caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

[kane1303]

Re: caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

In the second one it said that unfortunately I ignored the first letter and that this will not mean that they will be removing the "fine" we have to pay.

[bluebottle]

Re: caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

In the second one it said that unfortunately I ignored the first letter and that this will not mean that they will be removing the "fine" we have to pay.

Kane,

What RLP have sent you is a speculative invoice. It is not a fine. RLP have no power in law to impose fines on anyone and they have no power or right in law to demand people pay them money. A senior Circuit Judge at Oxford County Court told them that in May 2012. However, they hope you don't know or find out about the case and judgement that resulted.

It is now important that your parents speak to Kate on Tuesday. She will explain to your parents what RLP are really like and how to deal with them.

Bluebottle

[kane1303]

Re: caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

Okay thanks.

[CleverClogs]

Re: caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

Okay thanks.

Please read the attached file, then print it out and show it to your parents.

[bizzybob]

Re: caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

Kane that attachment is the Oxford Case, it blows RLPs claims and speculative invoices out of the water. They would rather you didn't know about it, and indeed are so worried by it they tried to have blogs taken down over it's exposure

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

unfortunately for RLP it makes their methods open to question, and indeed a letter chain would be good evidence of harassment, the more letters they send the bigger the hole they dig for themselves.

[CleverClogs]

Re: caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

Kane that attachment is the Oxford Case, it blows RLPs claims and speculative invoices out of the water.

What it "blows out of the water" or, more precisely, holes under the waterline, is RLP's persistent misstatement of case law.

Yes, the case of Aerospace Publishing v Thames Water (which RLP are always keen to cite) does allow for compensatory damages to be paid in respect of workers diverted from revenue generating tasks but, unlike America where "civil recovery" originated, punitive damages are rarely (if ever) awarded in the UK. Compensatory damages are meant to be just that - to return the situation to how things were before the tort happened.

In the case of Aerospace Publishing, the staff were forced to spend long hours clearing up the mess caused by the flood. Old photographs had to be salvaged where possible and new photographs had to be commissioned. When the staff were engaged on such duties, they were diverted from their usual, revenue generating roles and that was the basis of that company's successful claim.

The Oxford case was significantly different, in that it established that no member of staff had been diverted from revenue generating activities for any significant period of time. The damages demanded by the retailer (perhaps at the suggestion of RLP) were thus not a genuine pre-estimate of liquidated damages or even a "best guess" of any losses sustained, but an attempt to extract punitive damages. The security goon was found not to have been diverted from his proper duties; indeed, apprehending suspected thieves was his proper duty in that store. Likewise, all the other possible causes of loss were found not to have been proved, even on the balance of probability.

They would rather you didn't know about it, and indeed are so worried by it they tried to have blogs taken down over its exposure

They even threatened to sue for alleged harassment of their company (which is impossible!) and for alleged libel; all that happened is that they made a little bit of work for a firm of lawyers until RLP saw sense and realised that, when their libel case came to trial, the arguments used in the Oxford case would be repeated in the High Court - which is where libel cases must commence - and that a binding precedent could thus be set, effectively derailing their gravy train permanently.

[bizzybob]

Re: caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

Kane CleverClogs has succinctly, and effectively made out the case why RLP would be very silly indeed to continue with their outrageous demands.

[CleverClogs]

Re: caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

Any updates?

[Celestine]

Re: caught shoplifting in primark - age 16

I didn't hear anything :noidea: