Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

With thanks to Christian for giving me the idea.. but maybe we should send "the boys" round!

[bluebottle]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

*****PRESS RELEASE*****

INTERNET CONSUMER WEBSITE ANNOUNCES FORMATION OF MOUNTED BRANCH

Internet consumer website Legal Beagles today announced the formation of its Mounted Branch. New recruit, Chico the Chihuahua, pictured above with mount Percy the Pomeranian Mountain Dog, said, "When I saw the advert, I thought I would be riding a police horse. No-one told me it would be this hairy monster." Percy refused to comment.

[EXC]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

It looks like a member of the House of Lords is taking up the issue.


Questions for Short Debate

Time limit 1 hour or 1½ hours. The date on which the question was tabled is in italics; questions are removed from the list six months after tabling.

Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town to ask Her Majesty’s Government what is their assessment of major retailers’ practice of threatening civil recovery against those accused of low-value shoplifting following the judgment in Oxford County Court on 9 May in the test case of A Retailer v Ms B and Ms K. (22 May)

http://www.publications.parliament.u...dpap.htm#order

[EXC]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

It isn't the first good queation that Baroness Haytor has asked of the Government:



Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town (Labour) To ask Her Majesty's Government, for the year to 31 March 2011, how many complaints the Claims Management Regulator received about any claims management businesses that had their authorisation suspended or cancelled for reasons other than failure to pay their annual renewal fee; how many complaints were received before the Claims Management Regulator took a decision to investigate those businesses; how many complaints were received after the Claims Management Regulator had taken the decision to investigate until the business's authorisation was suspended or cancelled; and how many were received after the business's authorisation was suspended or cancelled.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/...3A24973#g459.4

[EXC]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

Thinking about this, Baroness Haytor was quick off the blocks with her question as it was lodged less than 2 weeks after the judgment was handed down and well before the Schillings letters and the resultant publicity in the Defamation Bill debate in the Commons.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

Perhaps the schillies at Schillings will write to her, seeking details of the Evil Criminal Mastermind who tipped her off about their client's activities?

I doubt that they'd be schilly enough to schue, as proceedings in Their Lordships' House are subject to Parliamentary privilege.

[TUTTSI]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

Copied from CAG....

The claimant in the instant case has not established either that the staff in question
were “significantly diverted from their usual activities” or that there was “any
significant disruption to its business” which, in this type of case, may amount to the
same thing. Nor was there any loss of revenue generation.

15. The two security people, far from being diverted from their usual activities, were in
fact actively engaged in them. They were doing just what the claimants paid for
them to do. I do not think that it avails the claimants to say that because they were
busy apprehending, they could not be patrolling or doing camera invigilation. It
might just as well be observed that when they were patrolling they could not be
looking at the security cameras anyway. They could not carry out all aspects of their
job simultaneously in any event. The shop continued to trade undisturbed and there is
no evidence that any non-security staff were involved with these defendants.

16. So the claim in respect of staff time cannot, in my judgment, be established. I was
not clear if, at the end of the case, the other two alleged heads of loss – administrative
costs and security equipment costs – were still being sought. But, if so, these claims
too cannot succeed. Neither can be shown to be attributable to the defendants’
activities. The amounts spent by the claimant would have been identical had the
defendants stayed at home or limited their shoplifting to other establishments.

17. It follows that the claims must be dismissed but I do not want it to be thought by the
claimant company that there is any lack of sympathy for its understandable desire to
recoup, if it can, something from those who prey on it by shoplifting. It is, of course,
no part of the purpose of this judgment to advise in this connection though it may be
that some different approach akin to that used against motorists who park too long in
excess of the contractual licence might work better.

18. But, in the circumstances there must be judgment for the defendants.

[enaid]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

...... http://www.legalbeagles.info/ARetailervMsB09052012.pdf

http://www.legalbeagles.info/ApprovedJudgment.pdf

[Guest]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

HI
I think section15 is quire damming and confirms everything we have been saying.

In my view it sounds the death knell for RLP,rest in piece.

D

[labman]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

Someone with, or with access to high connections per-empting and informing her in advance then.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

Someone with, or with access to high connections per-empting and informing her in advance then.

Monsieur L'épouvantail, perhaps?

[GuidoT]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

Transcript where the appeal was refused.

http://www.legalbeagles.info/ARetailervMsB09052012.pdf

[CleverClogs]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

Why did the claimant not appeal?

Was it because it was decided it would make better business sense to continue to claim damages from other alleged thieves on the basis of stare decisis that may not be wholly applicable, than to risk an adverse precedent from this case which could scupper their chances in the future?

[bluebottle]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

Why did the claimant not appeal?

Was it because it was decided it would make better business sense to continue to claim damages from other alleged thieves on the basis of stare decisis that may not be wholly applicable, than to risk an adverse precedent from this case which could scupper their chances in the future?

Mounting an appeal in the Court of Appeal is fairly expensive and the risk of judgement going against you is much higher than in the lower courts. An adverse judgement would be financially-disastrous for an R.L.P. company unless they had deep pockets, as the company would end up having to pay not only their own costs, but the other side's costs, too. My gut-feeling is that the prospects of successfully appealing HHJ Harris's ruling at Court of Appeal level are less than 51%. If the more learned LB members have a different view, it would be interesting to see what these are.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Civil Recovery Firm lashes out at Consumer Forums after Court defeat

As Misses A and B were represented pro bono at the County Court, the same would probably apply at appeal - so there'd be no respondents' costs to consider.

However, an adverse judgement in the Appeal Court would certainly cause more than trivial problems for a certain company as the purported basis for their fatuous claims would no longer exist.

Perhaps they should diversify now, to prepare for the future?

Has Ms La:censored:rt ever considered selling knitting patterns?