RLP please help or advice?

[calmandcool]

Hello, firstly my apologies if I am repeating any information or requesting advice that has already been given!
to cut a long story short I visited my local Debenhams, killing time before traveling home, just browsing, I picked up what I thought was a make up sample, nipped to the loo and attempted to leave the store. I was stopped outside by a gentleman who said he was security and that I needed to follow him, I stepped inside the store and asked why, he said I had pocketed a mascara and left without paying, I said I'm sorry but u are mistaken, it is a sample! He clarified it was not, I was mortified and accompanied him to a room where another gentleman quizzed me, I was completely honest and said I had the impression it was a sample? During a half hour ordeal of being made to feel like a child, they said they didn't like my attitude, if I continued to speak they would just call the police, I said fine! But they didn't, instead told me I was barred from the store and they would be referring me to civil recovery, some weeks later I received a patronizing letter threatening me and demanding £147?
I have no idea what my rights are or how to handle this, I've now received a second letter even worse than the first, I'm so worried they could take me to court? Can anyone please advise?

[ploddertom]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

Did they call the police - no. Did they retain the goods still in a saleable condition - yes. Therefore what loss have they sustained - none. Like Private Parking tickets these letters are phrased to frighten & intimidate whereas they have no powers at all. The letter will be full of ifs, buts, mays, mights etc. You can safely ignore them, if by some remote chance you get Court documents then come back for more help. You may get more of these letters from them each increasing its threat level.

For me having told you all this I will now charge you £100 - please send it ASAP.

[calmandcool]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

Thank you for that, I'm still but confused as to how they can say all those things if they are not going to happen? They gave a break down of the losses incurred such as employment of security staff, cameras, etc etc, it had a slightly unprofessional tone? Such as, 'you will probably be embarrassed or scared hence not replying to previous letter' I have worked in retail and never thought security staff had the right to impose punishments,
sorry if I'm wittering on?! I suppose I need to know the worst case scenario, and what RLP can actually do? If anything?
thanks again for your help, I cannot talk to anyone about this as I'm completely embarrassed!

[ploddertom]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

Take the time to read some of the other threads on the same matter and you will get a feel for how this pans out.

[calmandcool]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

That's how I initially found this site, by search engine? Just slight differences that I was unsure as to whether my situation would still apply? I will have another look thanks again!

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

Following on from Ploddertom's post, it is clearly evident from what you say that Debenhams have acted in a totally disproportionate and unnecessary manner. What should they have done? It is clearly a misunderstanding and they should have treated it as such. Taking the make-up from you should have been the end of it. However, they decided to detain you, abuse you and then have the nerve to threaten you with "civil recovery". The fact is, any expense Debenhams incurred was as the direct result of the ineptitude and incompetence of the company, its employees, servants and agents. The law does not allow anyone to make a claim against another person for any alleged losses they have incurred as the result of their own incompetence, ineptitude or disproportionate behaviour. The Law Commission has stated, publicly, that there is NO legal basis for civil recovery claims and a senior Circuit Judge took the same view at Oxford County Court in May 2012. RLP will insist this ruling is of no consequence and that their version of the law is the correct one. Well, it is not. They will also try and have you believe that posters on LB do not know what they are talking about? Oh yeah? A number of the posters on LB are legal professionals or retired law enforcement professionals.

Should RLP make any further demands or, indeed, make any threats, come back onto this thread as there are a number of ways in which to deal with this sort of behaviour by legal means. In the meantime, follow Ploddertom's advice.

[calmandcool]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

Thank you thank you thank you! I will be back on with anymore correspondence I may get. There's letters are quite bizarre? If nothing else this is an experience!

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

In my view, for a CR operator to send one of their Demand-O-Grams is sailing close to the wind legally. For them to send two is sailing dangerously close to the wind. After that, any further correspondence makes them and their client legitimate targets for the legal equivalent of a torpedo armed with a nuclear warhead.

[calmandcool]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

I really hope this is not going to get nasty, its so sad when a person feels they can only talk to strangers (very nice strangers) and not have any confidence? Also could I ask if I should contact the CAB or if there help would not be ssomething needed? And I am concerned with posts regarding the RLP trolling these sites and mentioning in correspondence? Surely that is a breach of my privacy?

[wales01man]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

I would expect RLP and other companies who feature on this forum to read it even thinking some of the posts are put on by them to see what info people are given for them to fight them off in your case you did nothing wrong so have nothing to fear,please review the advice and make your decision

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

We are fully aware of the fact that RLP troll this site and refer to it in correspondence, often slagging off those who advise people who have been caught up in the inept and incompetent behaviour of retail security. Whatever RLP may claim, they cannot overrule the Law Commission and, until they and their clients can obtain a judgement, in their favour, from one of the higher courts, they cannot continue to behave in the way they have been doing so up to now. Sooner or later, someone is going to turn around and give RLP and their retail clients the biggest legal hiding of their lives. That is, if the authorities do not launch an investigation into RLP and its sister company Cireco before that happens.

[CleverClogs]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

Thank you for that, I'm still but confused as to how they can say all those things if they are not going to happen?

That's easy to explain - they make money by bullying people.

They gave a break down of the losses incurred such as employment of security staff, cameras, etc etc, it had a slightly unprofessional tone?

Perhaps because it was unprofessional?

If their purported losses are subjected to strict proof, they will be seen to have no direct link to the incident. They would still have employed the same security goon(s) at the same rate of pay whether or not the incident had occurred. Likewise, the cameras were not installed just for your visit to the store, any more than the sales counters and tills were installed for your convenience.

I have worked in retail and never thought security staff had the right to impose punishments,

They don't.

I suppose I need to know the worst case scenario, and what RLP can actually do?

RLP can do precisely bugger all other than to "advise" Debenhams to sue and, if the case is properly defended, Debenhams will lose.

Please see the attached file.

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

What is laughable is that although RLP employ an in-house legal professional - Vanessa Willetts - they are not registered with the SRA or the MoJ as a CMC. Their sister company - Cireco - is not registered with the ICO, as required by the Data Protection Act 1998. Cireco maintain RLP's "Database of Wrongdoing". However, the legality of maintaining such a database is questionable, as The Economic League and its successor found out.

The questions that arise as to CR operators' activities and those of their retail clients are -

Does A CR operator or retailer have any right, in law, to demand compensation for costs they allege someone has caused as the result of the ineptitude and/or incompetence of the retailer and/or their security staff?

No. If a retailer or their security staff behave in an inept, incompetent, disproportionate or inappropriate manner, the law will not compensate them for any alleged losses they incurred as a result. If there has been a misunderstanding, then it should be treated as such. If the retail staff cannot prove that the person they allege has committed a "wrongful act", then there is no cause of claim. With point-of-sale equipment being notoriously unreliable, security equipment being equally unreliable and retailers taking their legal advice from commercial lawyers who have little, if any, understanding of the Criminal Law, is it any wonder the retail and CR industries have convinced themselves that they have a right to compensation? The fact is, the Law Commission and a senior Circuit Judge have made it abundantly clear that they don't.

Can a CR operator demand an alleged "wrongdoer" produces evidence of innocence to them without them producing any evidence of the alleged wrongdoing?

No. That is a breach of Civil Procedures Rules' Pre-Action Protocol and Practice Direction. The CR operator MUST produce evidence of the alleged wrongdoing and, indeed, produce evidence that it IS, in fact, a wrongdoing, not, simply, a misunderstanding or retail security staff who are inept, incompetent or behaving in an inappropriate or disproportionate manner. CR operators, all too often, will allege you have committed a wrongdoing, but will not specify or detail what that alleged wrongdoing is. Put pressure on the CR operator to both specify and detail what the alleged wrongdoing is and how this has resulted in loss to their client. If they still avoid doing so, then any person being pursued by a CR operator would be justified in increasing the pressure on the CR operator to detail and justify their allegations and claims. Any further refusal or failure to comply with requests after that on the part of the CR operator and the person being pursued by them would be entitled to take appropriate steps to legally restrain the CR operator and the retailer involved.

Hope this helps.

[calmandcool]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

It really does, I think there must be many people out there who are scared to disagree and stick up for there rights, and do pay these bullies? I considered it when I got the first letter just purely to put and end to it? But on researching on sites like this I realize my gut instinct was correct. I'm not sure how to handle the ban from the store? As ridiculous as it sounds, up until this incident I was a regular shopper! I dread to think how much hard earned cash I have spent in there, not to mention having to make poor excuses not to go in with family and friends as I normally would! It's not life or death and I don't HAVE to go in, its just so petty and inconvenient?

[CleverClogs]

Re: RLP please help or advice?

I'm not sure how to handle the ban from the store?

Ignore it.

Are they really going to set a guard on all entrances, lest your shadow darkens their threshold?

Are they really going to refuse payment at a till and tell you to depart without your selected goods?