I never ever carry any form of I.D, so if asked for some, I would have to leave my shopping and walk out.

The legal age for buying alcohol is 18 not 25. I think this is the problem many have with the supermarkets stance, especially with the proposed Think 30. People see, rightly or wrongly, supermarkets re-writing the law, which is totally unacceptable. They would do well to remember that without customers they have no profit, and to alienate them by pretending to stop under age drinking is just upsetting many people. Young people always have, and always will have access to alcohol I have said before that all this nonsense, which was not necessary 7 years ago, is about the introduction of a National I.D. card. Make it increasingly difficult for the public to conduct a normal life without one, and we will get people taking the line of least resistance and accepting them, giving such excuses as it no bother showing one, so what is the problem. Then comes legislation to make it COMPULSORY to carry this I.D. card, and one more freedom has been eroded by those who would take the easy route.

I am sure this is correct, however the point of the exercise is to challenge an assistant who APPEARS to be underage, in the same way they challenge customers who appear to be under 25.

Just had a wonderful thought. If you are regularly asked for I.D, next time you purchase alcohol, go to the checkout with the youngest looking operator, and when asked for I.D. ask to see their I.D proving they are over 18 (or even 25), and allowed to sell to you.

PLEASE take the advice of scousegeezer and others. They HAVE to prove their case, not your husband proving his innocence. If they instantly dismiss him, he has more than adequate grounds for an E.T. Look at it this way.Some of their stores sell clothing. If he is wearing their socks to the meeting, will he be told that unless he can produce a receipt, he will be presumed to have stolen them.All this is so rediculous. Tell your husband to go to the meeting and say the barest mininimum.Do not volunteer any information they don't know, or think they know.

I am still puzzled as to why all this nonsense is suddenly necessary. If it is to halt binge drinking, then surely this is caused by people buying and drinking in clubs until the early hours of the morning, and has nothing to do with buying alcohol with your weekly shopping. I have yet to see a binge drinker in a supermarket car park. I know that they are those that advocate the path of least resistance, and just show your I.D. - but this is how precious liberties are lost. We should all,if over 18, when asked for I.D at a supermarket just walk away leaving the shop on the belt. If we all did this, supermarkets would realise they are steadily alienating their core customers, and not solving underage drinking. The only answer is to control the sale of alcholol to off-licenses and pubs. Of course supermarkets don't want this as it would remove a huge chunk of their profit.

Can't contribute anything other than good luck and best wishes deathbycrayons.

A pensioner may no longer drive and have a licence, and be too old to travel and have a passport. If Think 25 is extended, what form of photo I.D would be acceptable - other than the proposed national I.D card. If under Think 25, a supermarket cashier is shown an I.D showing that the person is 20 years old would they refuse to sell them alcohol?

With respect suzieblooz, there have been no reported cases of cashiers actually being fined £5,000. If you genuinely believe the person purchasing alcohol is over 18 (not 25) you will not be prosecuted.The store may take diciplinary action, but they are not legally obliged to do so. What is happening is that supermarkets, fearful of loosing the alcohol trade, by far their most profitable sales, are putting unfair onus on the staff to protect their income streams. Couple this with the government's knee jerk reaction to binge drinking (which they directly caused), and you have the current mess on purchase of alcohol. As little as 5 years ago all this nonsense was unthinkable, so what has changed to have Think 21, Think 25, Think 30 ad nauseum.

The cynical side of me says this is all part of a Government plot to force us all to carry I.D cards.

I may be wrong, but I do not think there is a requirement for signs to indicate a mobile speed camera is up ahead.There would be little point as all drivers breaking the speed limit would just slow down past the camera. Look at it this way. The camera you could not see as you approached it could have been a child about to run out into the road. The excess speed you were doing could have made the difference between a death and an injury. The good news is that if your speedo was indicating 35mph, your actual speed was probably 32mph. Since most. prosecutions are brought at actual speeds of 10% over the limit plus 2 mph, you are unlikely to get a ticket.

Doorstep visits are very very rare. Just look at the distances they would have to travel to see how it is more profitable to write. It is understandable that you would not want any hassle, but these people remain in business by scaring motorists into paying them.Think of it this way. If their demand is not for £40, but £400, would you still want to pay them to avoid any hassle.

Lots of similar cases here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1858141

Of course the behaviour of the DFS rep is inexcusable, however did you not try out the sofas before purchase? It is now 10 months since you had them, and to reject them at this stage because you find them uncomfortable is unreasonable. The warranty would cover manufacturing defects, so is irrelevant in your case. You could try rejecting the sofa as 'not fit for the purpose', but since you have taken ten months to discover this, and it is a soft sofa, not a hard one, you would have great difficulty pursuing this line of argument. Best bet is to try and do a deal with DFS to part exchange, or sell privarely. Be warned, second hand furniture has a very low value.

I wonder if right at the start,Lyons Davidson handed this case to a junior or trainee solicitor, and let them get on with it thinking it was just a routine recovery of a debt. Would explain the awful mess they are now in.

Can you post details of the paperwork you have received. The amounts asked for are very much like a PPC would ask.If it is a PPC then ignore.

What caught my eye on the da Vinci attachment was a list of 8 codes they put on their tickets. They then go on to say "There are no secret codes, and anyone who avoids parking in contravention of the eight listed will never get a notice" Now there is a code for parking in a disabled bay without a blue badge, but no code for parking in a parent and child bay without a child. Anyone want to park in a parent toddler bay, and appeal quoting their own words.:D

Sadly, I think now this is the correct course to take. There was a time when the vast majority of citizens held the police in high regard; but now as a body, they are driven with quota filling,a P.C agenda, and a reluctance to engage with the true criminals. This is not the fault of the individual police officer,most who are hard working and want to fight crime, but a fault of government led directions trying to mico-control our lives. Our Government should do well to remember that the police can only operate with the consent of the majority of citizens; and once that trust and consent is removed, anarchy remains.

Attend the interview and immediately ask for the duty solicitor to represent you. If they say you can't are or not elligible, then tell them to arrest you in which case you will ask for a duty solicitor. If they don't, get up and say you are leaving. It is important that you volunteer no information or explanations, say nothing other than the above. They may say it is just an informal chat, again say nothing. It is up to them to prove the case, and not you to help them do their job. They may say that if you have done no wrong, why don't you want to have this 'chat' to clear it up. Don't fall for it. Just again ask to be legally represented. This will put you in control of the interview which is what you want. Again say nothing other than confirming your name and address. Please let us know how you get on. P.S I know that it is your wife that is involved, but you should try and go with her for support.If they insist she is to be interviewed on her own, refuse, and walk out since at that stage she is not not under arrest.

Read the many other threads on here about CP. You will then see what to expect through the post. You will also see that completely ignoring them will make them eventually go away. Why should they waste time and money on you when many other,badly informed, people will continue to pay these bogus fines without a protest.

The core objection to RLP and similar companies are that they set themselves up as Judge and Jury and appear always to find someone guilty, then 'fine' them. This is contrary to our judicial system that not only presumes a person innocent, but gives them the right to defend themselves in a court of law. When the income of RLP depends on finding as many people 'guilty' as possible, and sending them a 'fine', you have a recipe for intimidation of the weak and vulnerable, and a gross miscarriage of justice. They also appear to have no genuine appeal process unless the media are involved.

If it was sold as smoking and for spares or repair, what exactly were you expecting that you didn't get.

Singe - you consider members of this forum are freeloaders. I have difficulty equating this term with motorists who stay in a free car park for 5 minutes longer than should and are 'fined' £60-£100. Surely you should be looking closer to home for freeloaders.

Something not right here. Debt collectors collect debts; they do not listen to appeals from motorists; that is what the PPC's claim to do, and when you refuse to pay the alledged debt is passed to a debt collector. Note the debt collector is powerless to collect PPC money unless a court order is obtained. So it is sound to advice to ignore all correspondence from a PPC. When they pass the debt to a debt collector; inform them that the debt is in dispute, at which point they are required to hand it back to the PPC. As you can see, debt collectors are ineffective, powerless and have no purpose in this world other than to scare and intimidate vulnerable people. No wonder Singe80 gets upset with forums such as this.

You need to set aside a couple of hours and read the parking forum on this site, and also Pepipoo. Eventually you will see a pattern emerging where if you completely ignore them, they will give up and go away. The correspondence you receive will depend on the PPC; but could include letters from debt collectors,pretemd balliffs, and even fake court documents. If concerned at any point post here for reassurance.