BBC Inside Out (East): 7.30pm 29 Nov 10

[Michael Browne]

Every year ordinary shoppers are being accused of shoplifting and fined for crimes they didn't commit. David Whiteley investigates the growth of civil recovery and uncovers the unreliable evidence being used to accuse innocent people.

 

Student Caroline King was accused of taking makeup from Boots. She received a letter from Retail Loss Prevention, the largest civil recovery company in the UK, demanding payment of 135 pounds for her wrongful act. They threatened to take her to court if she didn't pay.

 

Yet neither Boots nor RLP have provided any evidence to prove that Caroline stole the items, and Caroline denies taking anything. Boots say that civil recovery is necessary to deter shoplifting. They wouldn't comment on Caroline's case. Retail Loss Prevention say their action provides an effective deterrent to shoplifting.

 

Caroline's is not an isolated case. Retailers are increasingly using civil recovery to claim damages after alleged shoplifting rather than relying on the police and criminal courts.

 

The Citizens Advice Bureau are dealing with 4,000 cases a year. Many of them like Caroline say they are innocent but have been intimidated into paying up.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00wcq5f

[silverfox1961]

I think most of the country might miss this as (as far as I can see) it is for the east only. BBC iplayer might be busy next week

[Zamzara]

Boots say that civil recovery is necessary to deter shoplifting.

 

...Retail Loss Prevention say their action provides an effective deterrent to shoplifting.

 

Bit of a telling admission, if they did say that. I thought the amount was to cover their 'reasonable staff costs'.

[Madamfluff]

If you have sky+ you can get all BBC 1 Channels - I have just found it and set it to record

[notareargunner]

Download and re-read the Retail Loss Prevention link. Unfortunately it has lots of legalese but also a lot of sense. The reliance on CAB can be misleading as many CAB offices have such a long waiting list that it is not as helpful as anecdotal and historic evidence purportedly provides.

One theme runs through this piece, the police have not been involved. One possible reason is that the police are subject to Malfeasance in Public Office charges and these legal firms are not, nor the recovery people. Letters from solicitors firms are a regular and overused threat to legal correctness and the firms are liable for non-professional acts through the very same courts they threaten their victims through; and it is a waste of time and effort reporting them to their disciplinary bodies as they do nothing. Slap them in the small claims courts after collating all the evidence and reading it through with a legally minded independent body or person. Reclaim your rights by claiming a small sum from the wrongful accusers and have a single word place within a court - found.

[Mrs E Blackadder]

If you have sky+ you can get all BBC 1 Channels - I have just found it and set it to record

 

I have just an ordinary Sky box and you can get the BBC1 channels for all over the country. So, even if you can't record it, you can still watch it with an ordinary box. From memory the BBC1 channels begin around 967 and upwards.

[oxford10]

Hi All

 

Sorry if this is a repost but dates back from 2009 from the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8403000/8403379.stm

[ScarletPimpernel]

This story featured on Radio 4's 'You and Yours' programme yesterday 29 Nov 10. It should be on iPlayer by now.

 

It included an interview with Jackie Lambert, the MD of RLP. Apparently what her company does is 'crime prevention', though she wasn't able to explain how demanding money from people who have not committed any crime does this. The report highlighted the way RLP targets teenagers, relying upon parents paying up out of embarrassment. Interestingly, the repellent Ms Lambert stated categorically that police are always called in every case - but the reporter then stated that the police had confirmed that no call was received in relation to the main case in the story.

[2Grumpy]

It was interesting that the MD wouldn't give any details of any court cases - although "there were some" and "they try to reach a conclusion without using the courts" or some other drivel

 

In the case of Caroline King, although they didn't find the goods in her possession, they did find the same items hidden in their interview room ... on a different day to which Caroline had been there. Boots paid her a couple of hundred pounds compensation and lifted the ban, but accepted that she might not want to return to their stores after what had happened to her.

 

They must realise that most people will be frightened, not know their rights and will sign anything to get out of the "interview room" without realising that they needn't be there in the first place. (I didn't see that being mentioned in the program - best advice stay just inside the store, not in their back room and wait for the police to arrive)

[Michael Browne]

Link to iPlayer:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00wcq5f/Inside_Out_East_29_11_2010/

[Yorky2008]

It was nice to watch that Jackie woman looking v uncomfortable with the questioning!

SHe also refused to answer the 60/40 split question despite being asked it several times

 

Yorky

[Zamzara]

Jackie Lambert again stated that the amounts were set as a deterrent. She doesn't seem to understand you can't use a civil action to penalise someone.Surely this means it's over for them? They can never go to court after this.

[2Grumpy]

If that were the case then their practices would be clearly and widely advertised. I must admit that since seeing the RLP threads I have seen small signs about civil recovery that I hadn't taken notice of before. However, most of the people coming here had never heard of RLP before and are shocked by the size of their claims - which they still justify in terms of their "actual costs". That's not entirely consistent.