Unjustly Stopped: Understanding My Rights as a Tesco Shopper if this happens again

user1977

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Undervalued said:

Unless the "shoplifter" has eaten the food he hasn't actually stolen anything until he leaves the store!

Shoplifting is just a term to describe theft and the offence of theft occurs when someone dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it, might be wrong of course but I'm not sure you can't be charged for committing the offence because you've yet to leave the store. 

You could be charged with attempt. Doubt the police would be interested though.

Undervalued

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Undervalued said:

Unless the "shoplifter" has eaten the food he hasn't actually stolen anything until he leaves the store!

Shoplifting is just a term to describe theft and the offence of theft occurs when someone dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it, might be wrong of course but I'm not sure you can't be charged for committing the offence because you've yet to leave the store. 

I assume you could create doubt by saying as you hadn't left the store you intended to pay for the items, whether a court would believe you or not is another manner, if you have a pack of shaving blades stuffed up your jumper I think it's hard to suggest your intent wasn't to deprive and as the item is on your person you've already appropriated it? 

In practical everyday terms let us just say it is very difficult to prove the necessary intent, beyond a reasonable doubt, until the thief (shoplifter) has left the building. So it would be very rare for such a case to come to court, let alone be convicted.

Yes, I am sure in certain circumstances it has happened.

user1977

jackrussell7 said:

To draw an analogy, if I were purchasing alcohol, I’d fully understand being asked for ID. However, if I had to wait minutes because the staff wanted to call the DVLA to confirm my ID's validity and information, that would feel excessive and like an attempt to embarrass me.

I think minimum wage retail staff have better things to do with their time than deliberately set out to embarrass random customers (and there's no such thing as a DVLA hotline for such checks!), but in any event you don't have a right to not face an attempt to embarrass you. If you don't like their procedures, you are free to go and shop elsewhere.

Undervalued

user1977 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Undervalued said:

Unless the "shoplifter" has eaten the food he hasn't actually stolen anything until he leaves the store!

Shoplifting is just a term to describe theft and the offence of theft occurs when someone dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it, might be wrong of course but I'm not sure you can't be charged for committing the offence because you've yet to leave the store. 

You could be charged with attempt. Doubt the police would be interested though.

Exactly - so it would incredibly unusual.

HillStreetBlues

Undervalued said:

user1977 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Undervalued said:

Unless the "shoplifter" has eaten the food he hasn't actually stolen anything until he leaves the store!

Shoplifting is just a term to describe theft and the offence of theft occurs when someone dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it, might be wrong of course but I'm not sure you can't be charged for committing the offence because you've yet to leave the store. 

You could be charged with attempt. Doubt the police would be interested though.

Exactly - so it would incredibly unusual.

There isn't a crime of attempt.

Undervalued

HillStreetBlues said:

Undervalued said:

user1977 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Undervalued said:

Unless the "shoplifter" has eaten the food he hasn't actually stolen anything until he leaves the store!

Shoplifting is just a term to describe theft and the offence of theft occurs when someone dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it, might be wrong of course but I'm not sure you can't be charged for committing the offence because you've yet to leave the store. 

You could be charged with attempt. Doubt the police would be interested though.

Exactly - so it would incredibly unusual.

There isn't a crime of attempt.

Even more unusual then!

user1977

HillStreetBlues said:

Undervalued said:

user1977 said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Undervalued said:

Unless the "shoplifter" has eaten the food he hasn't actually stolen anything until he leaves the store!

Shoplifting is just a term to describe theft and the offence of theft occurs when someone dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it, might be wrong of course but I'm not sure you can't be charged for committing the offence because you've yet to leave the store. 

You could be charged with attempt. Doubt the police would be interested though.

Exactly - so it would incredibly unusual.

There isn't a crime of attempt.

Yes there is: Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (legislation.gov.uk)

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Ergates said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Whilst you are free to comply with a random check you would also be free to walk away, there would be no powers to detain as picking people at random lacks either an offence being committed or reasonable grounds to suspect one  

Bearing in mind that a shop is free to refuse entry to anyone who has refused to cooperate with a random check, if they so chose.

Indeed they can but they have to counter that with losing loyal customers, I think it would be very petty and more so I don't think stores ban customers willy nilly as is often made out on here but rather do so if they steal stuff or are abusive to staff (and rightly so in such examples). 

prowla

A lot of stores these days don't give you a receipt unless you ask for it; I always do.

I sometimes go to a store and put things in my bag and then make a thing of taking them out and turning the bag upside down at the checkouts.

mr_stripey

jackrussell7 said:

After reading through the posts and comments, I have a better understanding of the situation and realise I may have missed the main point: how the checks were carried out.

The first incident involved the security guard asking me to search through a bin to find my receipt, which I found excessive and intended to embarrass me.

As for yesterday's incident, if the guard believed I should have used a basket, a more constructive approach would have been to simply offer me one. When he checked my items, I only had six small items in my bag, which could have been easily reviewed with a quick glance. Instead, the guard insisted on checking the barcode of every single item against the receipt, which seemed excessive.

When the store manager arrived, he immediately noticed that my receipt was a reprint, which I explained that I hadn’t requested at the self-checkout. The manager also mentioned not finding "Spontex" on the receipt, and I promptly showed him the item. I found this interaction reasonable and was perfectly happy with how he handled it.

I prefer using self-checkout. As Bro Grumpy_chap, pointed out, the self-checkout sometimes requires a store assistant to check five items, which has happened a few times to me before. In those cases, the staff quickly scanned the items, even those deep inside my bag, and the whole process was completed in half a minute, which I found perfectly acceptable.

To draw an analogy, if I were purchasing alcohol, I’d fully understand being asked for ID. However, if I had to wait minutes because the staff wanted to call the DVLA to confirm my ID's validity and information, that would feel excessive and like an attempt to embarrass me.

 a more constructive approach would have been for you to take a basket and placed your items in it before paying for them, thus arousing less suspicion.