Vent:Store staff told me they would search me

Azari

hollydays wrote: »

But I asked you for whose benefit were they being detained,and how you deem it to be reasonable.Your quote is a reply to "how long can a person be reasonable detained (for theft for example),not a reply towhy.
Why not give us an exact situation,lets see if we agree.

Obviously detaining someone whom you have reasonable belief has stolen from you is primarily for your own benefit.

A situation where this would definitely be reasonable would be where a shop worker had seen someone place a tagged item in their own bag, had informed security, and then, when the alarm went off and security challenged the person in question they refused to cooperate in locating whatever was triggering the alarm.

A situation where if would not be reasonable would be where a security guard thought someone looked shifty and was wearing a voluminous coat.

In between there are many less clear cut situations and, presumably, any decent retailer will go to some lengths to train their security staff in what is and is not likely to be deemed reasonable.

Azari

hollydays wrote: »

In the hyperthetical situation,you would be asking why the person didnt want to be searched Before you could determine reasonable.
I think the man in the street would think it reasonable to detain that person if they ran off after being asked to be searched.

Probably, but they would need to have solid grounds for requesting a search in the first place.

You cannot just ask to search someone because you think they look as if they are the sort of person who might have stolen something and then use running away as grounds for detaining them.

hollydays

agreed...............................
You have to have solid grounds for requesting a search,and have to establish why the person doesnt want to be searched to determine if its a reasonable.

hollydays

NoSatisfaction wrote: »

Rubbish. I wouldn't want to be searched by anyone. Its an invasion of my privacy and I have not stolen anything.

What if I had private documents on me or a large amount of cash because I was about to buy a secondhand car privately, or medicines or a medical device; being searched could cause embarrassment and therefore can legitimately be refused.

Surely it would be reasonable to ask to be searched in private,in this situation? with more than 1 person present..

NoSatisfaction

hollydays wrote: »

Surely it would be reasonable to ask to be searched in private,in this situation? with more than 1 person present..

Of course it is not. The only people who can conduct a search are the police and they need suspicion to do so.

Why should I have to explain "whatever" to someone with whom has no authority over me or let them see and even trawl though what could be sensitive or confidential documents, medicines or implements.

Some people roll over to these thugs too easily!

hollydays

ok,then,another idea of what is reasonable......You set alarms off,but have sensative papers on you (!),loose in your bag,therefore you have a legitimate right to refuse to be searched,because you are sure the staff will read them? even if you instructed them about this,you could still legitimately refuse... even if offered a private search? is that what you are saying? ....and that is reasonable to you?

Sally_A

Well, I went down without my new car key, the alarm still went off.

I had reason to empty my bag all over the floor as I couldn't find my house keys (found them now - left in car).

I found a Rimmel Mascara that I bought in Superdrug Cardiff about 6 weeks ago, that had a security tag stuck to it underneath the cellophane - the alarm never went off when I left Superdrug, could it be that a) Superdrugs system was not working b) even a deactivated tag in one store could still set off an alarm in another? (It has never activated any alarm system in other stores I have been into since).

Anyhow, have now peeled it off, so my next visit will be interesting.

Short of walking in butt naked, I have no idea.

NoSatisfaction

hollydays wrote: »

ok,then,another idea of what is reasonable......You set alarms off,but have sensative papers on you (!),therefore you have a legitimate right to refuse to be searched,because you are sure the staff will read them? even if you instructed them about this,you could still legitimately refuse...? is that what you are saying?

Of course you can. The only people that have a right to search you are the police and they must have suspicion.

The shop security can only stop you if they have witnessed you stealing something. Just setting of an alarm does not constitute witnessing of a theft.

Even if they witness you stealing something, they have no rights to search you! They must call the police who will then conduct a search if they have suspicion.

Sally_A

hollydays wrote: »

ok,then,another idea of what is reasonable......You set alarms off,but have sensative papers on you (!),loose in your bag,therefore you have a legitimate right to refuse to be searched,because you are sure the staff will read them? even if you instructed them about this,you could still legitimately refuse... even if offered a private search? is that what you are saying? ....and that is reasonable to you?

I'd say, "I have work files in here that are confidential", I would happily flick through the pages for them at a distance, but realistically they wouldn't need to look through sensitive paperwork, you can hardly stash a joint of beef, bottles of whisky, or other tagged items inside sheets of paper.

hollydays

common sense again.