more serious?

[des8]

Not more serious, but it might enable the figures to be challenged

[Lottieloulou]

Would you recommend that they attempt to negotiate the figures or ignore any further correspondence? If a payment is not made, is it likely that the supermarket will then look to prosecute themselves?

[des8]

Can't possibly hazard a guess without seeing the full facts and figures.
Unlikely they would prosecute as that means initiating a private criminal prosecution in magistrates court and might be difficult to prove.
Possibly they would initiate a civil claim in the county court, but will depend on the amount involved and probably unlikely.
However as the offences seem to have been admitted, who knows?

Often civil recovery firms add in costs of investigation and the like.. they can be dismissed.
Also you need to work out what the shop has actually lost, which figure takes into account the wholesale cost to the shop, not the retail cost. You could argue that they only lost the wholesale value less the reduced amount paid.
It is possible that the reduced price that was scanned is more than the wholesale cost of the item.

[Lottieloulou]

The offences haven’t been admitted to the store however, I think that the fact they engaged in correspondence with RLP shows a level of admittance. Would you recommend that a response is sent requesting CCTV footage? It’s difficult to know whether they should pay or challenge the amount. They’re scared that if they don’t pay that this might make the store take further action.

[des8]

What CCTV coverage is there? You only mention till receipts indicating use of reduced price barcodes.

As mentioned earlier without knowing full facts and figures it is difficult to make suggestions.
Could you post up a redacted copy of RLP's letters and the initial response from your family member?

[Lottieloulou]

Yes I will ask them for the letter.

I am guess

[Lottieloulou]

I am I guess referring to possible cameras at the self scan tills or even cctv footage in the store

[Lottieloulou]

Scanned Document.pdf Hi,
Update on case and advice request.
RLP have passed the case to Scott & Mears. My relative has told me that they have received some letters and text messages from said company. Today they received the attached letter.

any advice that I can pass on to them?

[des8]

Scott & Mears are debt collection agency, nothing more nothing less.
RLP weren't able to collect a non existent debt, nor can this new lot of bottom feeders.

Ignore them and their letters.

The only thing one never ignores are genuine court papers (and there won't be any of those)

Here's a thread you might find of interest https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...o-recover-debt