Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

[labman]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

I'll do you the courtesy of answering the points you've raised, Labman. Thank you!

PPCs are just plain chancers, as you well know. Yes, but they, too, issue speculative invoices which is what this is. They are not what this thread is about. What this thread is about are civil recovery operators who act for retailers and prey on people's vulnerabilities by issuing speculative invoices with dubiious or no legal standing. A lot of alleged CR cases are due to incompetent and badly-behaved and trained retail security staff, not to mention POS and security technology with a known history of reliability issues. The Oxford case demonstrated that there is an element of dishonesty involved in CR claims, evidenced by the two security personnel who were forced to admit, under cross-examination, on oath, that the figures they had quoted for time and cost were exaggerated. See Post 109.

With regard to litigation, any person representing another in a litigation case has to be registered in accordance with the Legal Services Act 2007. CRS and RLP represent others and, as such, it could be argued that they should be registered in accordance with the Act. Neither of them are registered. It could also be argued they shouldn't.

With regard to the PfHA, CRS have yet to demonstrate there is a valid and discernible case, in law. As yet, they have not. Don't forget that in Ferguson -v- British Gas Trading [2009], Ferguson owed nothing to BGT, but BGT continued to badger her for payment she did not owe, threatening her with legal action. Yes, I'm aware of this.

With regard to the Law Commissioner's comment to RLP, he made it quite clear that a CR operator is unlikely to be liable to civil or criminal action, so long as they do not engage in misleading or aggressive practices. Indeed - "unlikely to be liable to civil or criminal action"

As for the comment you have raised in the final part of the quote in your post, cases have to be looked at from different angles, not just on the face of it, otherwise, there is a further risk that an OP could be given incorrect advice or guidance. Or perhaps the risk of being given incorrect advice or guidance is increased by looking at it from different angles?

In Beagleman's case, I have offered an opinion. The mention of the regulators is an avenue of enquiry to determine whether the regulators consider a CR operator should be conducting their business under the ambit and scope of legislation that is intended to protect people from unscrupulous individuals and businesses.

The result of this has been the production of a letter (post 129) in which Beagleman states, "You are further put on notice that you make unlawful threats against me, which fall outside of legal protection, and I reserve my position as to whether I will pursue you, and/or your "client" (assuming it is true you act for them), in the criminal and civil jurisdictions."

Now let's assume he pursues this action, given that we know as fact CAB and other major advice organisations have taken HUGE interest in civil recovery, and not suggested the actions you have above, he could open himself up to vast legal costs when / if he loses the case.

This is my major concern with this form of advice. If it is going to be given, it should come with an absolutely massive warning or caveat. I am sure that if these avenues were there to be realistically tested, CAB etc... would have done so by now. Advising LB members these avenues exist in theory could lead to them being guinea pigs in this process, testing legislation that may or may not apply. This is not helpful.

The above is purely my opinion, but if I were the OP I would be very cautious of people who post with vast authority, when they may well not be correct in their line of thought.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

I would love to give them a good, tanned hide

By some means other than paying for their foreign holiday?

I'd suggest visiting the National Pro-Bono Centre (link). CRS are bullies and the only people bullies respect are those willing to stand up to them and to cause them some pain.

[beagleman]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

The result of this has been the production of a letter (post 129) in which Beagleman states, "You are further put on notice that you make unlawful threats against me, which fall outside of legal protection, and I reserve my position as to whether I will pursue you, and/or your "client" (assuming it is true you act for them), in the criminal and civil jurisdictions."

Now let's assume he pursues this action, given that we know as fact CAB and other major advice organisations have taken HUGE interest in civil recovery, and not suggested the actions you have above, he could open himself up to vast legal costs when / if he loses the case.

This is my major concern with this form of advice. If it is going to be given, it should come with an absolutely massive warning or caveat. I am sure that if these avenues were there to be realistically tested, CAB etc... would have done so by now. Advising LB members these avenues exist in theory could lead to them being guinea pigs in this process, testing legislation that may or may not apply. This is not helpful.

The above is purely my opinion, but if I were the OP I would be very cautious of people who post with vast authority, when they may well not be correct in their line of thought.

If you were in my shoes, what action would you take?

[charitynjw]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

If you were in my shoes, what action would you take?

Again, & to echo above thoughts, the final decision has to be yours! (My opinion, btw!)

[beagleman]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

Ok thanks,

can you guys just check over my letter?

is there any reason why they are legally not obliged to relinquish any evidence they intend to rely, to me?

[labman]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

If you were in my shoes, what action would you take?

It would do you no harm whatsoever to pop down your local CAB for a second opinion and see what they say. I make no claims to be an expert, but if you look at the writings of such people as Richard Dunstan about this, you'll get a different picture to the one painted above, and that from someone with 'real' authority to talk about the subject.

Have a read around the Oxford Case and research a few things yourself. There's loads on the internet, and the entire judgment is posted on the LB homepage. As a site we are dead against civil recovery.

Only you can decide what to do, but PLEASE make sure that you act from a fully informed position, not just from the reflections of one authoritative sounding poster. I don't want to undermine BB too much as he does a lot of good work on this site, but he knows I disagree with him on this point, so neither of us will take things personally.

We're not here to use members as guinea pigs, and I worry that blindly following one person could be a dangerous path to tread.

So if I were in your shoes, I'd have a good read round, pop down to my local CAB for another opinion and act from as informed a position as you can put yourself in.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

Let me preface this by stating that I do share your concern...

The result of this has been the production of a letter (post 129) in which Beagleman states, "You are further put on notice that you make unlawful threats against me, which fall outside of legal protection, and I reserve my position as to whether I will pursue you, and/or your "client" (assuming it is true you act for them), in the criminal and civil jurisdictions."

I am not wholly convinced that it would be helpful to call their threats unlawful - ill-founded or mistaken might be more apposite. Stating that one reserves one's position of suing or seeking prosecution does not necessarily mean that litigation or prosecution will ensue - it just means that it might.

Now let's assume he pursues this action, given that we know as fact CAB and other major advice organisations have taken HUGE interest in civil recovery, and not suggested the actions you have above, he could open himself up to vast legal costs when / if he loses the case.

If he were to seek an account of damages for their alleged harassment, he'd presumably do that via the County Court; provided the claim remained in the Small Claims Track, it is difficult to understand how he might be faced with "vast legal costs" were he to lose.

That said, I would rather doubt that he'd really have a viable case. Ferguson had been hounded over some considerable time by BG, which beagleman has not (yet) been.

Would you say that a shorter and more appropriate response would be to remind CRS of Arkell v Pressdram?

[beagleman]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

Thanks

i would feel more comfortable with the evidence in front of me, that's for sure - I would like to get my hands on that first and foremost

[CleverClogs]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

If you were in my shoes, what action would you take?

I do believe I'd wish to change my shoes. :rofl:

[charitynjw]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

Let me preface this by stating that I do share your concern...


I am not wholly convinced that it would be helpful to call their threats unlawful - ill-founded or mistaken might be more apposite. Stating that one reserves one's position of suing or seeking prosecution does not necessarily mean that litigation or prosecution will ensue - it just means that it might.


If he were to seek an account of damages for their alleged harassment, he'd presumably do that via the County Court; provided the claim remained in the Small Claims Track, it is difficult to understand how he might be faced with "vast legal costs" were he to lose.

That said, I would rather doubt that he'd really have a viable case. Ferguson had been hounded over some considerable time by BG, which beagleman has not (yet) been.

Would you say that a shorter and more appropriate response would be to remind CRS of Arkell v Pressdram?

Arkell v Pressdram..........

Very apt, CC!

[beagleman]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

Arkell v Pressdram..........

Very apt, CC!

Should I quote a particular part of the case, or just refer them to it?

[labman]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

Ok thanks,

can you guys just check over my letter?

is there any reason why they are legally not obliged to relinquish any evidence they intend to rely, to me?

They haven't actually issued proceedings yet have they? Have they done anything other than threaten and ask for the money?

If the answer to the above questions are 'no' then they have no obligation to release anything to you. You could waste £10 sending a SAR under the DPA, but they'd only tell you the bits about you, not anyone else.

You really want to know how they've arrived at that figure. You can ask for a breakdown (apologies if you already have - maybe you could point me to the post number if you have), a detailed breakdown would help, if you can get it.

Personally, I wouldn't send the letter, but that's just me. See what others say.

[labman]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

Should I quote a particular part of the case, or just refer them to it?

DON'T MENTION IT!!!!!!!!! lol

http://www.nasw.org/users/nbauman/arkell.htm



Probably exactly what you want to say, but ...........

[CleverClogs]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

Arkell v Pressdram..........

Very apt, CC!

Should I quote a particular part of the case, or just refer them to it?

:rofl:

[beagleman]

Re: Caught Stealing from Work, Letter from CRS

They haven't actually issued proceedings yet have they? Have they done anything other than threaten and ask for the money?

If the answer to the above questions are 'no' then they have no obligation to release anything to you. You could waste £10 sending a SAR under the DPA, but they'd only tell you the bits about you, not anyone else.

You really want to know how they've arrived at that figure. You can ask for a breakdown (apologies if you already have - maybe you could point me to the post number if you have), a detailed breakdown would help, if you can get it.

Personally, I wouldn't send the letter, but that's just me. See what others say.

I have drafted the letter above which includes;

Need I remind you, financial gain is NOT permitted by Civil Recovery, I would like a breakdown of all alleged charges and how you met the figure which you claim I owe – which you noted in your first letter to me as being the value of the loss, compensation to your client for the investigation, security and administration costs.

as of yet, I have received no breakdown of how they arrived at the figure