Shoplifting and RLP - slightly different case.

[Dog Father]

Back in December I was caught shoplifting in Waitrose, the police were called and I received a community resolution order. I have received the first RLP letter which I have attached (3rd March). I understand from the threads the best thing to do is ignore, I emailed before I found this forum stating without admitting any liability I wished to bring the matter to a close and how would this be possible. They replied saying I needed to make an offer. I have not replied since. My biggest concern and what is giving me crippling anxiety is the fact they say that on reviewing CCTV they have 7 other occasions showing that i did the same thing this is based on the 2 x weekly shops i did. I assume they have only gone that far due to how long they keep CCTV? They have come up with a figure based on how many times I used my waitrose card in store for the previous 12 months, again assume they keep card data for 12 months.

I understand to ignore the letter but I am worried the police are going to turn up at my door anytime. I am constantly checking the driveway. I am so scared and regret so much what I have done. Does anyone think that Police would have been in touch already if they were going to? The store would need to get the Police reopen the case I assume

Please help I don't know what to do

Apologies I am unable to upload any attachments... It says I am not authorised to

[Dog Father]

Letter

[echat11]

Hi Dog Father

Welcome to LB

You need to upload the letters again, can't be read without difficulty.

[PallasAthena]

I can't read the letter very well but does it expressly state that the CCTV pictures of you on 7 previous occasions each shows you stealing? Please do NOT comment on here on whether you did or did not steal on those visits - RLP may read this thread, it's a public forum.. I just want to know whether their allegation is that the CCTV actually shows you committing an act of theft?

As for your previous shopping visits in the last 12 months, for which it appears they have no CCTV only a record of your payments, they cannot have any actual evidence of you stealing. The text isn't clear enough for me to read but they seem to be saying that if they have evidence you have stolen once Waitrose are entitled to assume you always steal and therefore arrive at their own estimate of how much you stole in total in the last year and sue you for that. Again please do not comment on whether you did or did not steal on those previous visits to Waitrose. They quote some case law to support their claim. This is outside my legal experience (I am not a lawyer) but Celestine might be able to help.

It looks very much to me that they have evidence of theft by you on one visit late in 2024 but have no evidence of any previous thefts at all but are trying to claim that because you know you have been to that store on 108 previous occasions they are entitled to assume you stole on all those visits and so owe Waitrose over £21,000!

Rather amusingly I see RLP describe the complete lack of any evidence at all for the previous 100+ visits as being "evidential uncertainty"!

Of course as in all RLP cases RLP themselves have no power to sue you and I imagine this letter, like their usual letters, implies that Waitrose 'might' or 'could' sue you. Not that they will.

[Dog Father]

Re take of letter, hopefully clearer. P1.jpgP2.jpgP3.jpg

[Dog Father]

PallasAthena hopefully the last paragraph on page 1 is clearer now and answers you question on allegations.

[Dog Father]

Hi Dog Father

Welcome to LB

You need to upload the letters again, can't be read without difficulty.

Can you read these now?

[echat11]

Can you read these now?

I agree with what PallasAthena has said.

What I would say is, they don't need to estimate as they use electronic stock systems, i.e. stock is delivered, input into the store's inventory, then customers buy items, that comes off the stores inventory etc. There is no 'rhyme or reason' why they haven't used technology to account for the stock that they allege is missing e.g. their inventory shows they had 8 cans of beans before your visit, then 7 cans of beans after your visit etc. They know they can, but seem to be pinning a missing stock on you. But it seems 'ridiculous' that they've been selective in the use of 'technology'.

I have to caveat the post by saying, I don't what you've done or haven't done.