Tesco Shoplifting - need help.

whiteswan

Wow.............

Didn't expect all these posts in the last 24 hours.

As the OP I actually have found the debate quite interesting - and I DO appreciate all sides of the discussion.

Just to address a couple of points.

Yes its irrelevant that the bans been lifted as I cant envisage ever going into Tesco's again - but who knows - Black Fridays not long off - although I do already feel as if I have had my own "black Friday" with Tesco's.

Clubcard coming back - no harm in using the points already allocated.

I will await telephone call from Store Manager on Tuesday.

Dave

powerful_Rogue

hollydays wrote: »

Fish filleting?

Can you not provide a serious answer to your earlier statement of

hollydays wrote: »

No of course security staff don't take the word of Betty from the fresh fish section as she's had no training...

What training does Betty require to be able to report a suspected shoplifter to security?

hollydays

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Can you not provide a serious answer to your earlier statement of



What training does Betty require to be able to report a suspected shoplifter to security?

It's the security staff that need retraining if they think it's ok to stop anyone on the whim of a third party.
If you haven't seen enough-call the police .
Security staff are not police officers.
the police have the powers to detain and search here-without risk

powerful_Rogue

hollydays wrote: »

It's the security staff that need retraining if they think it's ok to stop anyone on the whim of a third party.
If you haven't seen enough-call the police .
Security staff are not police officers.
the police have the powers to detain and search here-the security staff do not-

Thats not answering the question though.

A member of staff has seen someone they suspect has shoplifted. Your saying they cant advise security and/or security cant act on that information because the member of staff hasnt been trained. Trained in what?

No-one is claiming store security are police officers or that they have the same powers.

hollydays

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Thats not answering the question though.

A member of staff has seen someone they suspect has shoplifted. Your saying they cant advise security and/or security cant act on that information because the member of staff hasnt been trained. Trained in what?

No-one is claiming store security are police officers or that they have the same powers.

No the security staff should not stop the person full stop.
The police should.

Here's an example of what results when you take the word of a third party. In this case a customer
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/family-anger-as-brain-damaged-granddad-mistaken-for-shoplifter-1-6769793


A customer " suspected " him of shoplifting because he looked different..
The guard quizzed him on the aisle.
This isn't " reasonable grounds" is it?

This is exactly the problem with taking the word of a third party-it's not always reliable.

powerful_Rogue

hollydays wrote: »

No the security staff should not stop the person full stop.

Here's an example of what results when you take the word of a third party. In this case a customer
http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/family-anger-as-brain-damaged-granddad-mistaken-for-shoplifter-1-6769793

Hows that related? We're talking about a member of staff witnessing someone they believe to be shoplifting.

1) It wasnt a member of staff that reported they had seen him conceal items. (Not that he had) It was a member of the public that said he looked suspicious.

2) He wasnt detained, he was quizzed by a manager.

hollydays

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Hows that related? We're talking about a member of staff witnessing someone they believe to be shoplifting.

1) It wasnt a member of staff that reported they had seen him conceal items. (Not that he had) It was a member of the public that said he looked suspicious.

2) He wasnt detained, he was quizzed by a manager.

These mistakes can be made by staff or public.
Just because they are staff doesn't make them more to be highly believed.

It's a perfect example of my point.
That member of the public was exactly like the hypothetical Betty !
Only stop a person you have seen yourself .
Detention is irrelevant.
This is what happens when you try to act like a hero when that's not what you are paid to do.

powerful_Rogue

Wow, amazes me that if you disagree with a certain someone on here or engage in a discussion, their following come out and start throwing around insults.

Im all for a good debate, however when two members in less then two pages chime in with insulting/condescending comments, then I think its time to leave the debate there.

Hollydays - Good debate, shame it couldnt have continued. No doubt certain people will pipe up with the "Had no where to go with his argument so is bailing out" -but couldn't be further from the truth.

JReacher1

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Wow, amazes me that if you disagree with a certain someone on here or engage in a discussion, their following come out and start throwing around insults.

Im all for a good debate, however when two members in less then two pages chime in with insulting/condescending comments, then I think its time to leave the debate there.

Hollydays - Good debate, shame it couldnt have continued. No doubt certain people will pipe up with the "Had no where to go with his argument so is bailing out" -but couldn't be further from the truth.

Yes there are a few posters on this forum who can't argue a point without making personal insults at the person they are arguing with. It's best just to ignore them as they eventually go away.

More importantly I'm now thinking of cracking onto Betty. It seems her judgement can't be trusted so I'm hoping she is a bit easy

Azari

JReacher1 wrote: »

Yes there are a few posters on this forum who can't argue a point without making personal insults at the person they are arguing with. It's best just to ignore them as they eventually go away.

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Wow, amazes me that if you disagree with a certain someone on here or engage in a discussion, their following come out and start throwing around insults.

A reasonable debate is good.

When a couple of people continually go off at tangents and cannot seem to understand perfectly sensible responses it get very tiring.

I note that you have done exactly what a certain other poster always does in these instances: Ignore the substantive points made in the debate and hurl your toys out of the pram, using perceived insults as an excuse to throw in the towel.

Hollydays - Good debate, shame it couldnt have continued.

It could very easily have continued if you had made some response to the substantive points raised by myself and others instead of just nit-picking at everything Hollydays said.

---

To the two people responded to above.

Why have you not even attempted to respond to the substantive points made by myself, above.

They explain (again - you've had this explained to you again and again and again) quite clearly the points you are trying to argue and should enable you to easily see the various mistakes and misunderstandings in the things you have been saying.