We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
I was refused entry in a local B&M store today
Comments
-
I'm completely at ease with shops being able to bar customers, and I'm sure that's gone wrong in the past too - for example pub punters being mistaken for someone on a photograph behind the bar titled "DO NOT SERVE".Alderbank said:
That's a very interesting post and I'd like to develop it..booneruk said:It would be sensible if there was an official mechanism to appeal, with original footage needing to be retained as cases like this will continue to happen. Humans make mistakes, and they can be malicious.
However, it wouldn't be the end of the world if you were unable to physically shop. There's a world of online options these days (not that I'm saying being barred from physical stores without good reason should be a thing we tolerate)
The right of shopkeepers to bar anyone from their physical stores without good reason (indeed without any reason at all) is one we have had for years. We not only tolerate it but embrace it*.
AI face recognition is new, but using eyeballs is not. Some shops ban schoolkids unless with adults, and some shops ban gangs of schoolkids. Any bans of potential customers are difficult commercial decisions for retailers. When they make them, they always seem to be for the same reason, that they can't afford to subsidise shoplifters and can't afford the time and substantial costs to bring private prosecutions or civil court action. I can't imagine any other business reasons why shops would seek to reduce the flow of potential customers through their doors.
*Rightly, we have laws to protect discrimination for protected reasons such as race, colour or faith.
"YOU! OUT OF MY PUB!!!"
"MOI? WHY? I AINT DONE NUFFIN" etc.
Mistaken identities happen, but in the case of Face Watch it could mean you're told to scoot upon entering any shop in your area!
I can completely understand utilising modern technology in an attempt to tackle the scourge of shoplifting, which we all pay for through increased prices at the end of the day. Mistakes will always happen, and as this is rolled out they will become more numerous. Face Watch should be insisting there's an appeals process in place so that someone can complain to the shop that applied the original black mark and have their case reviewed. For that the shops will need to hold CCTV footage for some time.
1 -
Like I said, you were content with a £50 payoff after wrongly being accused of shoplifting. Obviously a win in your eyes. Good for you.Renfrewman said:
In what way?nero33 said:
Absolutely this.sheramber said:
You were given the chance to prove your innocence. The OP was not.Renfrewman said:
Something similar happened to me in B&M. I was stopped in the car park and asked to return to the store as a staff member thought they saw me shoplifting...was happy to do so! I was asked to empty my right hand jacket pocket...I did and it revealed six branded Tesco tattie scones...honestly you should have seen their faces! Did I get upset...not in the least especially as I got £50 of vouchers! Mistakes happen. OP fought for the right to shop in B&M and now that they can refuses to do so...a bit perverse I suggest?MattMattMattUK said:
A really good result and good info for others in the future who have done nothing wrong. Well done on this!nero33 said:UPDATE
I have been in regular contact with Facewatch and I requested that they send me all evidence that was held on their system.
I was told they did not hold any CCTV/video of the alleged incident but would now involve B&M who held the evidence/footage.
Facewatch then contacted me same day to say:
"Following our recent communications, I escalated the incident to the Manager of Profit Protection for B&M Bargains on your behalf.
Unfortunately, there is no longer any CCTV footage available for this incident.In light of this, and considering the information you have provided, I have resolved the matter by removing your record from the Facewatch system.Your profile has now been permanently deleted, and will no longer trigger any alerts going forward."
Clearly it is a huge weight off our shoulders and 4 months of stress took it's toll.
Facewatch were extremely professional and courteous throughout and I genuinely felt they were looking to help me from their first reply onwards. I think they realised yesterday that someone at B&M may have made up an incident and didn't expect us to go through the processes involved in challenging their decision to ban.
It is highly unlikely that we'll ever set foot in a B&M store again.
Many thanks to all of you that took the time to read/reply/offer advice;
Would You have been happy to be refused entry the next time you went and told you had something in your in pocket you did not pay for when you left the store last time?How would you have proved them wrong?
The ban did not just affect B&M. It affected all stores who use Facewatch, which could be all the stores in their neighbourhood.
The long term ramifications of this could have been disastrous for me or anyone else put in this situation.
But you're still totally oblivious to the long term implications of being effectively convicted of shoplifting by a store and banned - potentially from thousands of other stores up and down the country.
Perhaps you'd think differently if you were unable to enter any store in future to buy scones!
0 -
BBC news are awful for factual errors and just general sloppy journalism; I rarely take anything they say at face value now.Okell said:1 -
I rarely shop at B&M as it's mostly full of junk food and landfill polyester/plastic goods - so no great loss.Renfrewman said:
In what way?nero33 said:
Absolutely this.sheramber said:
You were given the chance to prove your innocence. The OP was not.Renfrewman said:
Something similar happened to me in B&M. I was stopped in the car park and asked to return to the store as a staff member thought they saw me shoplifting...was happy to do so! I was asked to empty my right hand jacket pocket...I did and it revealed six branded Tesco tattie scones...honestly you should have seen their faces! Did I get upset...not in the least especially as I got £50 of vouchers! Mistakes happen. OP fought for the right to shop in B&M and now that they can refuses to do so...a bit perverse I suggest?MattMattMattUK said:
A really good result and good info for others in the future who have done nothing wrong. Well done on this!nero33 said:UPDATE
I have been in regular contact with Facewatch and I requested that they send me all evidence that was held on their system.
I was told they did not hold any CCTV/video of the alleged incident but would now involve B&M who held the evidence/footage.
Facewatch then contacted me same day to say:
"Following our recent communications, I escalated the incident to the Manager of Profit Protection for B&M Bargains on your behalf.
Unfortunately, there is no longer any CCTV footage available for this incident.In light of this, and considering the information you have provided, I have resolved the matter by removing your record from the Facewatch system.Your profile has now been permanently deleted, and will no longer trigger any alerts going forward."
Clearly it is a huge weight off our shoulders and 4 months of stress took it's toll.
Facewatch were extremely professional and courteous throughout and I genuinely felt they were looking to help me from their first reply onwards. I think they realised yesterday that someone at B&M may have made up an incident and didn't expect us to go through the processes involved in challenging their decision to ban.
It is highly unlikely that we'll ever set foot in a B&M store again.
Many thanks to all of you that took the time to read/reply/offer advice;
Would You have been happy to be refused entry the next time you went and told you had something in your in pocket you did not pay for when you left the store last time?How would you have proved them wrong?
The ban did not just affect B&M. It affected all stores who use Facewatch, which could be all the stores in their neighbourhood.
The long term ramifications of this could have been disastrous for me or anyone else put in this situation.
If your local chemist adopted the system then it could unfairly stop you getting prescriptions etc0 -
I'm sure that your local pharmacist, and indeed all pharmacies, can and do ban people, in view of the unique stock they carry and their statutory duties under the Pharmacy Act 2010.[Deleted User] said:
I rarely shop at B&M as it's mostly full of junk food and landfill polyester/plastic goods - so no great loss.Renfrewman said:
In what way?nero33 said:
Absolutely this.sheramber said:
You were given the chance to prove your innocence. The OP was not.Renfrewman said:
Something similar happened to me in B&M. I was stopped in the car park and asked to return to the store as a staff member thought they saw me shoplifting...was happy to do so! I was asked to empty my right hand jacket pocket...I did and it revealed six branded Tesco tattie scones...honestly you should have seen their faces! Did I get upset...not in the least especially as I got £50 of vouchers! Mistakes happen. OP fought for the right to shop in B&M and now that they can refuses to do so...a bit perverse I suggest?MattMattMattUK said:
A really good result and good info for others in the future who have done nothing wrong. Well done on this!nero33 said:UPDATE
I have been in regular contact with Facewatch and I requested that they send me all evidence that was held on their system.
I was told they did not hold any CCTV/video of the alleged incident but would now involve B&M who held the evidence/footage.
Facewatch then contacted me same day to say:
"Following our recent communications, I escalated the incident to the Manager of Profit Protection for B&M Bargains on your behalf.
Unfortunately, there is no longer any CCTV footage available for this incident.In light of this, and considering the information you have provided, I have resolved the matter by removing your record from the Facewatch system.Your profile has now been permanently deleted, and will no longer trigger any alerts going forward."
Clearly it is a huge weight off our shoulders and 4 months of stress took it's toll.
Facewatch were extremely professional and courteous throughout and I genuinely felt they were looking to help me from their first reply onwards. I think they realised yesterday that someone at B&M may have made up an incident and didn't expect us to go through the processes involved in challenging their decision to ban.
It is highly unlikely that we'll ever set foot in a B&M store again.
Many thanks to all of you that took the time to read/reply/offer advice;
Would You have been happy to be refused entry the next time you went and told you had something in your in pocket you did not pay for when you left the store last time?How would you have proved them wrong?
The ban did not just affect B&M. It affected all stores who use Facewatch, which could be all the stores in their neighbourhood.
The long term ramifications of this could have been disastrous for me or anyone else put in this situation.
If your local chemist adopted the system then it could unfairly stop you getting prescriptions etc
But it would not stop you getting prescriptions.0 -
And many pharmacies are located inside supermarkets which would prevent someone from entering the store![Deleted User] said:
I rarely shop at B&M as it's mostly full of junk food and landfill polyester/plastic goods - so no great loss.Renfrewman said:
In what way?nero33 said:
Absolutely this.sheramber said:
You were given the chance to prove your innocence. The OP was not.Renfrewman said:
Something similar happened to me in B&M. I was stopped in the car park and asked to return to the store as a staff member thought they saw me shoplifting...was happy to do so! I was asked to empty my right hand jacket pocket...I did and it revealed six branded Tesco tattie scones...honestly you should have seen their faces! Did I get upset...not in the least especially as I got £50 of vouchers! Mistakes happen. OP fought for the right to shop in B&M and now that they can refuses to do so...a bit perverse I suggest?MattMattMattUK said:
A really good result and good info for others in the future who have done nothing wrong. Well done on this!nero33 said:UPDATE
I have been in regular contact with Facewatch and I requested that they send me all evidence that was held on their system.
I was told they did not hold any CCTV/video of the alleged incident but would now involve B&M who held the evidence/footage.
Facewatch then contacted me same day to say:
"Following our recent communications, I escalated the incident to the Manager of Profit Protection for B&M Bargains on your behalf.
Unfortunately, there is no longer any CCTV footage available for this incident.In light of this, and considering the information you have provided, I have resolved the matter by removing your record from the Facewatch system.Your profile has now been permanently deleted, and will no longer trigger any alerts going forward."
Clearly it is a huge weight off our shoulders and 4 months of stress took it's toll.
Facewatch were extremely professional and courteous throughout and I genuinely felt they were looking to help me from their first reply onwards. I think they realised yesterday that someone at B&M may have made up an incident and didn't expect us to go through the processes involved in challenging their decision to ban.
It is highly unlikely that we'll ever set foot in a B&M store again.
Many thanks to all of you that took the time to read/reply/offer advice;
Would You have been happy to be refused entry the next time you went and told you had something in your in pocket you did not pay for when you left the store last time?How would you have proved them wrong?
The ban did not just affect B&M. It affected all stores who use Facewatch, which could be all the stores in their neighbourhood.
The long term ramifications of this could have been disastrous for me or anyone else put in this situation.
If your local chemist adopted the system then it could unfairly stop you getting prescriptions etc0 -
A_Geordie said:Facewatch, along with Home Bargains are being sued by a teenager who was mistakenly identified as a shoplifter. Facewatch have already admitted mistaken identity (despite their wild claims of at least 99% accuracy before an alert is sent) and the OP may want to sit it out and wait the outcome of that case if considering the legal route. Big Brother Watch is bringing the claim on the teenager's behalf.
This isn't and won't be the last time it happens but will be interesting to see how it plays out in court. The EU is already looking to curb the use of live facial recognition tools through the proposed AI Act and I understand some US states have prohibited its use due to the number of mistaken identification issues which has led to wrongful arrest claims.
Well, if it's 99% accurate that means that on in a hundred results are incorrect.0 -
The irony being that they even have a segment on the news called BBC Verify. 🤦♀️😂[Deleted User] said:BBC news are awful for factual errors and just general sloppy journalism; I rarely take anything they say at face value now.Jenni x0 -
Yeah - it's strange (or maybe not ...)Jenni_D said:
The irony being that they even have a segment on the news called BBC Verify. 🤦♀️😂[Deleted User] said:BBC news are awful for factual errors and just general sloppy journalism; I rarely take anything they say at face value now.
I was following the Graham Linehan trial last week as the journalist Nick Wallis was live tweeting it and the not one of the BBC news reports each evening gave an accurate and unbiased view of what had happened that day in court.0 -
I find it amusing that this gone from one store to ANY store....what iffery in the extreme!nero33 said:
Like I said, you were content with a £50 payoff after wrongly being accused of shoplifting. Obviously a win in your eyes. Good for you.Renfrewman said:
In what way?nero33 said:
Absolutely this.sheramber said:
You were given the chance to prove your innocence. The OP was not.Renfrewman said:
Something similar happened to me in B&M. I was stopped in the car park and asked to return to the store as a staff member thought they saw me shoplifting...was happy to do so! I was asked to empty my right hand jacket pocket...I did and it revealed six branded Tesco tattie scones...honestly you should have seen their faces! Did I get upset...not in the least especially as I got £50 of vouchers! Mistakes happen. OP fought for the right to shop in B&M and now that they can refuses to do so...a bit perverse I suggest?MattMattMattUK said:
A really good result and good info for others in the future who have done nothing wrong. Well done on this!nero33 said:UPDATE
I have been in regular contact with Facewatch and I requested that they send me all evidence that was held on their system.
I was told they did not hold any CCTV/video of the alleged incident but would now involve B&M who held the evidence/footage.
Facewatch then contacted me same day to say:
"Following our recent communications, I escalated the incident to the Manager of Profit Protection for B&M Bargains on your behalf.
Unfortunately, there is no longer any CCTV footage available for this incident.In light of this, and considering the information you have provided, I have resolved the matter by removing your record from the Facewatch system.Your profile has now been permanently deleted, and will no longer trigger any alerts going forward."
Clearly it is a huge weight off our shoulders and 4 months of stress took it's toll.
Facewatch were extremely professional and courteous throughout and I genuinely felt they were looking to help me from their first reply onwards. I think they realised yesterday that someone at B&M may have made up an incident and didn't expect us to go through the processes involved in challenging their decision to ban.
It is highly unlikely that we'll ever set foot in a B&M store again.
Many thanks to all of you that took the time to read/reply/offer advice;
Would You have been happy to be refused entry the next time you went and told you had something in your in pocket you did not pay for when you left the store last time?How would you have proved them wrong?
The ban did not just affect B&M. It affected all stores who use Facewatch, which could be all the stores in their neighbourhood.
The long term ramifications of this could have been disastrous for me or anyone else put in this situation.
But you're still totally oblivious to the long term implications of being effectively convicted of shoplifting by a store and banned - potentially from thousands of other stores up and down the country.
Perhaps you'd think differently if you were unable to enter any store in future to buy scones!0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.1K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards