RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

[James2]

Hi all!

i am seeking a bit of advice on behalf of my friend.

a few months ago they were caught shoplifting from TK MAXX and was stopped after leaving the store by store security and asked to go back to the office. When they got in to the office my friend was asked why they had taken the items and everything was recovered in a fit for re sale condition (all tags still on items and un damaged)

my friend explained that it was completely out of character, expressed how deeply sorry they were and had no idea why they had done what they had done. After searching my friends bag they found some tablets and asked what they were for and my friend told them they were antidepressants and they are currently under going regular counselling (which is true)

The Police weren't called but they took a copy of my friends passport, name, address and place of work and he was aloud to leave.

Obviously my friend was distraught and was worrying that they were going to contact his work over the weekend, so, in result he wrote his notice and was ready to hand it in Monday morning first thing. Unfortunately, TK MAXX had called his work and he was called in to the office after he had handed in his notice and they said he can either A) leave with immediate effect or B) have a full investigation carried out regarding the incident. He decided to leave with immediate effect not knowing what could come of the investigation (he'd rather leave on a voluntary basis than be investigated and then ASKED to leave)

A week later he received a letter from RLP saying that,in short, pay up £157 for compensation to there client or the matter would be escalated to court.

he told me about this and I had a little look on the Internet and after reading pages and pages of posts and advice from people who had also been contacted by the RLP gave him the advice to ignore the letter as it was just a speculative invoice with no legal basis and that they are just using scare tactics to suck money out of you.

he took my advice and a second letter came through the post (as expected) with pretty much the same as what the first letter had stated but worded differently with a few scary words added in.

Again I reassured him and sent him some links to forums for him to read to help with his anxiety and he ignored this letter.

so next up, you guessed it, a third letter has been sent through today.

i worry that I am falling in to there fear trap and my friend is too and he is uncomfortable with ignoring these letters anymore due to what they are saying.

i know there has been a lot on RLP but every case I have read has been under different circumstances I.e they're under 18 or currently jobless

some advice would be much appreciated

i still believe that there is nothing they can do and to just ignore it but I wouldn't forgive myself if I gave advice to him that was bad and that got him in to avoidable trouble!

Thank you!



Letter one. http://i1272.photobucket.com/albums/...ps5c500a7a.jpg.


Letter two. http://i1272.photobucket.com/albums/...ps33201436.jpg


Letter three. http://i1272.photobucket.com/albums/...ps09dcb7f2.jpg

[wales01man]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

Why did TK MAXX contact his employer he was not convicted of an offence?

[James2]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

Why did TK MAXX contact his employer he was not convicted of an offence?

I'm not sure? I assumed at the time that that was just a normal thing that would happen to him because both stores are in town?

[wales01man]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

Its late now but im sure someone will come and offer some sound advice if you hear nothing overnight come back and just post Bump this will get your thread back on first page i am no expert but i think something can be sorted out with the advice of some LBers there are several things wrong with their treatment to my mind

[charitynjw]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

Hi,

Some interesting reading for you.
Enjoy :tinysmile_grin_t:

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...r-Court-defeat

http://legalbeagles.info/civil-recov...ings/#more-528

[CleverClogs]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

Why did TK MAXX contact his employer he was not convicted of an offence?

I'm not sure? I assumed at the time that that was just a normal thing that would happen to him because both stores are in town?

I would say it would only be "normal" if both stores were in the same group or if both stores were managed by fellow members of the sinister, secret society known as Rotary International.

It is possible that the culprit may have a valid claim for damages against TK MAXX and/or its putative manager.

[CleverClogs]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

a few months ago they were caught shoplifting from TK MAXX and was stopped after leaving the store by store security and asked to go back to the office. When they got in to the office my friend was asked why they had taken the items and everything was recovered in a fit for re sale condition (all tags still on items and undamaged)

my friend explained that it was completely out of character, expressed how deeply sorry they were and had no idea why they had done what they had done. After searching my friend's bag they found some tablets and asked what they were for and my friend told them they were antidepressants and they are currently under going regular counselling (which is true)

First of all, which antidepressants were they?

Some antidepressants are more likely than others to reduce or remove inhibitions, or even cause people to commit a crime.

The Police weren't called but they took a copy of my friend's passport, name, address and place of work and he was allowed to leave.

Why did your friend carry his passport?

Why did he tell them where he worked?

Obviously my friend was distraught and was worrying that they were going to contact his work over the weekend, so, in result he wrote his notice and was ready to hand it in Monday morning first thing. Unfortunately, TK MAXX had called his work and he was called in to the office after he had handed in his notice and they said he can either A) leave with immediate effect or B) have a full investigation carried out regarding the incident. He decided to leave with immediate effect not knowing what could come of the investigation (he'd rather leave on a voluntary basis than be investigated and then ASKED to leave)

I'd rather like to see the managers of those stores superglued together around a lamp-post. :grin:

A week later he received a letter from RLP saying that, in short, pay up £157 for compensation to their client or the matter would be escalated to court.

It's not so much for their impoverished (?) client as it's for RLP, as they take a large cut of the monies demanded whilst risking little if their client should take the matter to court.

so next up, you guessed it, a third letter has been sent through today.

I worry that I am falling in to their fear trap and my friend is too and he is uncomfortable with ignoring these letters any more due to what they are saying.

Yes, that is hardly difficult to understand.

Although they employ a solicitor - or did until quite recently - they are not actually a firm of lawyers.

i still believe that there is nothing they can do and to just ignore it but I wouldn't forgive myself if I gave advice to him that was bad and that got him in to avoidable trouble!

Merely ignoring their threats may not be the wisest course of action, as Really Lousy Parasites may believe that, if the case went to court, they/their client would get a default judgement.

However, most of the claims issued by RLP are more than somewhat excessive despite the assertions made to the contrary and the idea of a fixed cost is nothing more than an attempt to enforce a penalty by the civil courts.

Please read the attached PDF file for the judgement given in the Oxford case, which claim utterly failed when it was subjected to strict proof.

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

Having read the initial post in this thread, I am somewhat concerned by the conduct of TKMaxx and its security staff. Retail security staff have no power whatsoever to search alleged shoplifters, their bags or their person. The usual bleat retailers come out with is that they have a "common law power of search". Well, there is no such thing. And I should know that as I am a retired police officer. The fact that your friend is on anti-depressants is very relevant to their case. Like a lot of medicines, anti-depressants have side-effects and the fact that your friend is undergoing counselling indicates to me that they have suffered some sort of trauma or have witnessed some traumatic event that has had an adverse effect on their mental health, hence the counselling and anti-depressants.

By searching your friends bag, TKMaxx have destroyed all and any credibility in any case they believe they may have against your friend. What is there to say that the security staff were not responsible for placing the items in your friend's bag and then bullied or coerced him/her into agreeng that he/she took them without paying? Do you see what I'm getting at? If the police had been called and found out that the security staff had searched your friend's bag, they would have probably told TKMaxx to take a hike. Also, as far as I am aware, retailers and their security staff have no power whatsoever to demand or photocopy any official document an alleged shoplifter has in their possession.

As for TKMaxx ringing your friend's place of work, no court has found your friend guilty of any offence and it could be argued that TKMaxx have acted maliciously, if not, unlawfully, and the fact that your friend lost their job as a result may well give rise to a valid claim against TKMaxx for damages. There may also be a case to answer against the security staff, personally, as well as TKMaxx, for their actions.

Having read RLP's letters and taking into account the circumstances of the incident and the actions of TKMaxx and their security staff, I have to say that, in my experience of having dealt with shoplifters and alleged shoplifters, both as a police officer and when working in the retail industry prior to becoming a police officer, both TKMaxx and RLP are treading on very dangerous ground, legally. The claims RLP make in their initial letter are fatuous to say the least. Not only that, the Law Commission has gone on record to say that claims made by civil recovery firms have no basis in law whatsoever, no matter how much civil recovery firms claim to the contrary. Also, a court has ruled such claims to have no legal basis whatsoever. RLP will claim that what they quote on their website is correct and will go into a tirade of besmirching anyone who opposes them and their viewpoint.

Apart from being fatuous, the claims being made by RLP are certainly unsound and, taking account of the actions of TKMaxx and their security staff, may well give rise to proceedings being brought against them and TKMaxx. No judge is going to tolerate the sort of behaviour that TKMaxx has allowed their security staff and management to engage in, especially when it becomes clear that your friend is receiving counselling and is on anti-depressants.

As stated earlier in this post, TKMaxx has, by its actions, destroyed all and any credibility in any case it believes it has against your friend. If I were advising TKMaxx in this matter, it would be to drop the matter immediately or run the very real risk of having their unlawful and potentially illegal actions dissected in an open court, as well as having a judge wipe the floor with them. As for RLP, unless they are begging to have proceedings for harassment brought against them in the civil courts, they would be well-advised to drop this matter like the proverbial hot potato. There may well also be a case to answer under the Criminal Law, also, as it is an offence to make an unwarranted demand and at the time of doing so use menaces (threats) as a means of enforcing the demand. Neither TKMaxx or RLP have proven that a credible or quantifiable claim for compensation exists against your friend and the onus is on them to prove their case. Your friend needs to challenge RLP to produce ALL evidence they and TKMaxx claim to have in support of their case within seven days of their receipt of the request, failing which, steps may be taken to counter-claim against them and TKMaxx for harassment, amongst other things, or legally-restrain them. This may sound rather extreme and brutal, but, in your friend's case, both TKMaxx and RLP are treading on a legal minefield.

[wales01man]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

ASno criminal offence and conviction occured after this alleged incident would the OP best be advised to get their friend to a solicitor to pursue a claim against RLP and the store this stimks of a big vrother police state,where next we accuse people of any crime bypass the legal system sent a letter for an amount of so called damages and lose them there job,i wont condone any crime but the police and judiciary have to deal with it not some jumped up security moron and a company like RLP,

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

ASno criminal offence and conviction occured after this alleged incident would the OP best be advised to get their friend to a solicitor to pursue a claim against RLP and the store this stimks of a big vrother police state,where next we accuse people of any crime bypass the legal system sent a letter for an amount of so called damages and lose them there job,i wont condone any crime but the police and judiciary have to deal with it not some jumped up security moron and a company like RLP,

I think you'll find what you're referring to is corporate fascism, Wales. I endorse your advice for the OP's friend to consult a solicitor 100%. My gut-feeling is that, on this occasion, RLP have bitten off more than they can chew and may well have put themselves and TKMaxx in a position where they become the defendants and not the OP's friend. I have had a feeling for sometime now that RLP and one of its clients would cross the line and get clobbered, legally, as a result. This may well be one case where that happens.

[charitynjw]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

Has James2 (OP) got a copy of his resignation letter, & if so, does it give the reason for resigning?

If not, can he obtain a copy? (SAR if necessary)

It could come in useful.

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

Has James2 (OP) got a copy of his resignation letter, & if so, does it give the reason for resigning?

If not, can he obtain a copy? (SAR if necessary)

It could come in useful.

If he is going to hit TKMaxx with a claim for damages, I would say it was essential. Also, the OP's friend needs to find out if the security goons are SIA-registered or not. If they are SIA-registered, it may well be a case of "Goodbye SIA licence" and "Hello Jobseekers Allowance".

It may well be a case of "Hello Jobseekers Allowance" for the security goons and the idiotic TKMaxx employee who rang the OP's friend's employers, thereby causing him to suffer loss of employment.

That could prove to be a very costly error of judgement on the part of TKMaxx and instructing RLP may well compound the cost to TKMaxx, notwithstanding that RLP may be liable, also, as RLP and TKMaxx have yet to provide evidence to prove their case and in case RLP feel they can use the Data protection Act 1998 in order to frustrate the OP's friend from establishing the bona fides of the security goons and TKMaxx employee who rang his/her employer, the Civil Procedures Rules supersede the Act.

[James2]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

Thank you all for your time in responding to my original post, it's very much appreciated!

First of all, which antidepressants were they?


citalopram hydrobromide


Why did your friend carry his passport?

as a form of ID


Why did he tell them where he worked?

i asked him this as well! he told me that they said if he hadn't have given his details that they had asked for then they would have called the police :/




And no he didn't work for Tk Maxx, he worked for another high street department store that were in no way linked other than sharing the same town!

I didn't see the resignation letter but I'm pretty sure he'll still have a copy. He didn't write down a reason for why he was leaving but just put something along the lines of:
Termination of employment, last working day is X, thanks for the opportunity - or words to those effect.

His manager called him in to the office, told him (in short) "be investigated or leave with immediate effect"
and then made him cross out the date on his resignation letter and changed it to that days date. This was done in pen so it's pretty clear to see what happened! There is NO WAY he would have left his job working no notice with no other job lined up as he has rent and bills to pay for but was made to feel this was his only choice!

So by my understanding, his next step is to;

1. Request to see all evidence held against him by RLP
2. Write a letter of defence and explain the mitigating circumstances (antidepressants and counselling)
3. Seek legal advice and peruse a case against Tk Maxx for contacting his work and loss of job

i'll advise him to get names of those involved at TK Maxx including security guard (and check to see if he's sia licenced) and a copy of his letter of resignation?

Anything else in order to strengthen his case?

Thank you all very much for your help!

[CleverClogs]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

I'd suggest that he contacts Bates Wells & Braithwaite - link - as they were the instructing solicitors in the Oxford case. He should certainly get in touch with The Bar Pro Bono Unit (link) or The National Pro Bono Centre (link), as it is quite possible that RLP will back off as soon as a solicitor responds and they realise that he won't be such a push-over.

[CleverClogs]

Re: RLP 3rd letter. Help please!

For those interested in the antics of Cireco Limited - RLP's "employment screening service" - the attached PDF file may be helpful.