RLP...again

[primadonna12]

I am attaching a letter a colleague of mine received on behalf of us. Does all this legal jargon from RLP carry any weight or should we just ignore it all by sending them the sample letter found on this site? We are not from UK at all but from Malta. No police were involved in this case and we were told at Primark that we were just being giving a warning and would not go further. A document was signed at Primark, i believe it contained details only I think.Your help would be greatly appreciated since needless to say, we are somewhat worried and it was all just a misunderstanding at Primark from only my colleague, but being with her we got implicated as well. Thanks

[ostell]

It's not a proper letter before claim a d Primark have not lost.

They tried court once (look for RLP and Oxford) but got so thoroughly trounced they haven't tried again

[des8]

Just ignore the letter completely
Do not reply at all, as that encourages them to redouble their efforts to pick your pockets.

If anyone claims losses in the UK they cannot just request a "fixed contribution".*
They need to quantify their losses accurately. not just levy a fixed amount.

This is a standard letter from RLP and can be ignored (together with subsequent letters*
See here for their scary letters:*https://legalbeagles.info/forums/for...rs-rlp-and-dwf