RLP. civil recovery specialists.

Like to get some views on this subject are they legal or muggers. The C.A.B think they are illegally extorting money they get 40 % of any claim, they have im told have never been successful in court and rely on scary threatening letters to mainly kids to pay up.They are used by shops like boots and asda.Kids that have paid their fines and been cautioned then weeks later get these threatning letters from RLP who apparently have no legal standing. Basically firms like boots use them to pay for their security guards wage for that day.This is not about kids shoplifting so no fuck them they deserve it , its about RLP over to you LH.

Why are you writing in code?

AD, I hadn't heard of this firm so I Googled them and found this forum post:
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?165484-RLP-and-%A389.49-for-sweets-from-14-year-old-girl.

Which is about RLP sending a 14 year old girl a demand for 89 pounds after she stole some sweets from a shop.

There are some interesting responses - essentially saying that a lot of these demands for payment are legally unenforceable and are bullying veiled behind legalese.

For what it's worth, if I were the operations director of a large retailer, I would look at the amount of external shrinkage (losses through theft and damage to stock) on my P&L account and, in struggling times, adopt a zero tolerance policy.

Lets put it this way, if you catch 100 shoplifters in your stores, and then a bunch of cowboys come to you and say "we will pay you 20 quid for the name and address of each shoplifter you have apprehended" you have 2,000 pounds back into your company for nothing. I can kind of understand why retailers do it. They can write that 2,000 back against their actual shoplifting losses.

Then, companies like RLP will gamble that they will make enough profit from simply sending these threatening letters from people who will just pay. I suspect they will only actually carry out legal threats such a county court claim in cases where the shoplifter is bang to rights - ie multiple witnesses and CCTV or a criminal conviction.

I can see how that's a worthwhile exercise for both the retailer and the middleman, in this case RLP, but ultimately, in most of these cases, it's morally repugnant.

I am sure they will garner support from Natasha though.

Incidentally, I recommend every user of this site, even those who already think they know everything like chip butty, to register for that Consumer Action Group site - it is brilliant.

Thought you would find something on it LH , I had a female friend in a state over this company her daughter got landed in it by her so called mates and she took the blame ,now this shithouse firm are chasing a 13 year old with nasty letters. It's. Something I can't solve in my usual way ,so it's best to ignore them I guess.

Natasha Whittam wrote:Why are you writing in code?

I am going to ignore you from now on whittam, you are just an annoying dumb arse .

AD, get your female friend to visit that site I mentioned above. It's full of people with genuine legal expertise who will support her for free. They are passionate about stuff like this on that site. www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk

I wouldn't like to advise you to advise your friend just to ignore the letter because I'm no legal expert, but I think yuor friend should get advice before doing just that so she can make an informed decision.

Can you send her this link?
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?114-How-do-I-post-my-story-on-the-Consumer-Action-Group-forum

It is a short video that will teach her how to post a new thread on that forum in the right place (it is a huge site covering every type of consumer affair you can imagine from billing problems with big companies to faulty goods to problems with landlords to bank charges). They will look after her on there.

From what I can gather, your friend's daughter cannot be sued as she is not 18, and your friend can only be sued for her actions if the plaintiff can demonstrate that your friend was negligent (how are they going to do that? Chances are, they aren't).

But civil legal cases do not require the same burden of proof as criminal cases and you need to be mindful of this. Chances are you're right and ignoring the letter will be fine. But there might be a way to send them a shitty letter back or something. I don't know.

Angry Dad wrote: I am going to ignore you from now on whittam, you are just an annoying dumb arse .

I didn't understand a word of your original post, just saying like.