Tesco consider adding the points of discarded receipt as theft

Edwood_Woodwood

lucy03 wrote: »

(iii) Tesco can withdraw Clubcard points from any individual if they wish. They don't have to go to court to do that, they can act as they want. However because there are contractual issues here then someone can contest that in the civil courts if they wish. There is absolutely no involvement as a criminal matter.

Then why did Tesco treat an alleged theft of clubcard points in the same way they would treat an ordinary theft of say, a bottle of Vodka?

Tesco themselves state that the only consequence of an alleged theft of clubcard points is to cancel that clubcard.

Tesco cannot act as they want in detaining people, they have to obey the law just like everybody else.

ampersand

Dear dear me - what a kerfuffle. This is known as 'wombling' - has been for years.
Many people in queues donate points to others waiting. It's happened to me often. No checkout operator has ever uttered a bleat or a tweet.
I donate unneeded vouchers similarly.
CS know my points come from many sources. That's in any of 5 outlets I may be near.

Call it 'civic-minded litter clearance' if you want to gloss a non-event, then put your minds to real problems in our world. There are more than a few.

Even start donating to those that are trying to help.

op - I'd direct a well-written letter to the new CEO.
Tesco
Mr Dave Lewis Chief Executive
Email dave.lewis@uk.tesco.com
Telephone 01992 632222


I'd ring[and record the call] too, but it depends whether or not you feel lucid and articulate enough in making your points courteously and with confidence.

Edwood_Woodwood

lucy03 wrote: »

I think it's interesting too but there aren't any laws here which Tesco are imposing.

(i) They can decide who they want in their shop (with the usual exclusions). It might be unfair that they've banned someone but that's of no relevance in law.

The unlawful manner in the behaviour of Tesco toward the OP which led to the banning is the issue, not the actual banning, although it is clearly wrong by their own policy.

Edwood_Woodwood

wealdroam wrote: »

So you didn't see this sentence in the post you selectively quoted from:

You obviously don't get it do you?

Tesco breaching their own contract in how they deal with alleged clubcard points theft is the least of the woes in this sorry saga.

Lucy03 stated that Tesco can ban who they like but a civil remedy may be available to the OP if he wishes.

However, in this circumstance, Tesco cannot ban who they like when they like as they are bound by their own terms, which state that only the withdrawal of the clubcard should have happened.

Therefore, Tesco's unlawful detention of a customer is the issue, they essentially prove themselves, via their terms, that they have no right to treat this transgression in the same way as an "ordinary" theft from the store, ie leaving with goods and not paying.

The OP has at least a counter claim for breach of contract and a complaint to the police for being unlawfully detained.

powerful_Rogue

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

You obviously don't get it do you?

Tesco breaching their own contract in how they deal with alleged clubcard points theft is the least of the woes in this sorry saga.

Lucy03 stated that Tesco can ban who they like but a civil remedy may be available to the OP if he wishes.

However, in this circumstance, Tesco cannot ban who they like when they like as they are bound by their own terms, which state that only the withdrawal of the clubcard should have happened.

Therefore, Tesco's unlawful detention of a customer is the issue, they essentially prove themselves, via their terms, that they have no right to treat this transgression in the same way as an "ordinary" theft from the store, ie leaving with goods and not paying.

The OP has at least a counter claim for breach of contract and a complaint to the police for being unlawfully detained.

You seem to be adding to the original post to fit your argument.

Where does it say she was unlawfully detained? It dosent even say she refused to go with the security guard.

wealdroam

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

However, in this circumstance, Tesco cannot ban who they like when they like as they are bound by their own terms, which state that only the withdrawal of the clubcard should have happened.

To use your phrase "You obviously don't get it do you?"

Even if we were to believe you when you say "Tesco cannot ban who they like in this circumstance", the remedy is the same.

Let me spell it out:

According to you, Tesco would be breaking their T&Cs if they were to ban someone from their stores for allegedly breaking Clubcard rules.

You insist that this is a breach of contract, and say:

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

This simply cannot be ignored or excused.

The aggrieved party should then take their complaint to court to seek a remedy.

What's the phrase you used...

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

Armchair lawyers hey?

...or perhaps:

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

Armchair cyber lawyers!

Anyone is free to offer an opinion here without getting abuse in return.

bod1467

Tesco can ban anyone they like from their stores at any time for any reason (except for certain exclusions, such as on the basis of race, religion etc.).

Whether the OP went voluntarily or not to the office matters not one jot (to the subject of Tesco banning them). Neither does it matter whether they are using the 2 "stolen" points as their basis - THEY CAN IF THEY WISH TO. Just because it is not a remedy mentioned in their clubcard T&Cs is irrelevant.

Tesco stores are private property to which they offer a public invitation to enter. They can decide WHO they want to be allowed/denied access WHEN they like for WHATEVER reason.

EwahWoowah's reasoning holds no water.

Cornucopia

I haven't decided yet whether I completely agree with EW's reasoning regarding the penalty imposed by Tesco's.

However, I do understand it, so it might help others to hear it again in a slightly different form of words.

The argument is this: by obtaining a Clubcard, one enters into a contract with Tesco's. That contract sets out certain restrictions on the use of the Card, the points, etc. The penalty stated for those "offences" is that Tesco's *may* withdraw the Card. It's therefore a reasonable expectation, that may well be enforceable in law, that if a transgression did take place, that that is the sole penalty available.

The implication of a different penalty suggests as a minimum that Tesco's are not interested in the Ts and Cs as far as their own obligations, and would prefer arbitrary sanctions as opposed to those set out in what is effectively a legally-binding contract.

Cornucopia

wealdroam wrote: »

Anyone is free to offer an opinion here without getting abuse in return.

Perhaps you could clearly identify your opinions as such, and then we can give them the respect they deserve?

The trouble with trying to (mis)state facts is that sometimes people will disagree with you, and there's every chance they will be right and you will be wrong.

bod1467

Cornucopia wrote: »

It's therefore a reasonable expectation, that may well be enforceable in law, that if a transgression did take place, that that is the sole penalty available.

It might be reasonable in your and EW's eyes. But I stand by my previous post ... Tesco have done nothing wrong in respect of banning the OP - that is their right as the store is their private property. (I'm not commenting on the office/detaining point - we don't know whether OP went voluntarily or was coerced, so it's not possible to decry Tesco's actions on this point. And it actually has no relevance to the banning question).

And my posts declare my opinions on this matter.