JJB gave grandsons ipod away.

lucylucky

real1314 wrote: »

Saw this thread yesterday - a lot of peopel having a go at an 11 yr old kid for either having an iPod Touch or for not taking care of it, and yet the same people don't seem able to find any venom for a thief.

Anyway, the simple solution is for mum (Mum was not with the child as far as I can tell) and kid to attend the cop shop, having first got the JJB managers details and requested (in writing) that the video evidence be retained (including the previous half an hour). How do they request that? It may already be too late

Tel the plod that you've got a theft to report, evidence (alleged evidence) to prove the theft, video of the thief and evidence to link the video to an identity via a credit card transaction.

1 crime, 1 crime that should be readily solveable. Open and shut case. They should take that on as it would boost their figures.

Conversely if it has been reported as a loss followed by theft without all the relevant details, the plod might see it as another unsolveable on their stats.

If they seem reluctant to record / deal with the issue, ask for an inspector. If they refuse, ask for the officers ID and tell them you'll be getting on to your MP and then do so.

I am sure the OPs son will do just as you have advised as soon as he is back from the good old US of A.

lucylucky

real1314 wrote: »

I would assume monday is an appropriate day - working week and all that?

Jeez, hold your horses.

My local police station is open 7 days a week.

Perhaps if the OP meant Monday then she should have said so?

gordikin

If you read the whole thread the OP has been untruthful. Example:- She said her son cannot phone the police because he is in America in 1 post, and then in another says he can but doesn't want to be put on hold! Which is it, both can't be true?

Bamber19

gordikin wrote: »

If you read the whole thread the OP has been untruthful. Example:- She said her son cannot phone the police because he is in America in 1 post, and then in another says he can but doesn't want to be put on hold! Which is it, both can't be true?

Hardly a great example. It is expensive to call from America so he doesn't want to given he'll be back soon and in addition the costs will rack up even further if he's sitting on hold. Not everything is a conspiracy.

marleyboy

I really dont think the OP is being untruthful, I am pretty sure this child did leave an Ipod at the store and as a result, some lowlife took advantage of the situation and stole it.

However I STILL am not convinced that the store will be laid the blame for the theft. It is true that the store handed it over to someone who claimed to have left one behind, I have no doubt that, had the child turned up earlier, he would have had it handed back.

So many members seem to think the store should replace the item or compensate, and as much as nobody wants to admit. It is indeed the owner of the appliance who bears the forefront of the blame, for had it not been left behind unattended, this scenario would not have taken place, this is regardless of their age.

The woman who stole it should be the one fingers are pointed at, and its not too difficult to track her down, that she was in the store and overheard that someone had left an Ipod (by an HONEST member of staff), there should be records of her prior purchase, especially if she used a credit card to buy goods.

It is not the stores duty to even look after the Ipod, but they "honestly" placed the item behind the counter for the owner to collect. THIS IS NOT A POLICY, IT IS A COURTESY!!!!!

Every store cover themselves with the notice "Items left unattended are done so at the owners own risk", you will see such signs in every store you visit, from supermarket car parks to clothing stores. This covers anything from handbag thefts to Laptop thefts.

Sometimes the truth is hard to swallow, especially when an 11 Yr old child has lost such a valuable item, this story would be very different indeed had the store asked the child to PROVE the item was theirs, still they would be dogged for it.

The culprit is out their right now, running around with a new Ipod, yet as it seems too difficult for her to be tracked down, its a case of "lets blame the store for it". Heaven forbid we dare blame the child for losing it in the first place.

It seems to be anyone elses fault but the one who left it behind, even though the main culprit took advantage of a neglectful owner, whom had they NOT left it behind in the first place, would not have had such an easy opportunity to commit the crime.

I really hope this matter gets resolved, that the child does indeed get the item back, and the thief in question gets caught and dealt with accordingly, but I find it highly unlikely, as unlikely as the store being blamed for it.

I shall wait and see what the results are on that matter, but Good Luck OP!

adouglasmhor

As the thief had a CC I imagine she is an opportunist and not a serial thief, so she may well not have punted it to buy smack etc. If the cops do act the kid could get it back.

gordikin

Bamber19 wrote: »

Hardly a great example. It is expensive to call from America so he doesn't want to given he'll be back soon and in addition the costs will rack up even further if he's sitting on hold. Not everything is a conspiracy.

OP stated her son cannot phone the police because he is in America...can he...yes he can! Will he be put on hold? Perhaps he will but nobody actually knows! IMHO OP and her son chooses not to deal with this because they hold JJB responsible.....read the thread title!

Bamber19

gordikin wrote: »

OP stated her son cannot phone the police because he is in America...can he...yes he can! Will he be put on hold? Perhaps he will but nobody actually knows! IMHO OP and her son chooses not to deal with this because they hold JJB responsible.....read the thread title!

I've read the thread title, and the issue everyone should be focusing on is that the OP wants to hold JJB responsible for their grandsons mistake and the criminal activity of a shopper.

What is wholly insignificant and a waste of a post is a post branding her a liar because of a completely unimportant part of her story. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that the OP has a life outside these posts and that her information changes between them such that an assumption that he cannot phone from America becomes "he doesn't want to phone and end up on hold as it will be expensive" say after an email between mother and son. Did you not consider that within your detective work? That things can change between posts.

Jeff_Bridges_hair

Just wondering how they can make out what is being said on the CCTV.. I thought most was placed above the head to watch the tills not getting robbed

peachyprice

Yes, OP has been asked that, several times, but has chosen not to answer.