RLP and fraud claim with previous employer

[Maryboo]

Hello,

I am just after some advice please as I am super stressed right now. 2 years ago I was dismissed from my place of employment after an investigation was conducted on me for breech of partnership discount use. Just for insight I admit that I was indeed using my discount to assist friends and family to purchase items they were in need of and not for any other fraudulent reason. Also, on dismissal I was not informed that the company will be seeking to retrieve the costs of what they believed I had used fraudulently.

Fast forward two years on and I have just received this letter in the post. I am unsure of what to do now and made the mistake of both phoning the company and sending an email admitting where I went wrong but having no fraudulent intents but offering to pay £870 as that’s all I can afford currently being out of employment and being a single parent and just wanting it to all go away. I’m also just so confused as to why it has taken over 2 years for my previous employer to pass on my details and take it further. I’m also unsure of what else they have on me as they were extremely vague when I spoke to them on the phone and they took my email address to email me a PowerPoint that my previous employer had apparently compiled to present my case.

Please, please, please any advice would be greatly appreciated, I’m really upset about this. I have attached the letter to this post for full context. Thank you.

[Maryboo]

Attached letters

[Maryboo]

[R0b]

Hi

First of all, RLP are the bottom of the barrel bunch of nobodies who can't tell the left from the right. They are not a law firm and they like to send scary letters like this to try and get people to cough up. If I was an employer, I would be concerned about these guys acting on my behalf in legal proceedings, which follows that RLP tend not to be litigious though you can never rule it out.

You're admission isn't great which is a big no-no but before I go into any detail about what options you might have, the question is, do you want to defend this or admit defeat and try to reach a settlement?

[islandgirl]

One assumes their actual loss is the cost of the item and not the profit they make on a normal sale? The English in the letter also leaves something to be desired...Milage and travel? Very odd.

[atticus]

The loss is surely the amount of discount obtained through improper use. The OP may wish to go through the purchases and identify those which were made through proper use of the staff discount. I would suggest that a first step in any further engagement would be to request a breakdown of the £2726.12 figure, identifying item purchased, sale price, and discount applied.

[echat11]

One assumes their actual loss is the cost of the item and not the profit they make on a normal sale? The English in the letter also leaves something to be desired...Milage and travel? Very odd.

islandgirl They use to quote the Magna Carta in the letters they send out, explaining that, that gave them the 'right' to do what they do, but then went on to get the year of the Magna Carta wrong in the letter. I'm sure there are some 'bright' people there, but clearly not.

Also forget the £454.27, that would be covered in their 'business model', they would have 'budgeted' for those costs.

[Maryboo]

Thank you for all the replies so far R0b I’m currently unsure of the best way forward tbh, any advice or suggestions would be much appreciated!

[R0b]

Well I think the dispute is more than defendable, if that's what you are asking. However, it really is up to you how far you want to take it.
If you want to defend the claim, you will need to respond to RLP and I've added some points to think about below if you do.

1. In your response to the letter before claim, you need to withdraw your admission. The Civil Procedure Rules state that if someone makes an admission before legal proceedings have started, they need to give notice in writing. Once proceedings have started, you cannot withdraw from the admission without permission of the court. Not only will that cost you money, but you will need to argue why the admission should be withdrawn and then it is up to the court to decide if it should - they may decide not to allow the withdrawal in which case you are effectively stuck with an admission of liability.

You can simply state in your letter at the end something along the lines of "Any admissions made with respect to this dispute and/or liability are withdrawn"
2. As already pointed out by other members, the figures don't quite stack up and it would be sensible for you to request a full breakdown of the compensation and the costs or expenses incurred by their client since those itemised costs and compensation are vague at best. The law around recovering wasted management costs is quite strict such that it requires the employer to record the time they have spent dealing with the matter over and above what their normal duties require e.g. hourly or date rates. Costs cannot be recovered if the time they are spending falls within their usual duties. For example, if your ex-employer has a security team and they spent time dealing with this alleged abuse of discount, it is highly doubtful that cost can be recovered since it is part and parcel of their job role.

In my view, line items 2, 3 and 4 are almost always a non-starter with RLP and part of me thinks they have wrapped up their own fees somewhere in all of this, which could be considered fraudulent if not properly itemised.

3. In your initial post, you mentioned RLP alluded to a powerpoint presentation that indicated the evidence and/or level of supposed fraud you committed. Yet in the letter before claim, it also states that there is an investigation file, mining data, transactional information, till data and CCTV. This sounds like a template response but as they have included it in the letter, it may be a sensible option at this stage to make a subject access request to RLP for the supply of all of that information they have mentioned, including any correspondence and telephone notes or other meeting notes that RLP have on their own file that is about you. As they are not an authorised law firm, any advice or communications between themselves and their client are not subject to the legal privilege rule where a lawyer provides advice and is kept confidential - all of that should be disclosable.

4. Final point to note which makes me think RLP are not going to start legal proceedings is that they are alleging fraudulent acts by you. Claims of fraud or deceit have specific requirements in the rules that needs to be explicitly identified in any particulars of claim when proceedings are started. Again, given that RLP are not a law firm and are (in my view) unlikely to know the rules around pleading fraud in civil claims, they would either need to hire external lawyers to draft the claim or go it alone and risk having the claim struck out for non-compliance along with costs against them. However, it is still always possible they may issue a claim nonetheless.

If you want to feedback on your response then please provide a draft version with personal information redacted and we can comment.

Otherwise, if you want to settle the claim, it is a case of making your best offer and see if they accept it. If you do prefer to settle, you should also ensure you withdraw any admission of liability in your response for the reasons explained above in point 1. You then state any offer of settlement is based on a non-admission of liability.

[echat11]

Reference Rob's point number 3, Subject Access Request form, make sure you get Proof of Postage -

https://legalbeagles.info/library/gu...ccess-request/

[islandgirl]

islandgirl They use to quote the Magna Carta in the letters they send out, explaining that, that gave them the 'right' to do what they do, but then went on to get the year of the Magna Carta wrong in the letter. I'm sure there are some 'bright' people there, but clearly not.

Also forget the £454.27, that would be covered in their 'business model', they would have 'budgeted' for those costs.

Anyone quoting the Magna Carta and thinking it has a place in the modern justice system is, quite frankly, an idiot! If that is their level then you have an excellent chance....