RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

[EXC]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Do the retailers ever come up with any proof that price rises have been curbed because of this system?
We know that the consumer gets the brunt of the cost of shoplifting, so as an example do they state we used to add say 5% of any price rises to the cost of goods and now using this system we can keep that to 2%.

That's an interesting point. Most retailers will say that the cost of shrinkage is inevitably met by higher prices and therefore the cost of shrinkage is already being met. On the other hand they could argue that lower prices would increase overall takings. So it's a tough one really.

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

I don't think that this is practical, recovery of damages is a fundamental legal entitlement, I don't think you could make a law that excepted retailers from it.

I think there could be some guideline introduced that prevented the blanket issuing of invoices, perhaps.

D

Again, I disagree with you most strongly. The retail industry has tried this con before through the criminal courts until the courts twigged what they were up to and brought the bar down on the practice. The civil courts should now take the same line. You don't need legislation, just a change of policy at HMCTS and better scrutiny of claims submitted by retailers. HMCTS court legal teams are very adept and skilled at weeding out dodgy claims.

[Guest]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Hi

I can tell you that security and shrinkage appear as liabilities on the annual balance sheet, and feature in the tax calculations. So they are part of the operational budget of the store.

D

[Guest]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Again, I disagree with you most strongly. The retail industry has tried this con before through the criminal courts until the courts twigged what they were up to and brought the bar down on the practice. The civil courts should now take the same line. You don't need legislation, just a change of policy at HMCTS and better scrutiny of claims submitted by retailers. HMCTS court legal teams are very adept and skilled at weeding out dodgy claims.

Interesting, how exactly did the HMCTS Court service bring the bar down,.
How exactly are the courts to decide which cases are legitimate, because there will be some, unless your suggesting a blanket ban on recovery actions made by all retailers. Are we talking about the Civil court swat team now?

D

[Amethyst]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

What happened in the criminal compensation cases Bluebottle ? Presumably they were over egging the value they were requesting as compensation, got caught out, gave up and switched to civil recovery ?

[Guest]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

yes was this a widespread racket, do you have any links?

D

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Tell me something I don't know, Davy. The retail industry has been caught cheating on numerous occasions. I know most of the scams retailers pull on consumers as well as suppliers. My gut-feeling is that it will be a case not of if but when CR is consigned to the dustbin of history. And that could be sooner rather than later if the Oxford CC transcript is given the widest publicity possible. As has already been said, it is imperative to the very survival of the CR industry that it keeps the public in the dark about the Oxford CC ruling. However, once the ruling becomes public knowledge, the whole premise and basis upon which CR operates will be exposed for what it is and the industry will collapse. It would also not surprise me if it left those retailers who use CR feeling very nervous as to whether they could face claims being made against them.

[Amethyst]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Was just reading through some old stuff and noticed the Centre for Retail Research is saying (well were in 2009 - https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...ZiVe7nEBEiRBrg )

''A civil recovery law is needed to provide a proper framework for the process that would be fair to all parties. This would give retailers the right to levy a civil demand against any shop thief, and lay down a framework of penalties covering large and small thefts, juvenile and adult offenders, first-time offenders and habitual offenders.''

But then there are PND's/FPN's already ??

Be worth looking at the laws made in the US to see what safeguards there are in place to prevent the speculative invoicing. Just as a thought. I presume the RLP peeps are already looking at this but no move seems to have been made - possibly prefering to keep it uncertain.

Just a thought for discussing as an outright ban on civil recovery by retailers isn't ever going to happen.

Timeline for Civil Recovery in the United States (from The New Breed of Civil Recovery_Geoffrey Northcott etc http://www.online-web-presentations....reg-Saputo.zip ) Some interesting stuff on here http://www.online-web-presentations..../TechTrack.php (but heading off on a tangent sorry!)

Nevada enacts 1st civil recovery statute (1972)

Shorts v. Palmer (1994)

Delaware is the final state to enact civil recovery legislation (2005)

Payless Drug Stores v. Brown (1985)

49 states and Washington D.C. have civil recovery statutes (1996)

35 states have enacted civil recovery statutes (1990)

Shopko Stores, Inc. v. Kujak (1987)

Ourso v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (2008)

[Guest]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Was just reading through some old stuff and noticed the Centre for Retail Research is saying (well were in 2009 - https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...ZiVe7nEBEiRBrg )
But then there are PND's already ??

Be worth looking at the laws made in the US to see what safeguards there are in place to prevent the speculative invoicing. Just as a thought. I presume the RLP peeps are already looking at this but no move seems to have been made - possibly prefering to keep it uncertain.

Just a thought for discussing as an outright ban on civil recovery by retailers isn't ever going to happen.

Yes and I wouldn't be looking for any effective policing action by the civil court any time soon.

It has to be legislation or perhaps guidelines and an extension to the OFT powers or some other regulatory body.

D

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

What happened in the criminal compensation cases Bluebottle ? Presumably they were over egging the value they were requesting as compensation, got caught out, gave up and switched to civil recovery ?

The most common tactic was to claim a lost sale, obtain compensation and then take the item back to the store and put it back on sale, thus, obtaining the money twice for the same item. I blew the whistle on one retailer who had a habit of doing it when I was with the Metropolitan Police in Central London. I was very popular with the retailer, but the stipendiary magistrate (now called District Judges) hearing the case wasn't at all impressed with the retailer and threw out their request for compensation. Other courts started to cotton on to what was happening and increasingly refused retailers compensation. What the retailers were doing was using it not to compensate them for genuine losses, but as a profit-making exercise. The other matter that put an end to retailers having unrestricted access to the criminal courts was them demanding the police prosecute shoplifters regardless of the value of the goods involved, including instances where the goods had been recovered intact and in a saleable condition. It costs a minimum of £2,000 per case to prosecute a case in the magistrates courts. One case, involving goods worth a mere 65p, was pursued through into the Crown Court. The judge in that case wiped the floor with the CPS, not only because of the cost to the taxpayer (Crown Court cases can cost at least £5,000-£10,000 per case even for a straightforward case lasting a few days.), but the very low value of the goods. The other thing that was happening was that the courts system was becoming clogged up with cases involving goods of low value and this resulted in cases involving serious offences having to be abandoned due to statutory time-limits on the commencement of proceedings under Criminal Justice Law. This was very frustrating for the victims and police officers who had worked hard to bring the offenders to justice. Something had to be done and a policy decision was taken not to pursue cases involving goods of low value.

As for a link, Davy, a lot of these claims for compensation were weeded out at the antecedants stage of magistrates courts hearings and so didn't set a precedent. The other matter was that a lot of police officers were getting mightily p*ssed-off with the attitude of retailers who took the view they had a God-given right to have their day in court. Also, shoplifting isn't exactly a major priority where the police are concerned. It is, in fact, a pain in the arse, as there are other crimes which attract a higher priority. However, once the jungle telegraph within the police service and courts system got working, word soon spread and a lot of retailers got the message and gave up.

[Amethyst]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Yes and I wouldn't be looking for any effective policing action by the civil court any time soon.

It has to be legislation or perhaps guidelines and an extension to the OFT powers or some other regulatory body.

D

Well hope they do a better job than they have with CMC's lol.

Worth thinking about though.

[Guest]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Interesting Bluebottle, but I am not sure how it applies, there is of course no antecedent stage in civil hearings. Perhaps there should be.

D

[Guest]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Well hope they do a better job than they have with CMC's lol.

Worth thinking about though.

Well the CAB are the front office for the OFT these days, and they are heavily involved in the RLP thing.

Just a thought.

D

[bluebottle]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

Looking to the USA for inspiration is, IMHO, a serious error of judgement. Our politicians keep doing this and we find that what may work in the USA does not necessarily work in the UK. The politicians would be better looking at the approach our European neighbours take. We are Brits first and Europeans second. We are not the 51st state of the USA. Politicians tend to keep forgetting this. The other issue we have to bear in mind is that although the UK has an adversarial justice system at present, there appears to be a move towards a more inquisitorial system of justice, which is what many European countries have, France excepted, which has the Code Napoleon.

As to giving retailers the right to make civil demands, that, in my view, would be a move in the wrong direction. The retail industry has been caught cheating too many times and the consumer is getting sick and tired of being ripped-off. The practices of CR operators has done nothing to reassure either myself or, I suspect, the long-suffering consumer (of which I am but one), that the retail industry is the victim. CR is clearly being treated as a profit-making exercise, not legitimate redress. My gut-feeling is that abuse of CR by operators and retailers will be its downfall.

[Guest]

Re: RLP and the Oxford test case: The truth and the lies

I don't know, we seem to follow the US eventually in most things.

Look at the Pay Day loan situation for example, we are having the same discussions now that they had six years ago and will doubtless come to the same conclusion,... eventually.

D