Just wanted to let you know that I received a response from Boots Legal Dept. They mantain that RLP are not able to write to parents instead of the child concerned for Data Protection reasons as that would be a breach of confidentialty to the child. (Then why did Boots ask for my details when she was stopped?) They have however, agreed with RLP that the letter they send to teenagers will "... include an encouragement to the teenager to inform their parent or guardian of what has happened and to seek their assistance in resolving the matter." (I really can't see how this would help with a teenager who is already scared witless by their parents inital reaction to the whole matter!) They also state that RLP are not required to hold a Consumer Credit License as they are not acting as debt collectors. They clam that the items my daughter stole had been opened and were not in a re-saleable conditon. My daughter vehemently denies this, but it seems it is now our word against theirs and I don't see we have a leg to stand on. I have also had a response from The Childrens Commssioner, they say they cannot intervene in any individual matter (not what I was asking for, only ponting out the threat to retain data that could affect my daughters future credit rating) and suggest contact the Childrens Legal Centre, Unibversty of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester ESSEX CO4 3SQ. Disappointingly, no response as yet from Nottingham Trading Standards. It seems to me that this whole business is happening because the law allows for it, even if this is not the way it was intended. Some bright spark has seen this 'gap in the market' and is now making a very lucrative profit having set up RLP. The Stores involved probably aren't making much money out of it themselves, but it saves them the trouble of involving the Police and all they have to do is pass the teenagers details to RLP. No doubt they would also argue the deterrent value. The only way I can see a stop to RLP is if the stores can be convinced as to how damaging this is to the families involved. I sincerely hope that it does not take a teenagers suicide to do that. The affect this whole business has had on us, as a family has been awful. To the parents of the girl who tested the hair mousse, I hope you take this all the way. At the end of the day my daughter did wrong, your daughter did nothing intentional. I can well understand your reluctance to get the press involved, but you have a good case and RLP and the companies they represent rely on the fact that those concerned will be to ashamed to follow this route. I wish you the very best of luck.

My daughter was goaded into stealing by a friend who pointed out what she wanted and then left the shop. I am not condoning my daughters behaviour in any way, but I am concerned that RLP wrote to her direct. Yes it was her that committed the offence and you might say that the fact that she has been left traumatised by the whole event serves her right, but supposing she had not told me about the letter because she was too scared? This could cause some teenagers to do them selves some kind of harm. No doubt RLP & Boots would say that they cannot be held responsible, but will it take the association of a teenagers suicide to cause a change in this sharp tactic practice? I will be writng to Nottingham trading standards, The Children's Comissioner and Boots Legal department and would urge anyone else in the same positon to do the same!

My 15 year old daughter was caught shopliftng in Boots last week and after a telephone call from the security guard telling me they wold not involve the Police because of her age she was allowed to go. She was given a form to sign which she clams only said that she was banned from the store. I was not called to the store and she was not given a copy. Today a letter arrived from RLP addressed to her demanding payment of £180.00 or £35.00 if she pays within 21 days. She is deeply ashamed as are we. Looking at the other threads and amounts involved seems she has got off lightly, but I am furious that this company can interfere in what I regard as my parental responsiblity to deal wth her. She has no money to pay as we have stopped her pocket money - can she argue on this point and say she does not want to appont us to act as her guardian? Grateful for any advice.