Letter before claim From RLP

[Joe 23]

Echat11 I agree
After reading the thread with the lad who was a customer at Waitrose. They have done a similar add up in a different way and sent him a £6 plus demand. He should never of offered any amount to pay after they sent this bill out to him

[Joe 23]

Walesman
they have stated it was placed back on gift cards although I did pay by cash on several occasions. In letter 1 above in earlier post it is in the demand (gift cards). They haven’t mentioned any debit/credit cards.

[Joe 23]

Echat11 correction £6k demand in RLP thread with lad in Waitrose

[echat11]

They may struggle to gather CCTV for all the refunds, but it depends on what CCTV data protection policy they have in-house. Stores have regular audits, so they will have all the data with regards to the refunds.

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations.../introduction/

[Joe 23]

Even if they have CCTV of myself obtaining refunds what does this prove? I had the receipt damaged or not they have accepted it and issued the refund. If it were a fraudulent receipt I:E a fraudsters own made one I would understand their argument. But when you have been a purchasing customer and have changed your mind with the goods bought faulty or not and you have this proof, there isn’t anything illegal about this. The other point they state about riding the escalators with goods and then reappearing with a bag does not add up as a theft is not witnessed by a shop staff member or cctv. There presumptions in letter 1 are not solid confirmation that I have been stealing items. Why wasn’t I challenged by security on these days of question? Why wasn’t the alarms ringing when I left the stores (if it were even me). Why didn’t they notice these items missing from the areas they were stocked and why on earth would they be accepting the items they claim to be stolen in letter 1 and sanctioning a refund for them? Lots of questions need answering.

I really could do with a little support of means of a template letter so as I can counter letter 2 and see their response to this. I hope one of you guys can offer this who is a little more savvy on laws than myself and how to word this. I think with my wording they will not take my robust reply seriously.
I also want to see this through and will keep posting letters and responses so as to update all in comments on thread.

[Joe 23]

Their sole foundation on all the allegations in letter 1 is relying on the fact that I did not pay for 2 pizzas at a self serve checkout (they state but wouldn’t show the cctv) and happened 2 weeks before I was back shopping in store and asked to wait until a police officer arrived to verify my identity (which I did) and after viewing the cctv the officer stated NFA (no crime committed) this has been labelled in letter 1 as a theft (which it wasn’t as the police ascertained otherwise) and then the following allegations are lead to believe that incident 1 (pizza theft) is the starting point and proves I have been stealing items from them. The whole thing absolutely reeks the more I read it but at the same-time I am genuinely worried that they will be able to bully me into submission due to not knowing the law correctly in civil pursuits.

Would I be able to make a donation to this group for any support in getting these organisations off my back so I can sleep correctly again?

[echat11]

They've given 3 transaction examples in their first letter, the 3 returned items are all the same value, so it's not a case of 'a purchasing customer and have changed your mind with the goods', simply because they are saying it has been done more then 3 times, the hypothetical I gave in an earlier post, it could be approx 76 times.

'But when you have been a purchasing customer and have changed your mind with the goods bought faulty or not and you have this proof, there isn’t anything illegal about this.

[Joe 23]

So what do you suggest Enchat11?

[DE DOGS]

After reading all the replies and being interviewed by a Police Officer, who offered no evidence, that to me signifies that is the end of the matter. Personally, as you have been advised, wait for the next episode from them.

[Joe 23]

Thank you DE DOGS

[Joe 23]

Dear Forum
i received a reply from RLP after I responded to their letter previous. I asked them to forward all transactional data and all cctv relating to the thefts of goods from their stores (clear images of the goods) plus transactional data. I received X4 still images that resemble myself and in one them it shows myself placing something into a carrier bag going up the escalators. The still images are showing my journey to and thro from this supposedly wrong doing with an item of sone sort and then a bag with an item inside. It’s very vague and I’m unable to ascertain what I’m placing in the bag. The images are not clear but they have circled certain parts (scaring tactic I believe) they have also sent transactional data which I asked for but no cctv to add with each data refund or sale. I can’t ascertain if it was myself who did these transaction as I don’t evidence from them of myself refunding or buying any of this merchandise from them. They have also sent a map with times and a line between stores in different areas but no cctv to add to this that shows thefts from these stores. I feel like they are trying to dupe me for a large sum in the region of 40k and have stated they are waiting for the police to reply back to them and cough up in between. Any advice or evidence would be much appreciated and I will upload the letter for you to view

regards
Joe

[Joe 23]

Here is the letter I received

[R0b]

I'm just responding so it's on my list, but their response seems a bit crap and the costs they are trying ti recover are not costs normally recoverables since they are part of their overhead costs generally.

Have they supplied you with all of the information and data as requested? Sounds like they only supplied 4 examples, are they just CCTV images or something else?

[Joe 23]

Hi Rob
thank you for responding to my latest post. In my last letter sent to RLP I asked for all the cctv of every fraudulent transaction (I:E refund of goods) and all the thefts cctv also of which they have not done so. The X4 still photos are not very clear in saying what I was or the person in them was holding in their hands
they were single shot of a male walking in the with something in his could be anything as unable to see clearly. Then another of an item in his hand of some sort box shape. Then another travelling up the escalator and with his hand lifted and item in one and looks like a bag in other. Last one is the male walking with a bag in store. These images are of a customer in store the male resembles myself but I’m unable to ascertain as they are not clear but visible and I wouldn’t want to say it’s me or it isn’t me because I feel I truely have this right being a member of public, a customer or even not a customer. There also isn’t any evidence if anything was actually inside the item that is being held but also unable to fully identify what it actually is. If they have CCTV then they should have a clear image of what the item box is identifying any store labels on the item and a clear view of what’s actually inside the item. I also asked for all data of refunds and purchases of all the items they are suggesting that were refunded and purchased leaving an assumption that in between balances of these transactions there is a loss as they don’t hold records of this at the stores they have burned off the data. They haven’t included the refunds and sales at any of their over stores across their estate I feel. They have also not provided the cctv of each and every transaction (which I requested in my letter before I could fully respond in full to them). They haven’t supplied all the evidence I have asked for and their response to myself fully updating them is that they are waiting for the police to respond. They would not need the police to respond to them because they already have that knowledge that I have which is the conclusion no further action. They have also played down when I asked them if that item or items that were stolen had alarm tags on and please provide evidence of the door alarms sounding and security staff being alerted, they have stated in the above letter they do not have to provide this as they have enough evidence. They are claiming these are high value so surely they are alarm tagged it’s standard in all stores common sense is telling me.

I have kept the original letters I sent to them and the last letter I can upload for you to view if you can be kind enough to analyse my letter with theirs and the best way forward with this.
the letter is stated to be a letter before action and previous letter was letter before claim. They are also asking for my bank details which link with any purchases but yet they take cash, vouchers, gift vouchers, store cards, bank cards, gift cards, phone payments etc! But yet they state gift cards were obtained from the refunds but even if this was the case where is the wrongful doing and loss incurred when the goods returned were their goods and they are not providing full proof those refunds all belong to myself (not providing cctv or other evidence) and even so if these returns were sanctioned how was this able to go ahead and it isn’t illegal to return 1-100 items if these belong to the store and a receipt was offered in a readable condition or not. Why would they accept an unreadable receipt and then complain later? There are a lot of ifs and buts and threats and I clearly hear what they are saying but I am also not buying into the gaps of presumptional evidence between the evidence they are sending which isn’t full enough in my eyes to even think a wrongful act was committed

[R0b]

This is nothing more than a fishing expedition. It sounds like the evidence they have supplied is poor at best and is not conclusive of you committing any offence or doing anything untoward.

Given that they have failed to supply the information they're relying on and selectively chosen certain images perhaps shows the extent of their evidence. As you say, it is simply ifs and buts which I don't think will stack up at all should the matter go to court.

The choice is yours at this stage, you can either ignore it or respond. If I were in your shoes I would be inclined to do the latter with a robust response and essentially and that their allegations are hopeless with grainy evidence that does not prove anything at all in terms of what they are suggesting. Leave it at that and say the allegations are denied, you have nothing further to say, and that you do not expect to hear from them unless their client intends to issue legal proceedings, which you will defend in full. Any further demands for payment will be treated as harassment and you reserve your rights against RLP in that regard now that your position is made clear.

If you like, I can offer up some words and you can fill in the gaps.