Accused of shoplifting

hollydays

marliepanda wrote: »

Slightly different situation, but I once saw three young adults go through the cinema barriers without a ticket (they snuck around a back pillar)

I told the security guard at the time, who had not seen it. Should he have just ignored what I said? And did I give my address, no? What requirement is there for someone to give over their details when saying 'hey they just did something dodgy.' Absolutely none.

I've worked retail before and I have never been told once to 'not act on third party information.' Considering the item WAS placed into a bag so the accuracy of the accusation isn't in question' the security guard/staff member may have just said that to make it seem less of a personal assumption from him, so as to not get the OP's back up by personally accusing them. Maybe the initial witnessing was by a customer, but then the security guard/staff followed this up, saw an item in a personal bag and then the subsequent splitting up and going through the till multiple times, both together and apart scenario.

The 'event' that was stated as causing suspicion DID happen by the OP's own admission. its seriously not a big issue at all.

Totally different situation-entry to a cinema would be governed by rules. he's entitled to check their tickets anyway.

The accusation was made and was baseless. There was no theft.
Acting supposedly " suspiciously " isn't a crime. In fact it turned out this wasn't unlawful behaviour at all.There was no theft or attempted theft , putting something into a bag( let's not forget mother identified this and took it out again how come no one observed that) isn't a crime.
No, if any member of staff had seen it, it would have been simple for them to calmly watch him go through the till-
It would be an issue for the staff as they could be disciplined

hollydays

I do think people taking their own bags into shops more, and carrying paid for goods around if they don't want to buy a bag must make life more difficult for staff at the moment.

teddysmum

What about the self-scanning system used in Tesco (I don't know about other supermarkets) because people are allowed to bag the items as they go round the store ?

marliepanda

teddysmum wrote: »

What about the self-scanning system used in Tesco (I don't know about other supermarkets) because people are allowed to bag the items as they go round the store ?

I am pretty sure those have signs (my local one does) that say you can be subject to a spot check at any time when using those machines.

boliston

I must have looked a bit suspicious the other day as I purchased a bottle of beer from my local m&s but did not want to pay 5p for a bag for just one bottle, and then I had to go into sainsburys as I remembered I had forgotten to buy any milk so it might have looked like I had purchased a pint of milk and avoided putting the beer I was carrying through the scanner.

DCFC79

teddysmum wrote: »

What about the self-scanning system used in Tesco (I don't know about other supermarkets) because people are allowed to bag the items as they go round the store ?

Sainsbury's and Waitrose have a similar setup.

AJXX

marliepanda wrote: »

I am pretty sure those have signs (my local one does) that say you can be subject to a spot check at any time when using those machines.

They certainly do and I've been subjected to this a few times - however it's entirely random and decided by the self service machine that you use to pay when you're finished your shop (at Tesco at least).

AJXX

hollydays wrote: »

The accusation was made and was baseless.

But still an accusation was made, the staff have no idea if it was baseless or not until they investigate. I still don't see how they've done anything wrong; given the OP consented to the search.

hollydays wrote: »

Staff are told never to act on third party information.

hollydays wrote: »

It would be an issue for the staff as they could be disciplined

I think these two statements need some sources; otherwise you're just speculating.

hollydays

AJXX wrote: »

But still an accusation was made, the staff have no idea if it was baseless or not until they investigate. I still don't see how they've done anything wrong; given the OP consented to the search.





I think these two statements need some sources; otherwise you're just speculating.

As you are disagreeing, perhaps you'd like to provide the source that it's ok, for example to approach someone after having been too lazy to watch them going through the tills,which would have proven payment, then make an accusation of theft supposedly ( but totally incorrectly) witnessed by an unknown third party .
I look forward to that source .

AJXX

hollydays wrote: »

As you are disagreeing, perhaps you'd like to provide the source that it's ok, for example to approach someone after having been too lazy to watch them going through the tills,which would have proven payment, then make an accusation of theft witnessed by an unknown third party .
I look forward to that source .

It doesn't really work like that "I still don't see how they've done anything wrong" is not the same as you posting "Staff are told never to act on third party information." and "It would be an issue for the staff as they could be disciplined". What you have posted sounds like it's actual fact rather than your own opinion so I'm simply asking for some sources to support this.

to approach someone after having been too lazy to watch them going through the tills,which would have proven payment, then make an accusation of theft witnessed by an unknown third party

"Going through the tills" does not "prove payment" - You can still very well "go through the tills" with a load of stuff in your pockets or just pay for the cheap stuff to make it look like you're paying for everything, when in reality you have 20 quids worth of meat stuffed down your trousers....