Scenario about a call to a retail store for receipt check

[plopo]

I've read 2 of these stories on digg the past week. Someone goes to a large store, purchases some goods and on the way out is asked by an employee, to check their receipt. Customer says no and continues on the way out, this causes loss prevention to get involved. Just a note, neither person had stolen anything.

In the first case loss prevention\security stood between the customer and the exit preventing him from leaving the store. In response, the customer called 911.

In the second case, loss prevention\security prevented the person from leaving in their car by blocking the car door with their foot.

I was reading how lots of people are angry that they called 911 because it wasn't an emergency, but it seems like if a big dude is trying to prevent you from leaving then you have a damn good reason to dial 911...

[VACOP1]

Also its the point that if the person had just shown the receipt then none of this would have happened.

You have to realize that because someone says they went to the check out, does not mean they did. Or the Store has a Policy that they have to verify what the customer is leaving with is what he/she went to the cashier with.

SAM"S club and BJ's wholesale foods do this. A person goes throught the checkout, and before he she leaves the person at the door, checks and matches the receipt with what is in the cart, and then marks the receipt.
Happens no big deal, just show the receipt and be done with it.

[S.O.444]

If I don't want to show my receipt, you're going to detain me? I don't think so.

[Softscrubb]

As was already stated, both Costco and Sams Club require you have your merchandise and receipt checked. Fry's electronics as well.

Most places it makes sense to check the receipt since they merchandise things all the way to the door.

However, if it is not a standard practice and you single me out, you better have a strong justification for the 'search' since it is not something you ordinarily do.

I certainly would have a big issue with you detaining me or blocking me from getting to my car, once I am already out of the store.

scrubb

[txleo-3]

Most also have policies that state the door greeters are not to stop people who refuse to show receipt. I worked retail before LE and that was the policy. If the guy said No and kept walking, per policy, you let 'em go.

[Narco]

+1, those guys have no legal authority at all to detain you and look at your receipt. If they try to detain you all they have the right to do is get punched in the face!

If I don't want to show my receipt, you're going to detain me? I don't think so.

[mdrdep]

490.5. (a) Upon a first conviction for petty theft involving
merchandise taken from a merchant's premises or a book or other
library materials taken from a library facility, a person shall be
punished by a mandatory fine of not less than fifty dollars ($50) and
not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each such violation;
and may also be punished by imprisonment in the county jail, not
exceeding six months, or both such fine and imprisonment.
(b) When an unemancipated minor's willful conduct would constitute
petty theft involving merchandise taken from a merchant's premises
or a book or other library materials taken from a library facility,
any merchant or library facility who has been injured by that conduct
may bring a civil action against the parent or legal guardian having
control and custody of the minor. For the purposes of those actions
the misconduct of the unemancipated minor shall be imputed to the
parent or legal guardian having control and custody of the minor.
The parent or legal guardian having control or custody of an
unemancipated minor whose conduct violates this subdivision shall be
jointly and severally liable with the minor to a merchant or to a
library facility for damages of not less than fifty dollars ($50) nor
more than five hundred dollars ($500), plus costs. In addition to
the foregoing damages, the parent or legal guardian shall be jointly
and severally liable with the minor to the merchant for the retail
value of the merchandise if it is not recovered in a merchantable
condition, or to a library facility for the fair market value of its
book or other library materials. Recovery of these damages may be
had in addition to, and is not limited by, any other provision of law
which limits the liability of a parent or legal guardian for the
tortious conduct of a minor. An action for recovery of damages,
pursuant to this subdivision, may be brought in small claims court if
the total damages do not exceed the jurisdictional limit of that
court, or in any other appropriate court; however, total damages,
including the value of the merchandise or book or other library
materials, shall not exceed five hundred dollars ($500) for each
action brought under this section.
The provisions of this subdivision are in addition to other civil
remedies and do not limit merchants or other persons to elect to
pursue other civil remedies, except that the provisions of Section
1714.1 of the Civil Code shall not apply herein.
(c) When an adult or emancipated minor has unlawfully taken
merchandise from a merchant's premises, or a book or other library
materials from a library facility, the adult or emancipated minor
shall be liable to the merchant or library facility for damages of
not less than fifty dollars ($50) nor more than five hundred dollars
($500), plus costs. In addition to the foregoing damages, the adult
or emancipated minor shall be liable to the merchant for the retail
value of the merchandise if it is not recovered in merchantable
condition, or to a library facility for the fair market value of its
book or other library materials. An action for recovery of damages,
pursuant to this subdivision, may be brought in small claims court if
the total damages do not exceed the jurisdictional limit of such
court, or in any other appropriate court. The provisions of this
subdivision are in addition to other civil remedies and do not limit
merchants or other persons to elect to pursue other civil remedies.
(d) In lieu of the fines prescribed by subdivision (a), any person
may be required to perform public services designated by the court,
provided that in no event shall any such person be required to
perform less than the number of hours of such public service
necessary to satisfy the fine assessed by the court as provided by
subdivision (a) at the minimum wage prevailing in the state at the
time of sentencing.
(e) All fines collected under this section shall be collected and
distributed in accordance with Sections 1463 and 1463.1 of the Penal
Code; provided, however, that a county may, by a majority vote of the
members of its board of supervisors, allocate any amount up to, but
not exceeding 50 percent of such fines to the county superintendent
of schools for allocation to local school districts. The fines
allocated shall be administered by the county superintendent of
schools to finance public school programs, which provide counseling
or other educational services designed to discourage shoplifting,
theft, and burglary. Subject to rules and regulations as may be
adopted by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, each county
superintendent of schools shall allocate such funds to school
districts within the county which submit project applications
designed to further the educational purposes of this section. The
costs of administration of this section by each county superintendent
of schools shall be paid from the funds allocated to the county
superintendent of schools.
(f) (1) A merchant may detain a person for a reasonable time for
the purpose of conducting an investigation in a reasonable manner
whenever the merchant has probable cause to believe the person to be
detained is attempting to unlawfully take or has unlawfully taken
merchandise from the merchant's premises.
A theater owner may detain a person for a reasonable time for the
purpose of conducting an investigation in a reasonable manner
whenever the theater owner has probable cause to believe the person
to be detained is attempting to operate a video recording device
within the premises of a motion picture theater without the authority
of the owner of the theater.
A person employed by a library facility may detain a person for a
reasonable time for the purpose of conducting an investigation in a
reasonable manner whenever the person employed by a library facility
has probable cause to believe the person to be detained is attempting
to unlawfully remove or has unlawfully removed books or library
materials from the premises of the library facility.
(2) In making the detention a merchant, theater owner, or a person
employed by a library facility may use a reasonable amount of
nondeadly force necessary to protect himself or herself and to
prevent escape of the person detained or the loss of tangible or
intangible property.
(3) During the period of detention any items which a merchant or
theater owner, or any items which a person employed by a library
facility has probable cause to believe are unlawfully taken from the
premises of the merchant or library facility, or recorded on theater
premises, and which are in plain view may be examined by the
merchant, theater owner, or person employed by a library facility for
the purposes of ascertaining the ownership thereof.
(4) A merchant, theater owner, a person employed by a library
facility, or an agent thereof, having probable cause to believe the
person detained was attempting to unlawfully take or has taken any
item from the premises, or was attempting to operate a video
recording device within the premises of a motion picture theater
without the authority of the owner of the theater, may request the
person detained to voluntarily surrender the item or recording.
Should the person detained refuse to surrender the recording or item
of which there is probable cause to believe has been recorded on or
unlawfully taken from the premises, or attempted to be recorded or
unlawfully taken from the premises, a limited and reasonable search
may be conducted by those authorized to make the detention in order
to recover the item. Only packages, shopping bags, handbags or other
property in the immediate possession of the person detained, but not
including any clothing worn by the person, may be searched pursuant
to this subdivision. Upon surrender or discovery of the item, the
person detained may also be requested, but may not be required, to
provide adequate proof of his or her true identity.
(5) If any person admitted to a theater in which a motion picture
is to be or is being exhibited, refuses or fails to give or surrender
possession or to cease operation of any video recording device that
the person has brought into or attempts to bring into that theater,
then a theater owner shall have the right to refuse admission to that
person or request that the person leave the premises and shall
thereupon offer to refund and, unless that offer is refused, refund
to that person the price paid by that person for admission to that
theater. If the person thereafter refuses to leave the theater or
cease operation of the video recording device, then the person shall
be deemed to be intentionally interfering with and obstructing those
attempting to carry on a lawful business within the meaning of
Section 602.1.
(6) A peace officer who accepts custody of a person arrested for
an offense contained in this section may, subsequent to the arrest,
search the person arrested and his or her immediate possessions for
any item or items alleged to have been taken.
(7) In any civil action brought by any person resulting from a
detention or arrest by a merchant, it shall be a defense to such
action that the merchant detaining or arresting such person had
probable cause to believe that the person had stolen or attempted to
steal merchandise and that the merchant acted reasonably under all
the circumstances.
In any civil action brought by any person resulting from a
detention or arrest by a theater owner or person employed by a
library facility, it shall be a defense to that action that the
theater owner or person employed by a library facility detaining or
arresting that person had probable cause to believe that the person
was attempting to operate a video recording device within the
premises of a motion picture theater without the authority of the
owner of the theater or had stolen or attempted to steal books or
library materials and that the person employed by a library facility
acted reasonably under all the circumstances. (g) As used in this section:
(1) "Merchandise" means any personal property, capable of manual
delivery, displayed, held or offered for retail sale by a merchant.
(2) "Merchant" means an owner or operator, and the agent,
consignee, employee, lessee, or officer of an owner or operator, of
any premises used for the retail purchase or sale of any personal
property capable of manual delivery.

[pkagel]

Now this still leaves me questioning Fry's? Are you saying Fry's has PC to search everyone?

As far as Sam's and Costco go, you sign up for that with your membership so no biggie.

[B] (f) (1) A merchant may detain a person for a reasonable time for
the purpose of conducting an investigation in a reasonable manner
whenever the merchant has probable cause to believe the person to be
detained is attempting to unlawfully take or has unlawfully taken
merchandise from the merchant's premises.

[Blackdog F4i]

(f) (1) A merchant may detain a person for a reasonable time for
the purpose of conducting an investigation in a reasonable manner
whenever the merchant has probable cause to believe the person to be
detained is attempting to unlawfully take or has unlawfully taken
merchandise from the merchant's premises.

Me refusing to show my recipt is NOT PC for arrest or detention. A store employee preventing a customer from leaving without PC could be charged with Criminal Confinement (Felony) under Indiana Law. Furthermore if the Citizen used force to Defend themselves or to escape the situation the employee could be charged with Battery and the store could be liable for any damages to the Citizen.

Any way you dice it. If you attempt to make a Citizens Arrest (what loss prevention does) you still must have PC. If you don't then it is an ILLEGAL ARREST and the Citizen has a duty to resist.

I understand the problems that Loss Prevention faces, but come on now. We all know "those guys" who work loss prevention who think they are God of the World and would tackle grandma if you gave them the chance.

I dare store security to attempt to restrain me without PC. The lawsuit would probably pay for an early retirement.

[JKralC104]

I did the whole check the receipt gig before getting a LE job. It sucked and as mentioned above, there is no real right to check. However, its really not that serious to show the guy your receipt... I've saved people money doing it(They were charged wrong, charged for a higher priced item, double charged, etc.) so it might pay off to take the extra 10 seconds. Not to mention you are helping someone do their job and making it less of a hassle.

[Tim Dees]

I've seen several similar stories posted here and there on the web. One involved a security officer physically restraining a CompUSA customer who refused to show him a receipt. Worse yet, the police officer that responded didn't seem to know what the store could and couldn't do. I'm sympathetic with the store not wanting to be victimized by thieves, but they have often hamstrung themselves with "open" checkstand areas that make it easy to walk past the point-of-sale area and out the door without paying. That's a war that the sales managers and the loss prevention folks are constantly fighting.

I don't especially care if they check my receipt of not, as long as they're consistent. I expect it at Costco, so I keep it in my hand. But I usually fold the receipt into my money clip, and if they want to see it at the door, it's a PITA to get it out again.

[PhilipCal]

Interesting thread. Great posts. I'm a Sam's Club member, and have no problem showing my receipt at the door. That's me. From a legal perspective, in Alabama, as in most states, Shoplifting does not occur untill the subject actually leaves the premises. By premises I mean the actual store itself. As Tim noted, the merchant, and sometimes responding Officers don't always know the legal considerations which are operative in these situations.To my knowledge, there is no legal requirement in Alabama to show a receipt at the door prior to leaving the premises. To show the receipt is a case of voluntary compliance. Once you have checked out, as in payed for the merchandise in your cart, you're good to go. Unless the loss prevention agent, or other store employee,is prepared to make a case of theft against you, he/she has no right to block your exit from the store, or from the parking lot.

[irishlad2nv]

Some LP's do take their job way too serious and do call 911, however being a customer, you have a right to call 911 and also to keep walking. However, if they do attempt to detain you and you have not done anything wrong...yes there can be a lawsuit against that company, but in the end they are attempting and I emphasize "attempt" to deter theft. Look at Wal-mart, 99% it's an elderly person checking your receipt, etc. That's their job. However when LP gets invloved, lawfully ( in some states) they do have a right to detain, and per the store policy they can, however you as a citizen have the right to keep walking. If you assault them, well good luck, but if they attempt to physically restrain you, again law suit. This is a touchy topic as some store LP associates do take the job too seriously. As others have stated, I don't mind, however if I feel I am being targeted, well I will deal with them the correct way, no punches thrown.

[mdrdep]

One thing to think about and it's something we in law enforcement deal with every day. In Ca LP can detain you if they have PC to do so. If you resist them by violence the charge goes from simple petty theft to robbery. If LP does not have PC then you have the right to sue. But remember you don't know what they know and PC is based on there beliefs

[Bearcat357]

Why be an ***....? Just show them your receipt and be done with it.... Is that such a hard thing to do....??

If I was a store manager or LP person....and someone was being an *** like that just to be an ***....I would bar you from the store....and get you arrested for tresspass the next time you come in.....

My brother manages a large Super Target....and bars folks all the time.......including a few LEOs......

[Tim Dees]

One thing to think about and it's something we in law enforcement deal with every day. In Ca LP can detain you if they have PC to do so. If you resist them by violence the charge goes from simple petty theft to robbery. If LP does not have PC then you have the right to sue. But remember you don't know what they know and PC is based on there beliefs

The LP policy (as opposed to the law) in most retail stores is that the LP agent can't just have PC to make an arrest for shoplifting - they have to have certain knowledge that the person took an item without paying for it, what the item is, and precisely where it is at the time of the stop. It's very common for an LP agent to see the person pick up and conceal an item, but while following the suspect around the store, the suspect gets suspicious and ditches the item without the LP seeing them do it. After X number of "bad stops," the LP is canned.

My wife was an LP supervisor for Wal-Mart, and they had a five item checklist of criteria before an LP was allowed to make a stop. If you didn't have all five, and couldn't say with certainty, "I am arresting you for the theft of two hard packs of Marlboros, which are in your left jacket pocket," they were supposed to let them go without contact.

I don't think it's a problem when LPs take their jobs too seriously. I think it's a problem when they don't take them seriously enough and cut corners.

[Frank Booth]

As was already stated, both Costco and Sams Club require you have your merchandise and receipt checked. Fry's electronics as well.

No they don't. They might get angry and stamp their feet, but they're not going to touch you. I've walked past them before (Sam's Club) and ignored them with bagged merchandise in my hand after getting the run around on a return. I played enough games with them already that day.

I DO have a problem showing my receipt. If you want to see what I bought, put a security guy at each register to look over the cashier's shoulder. I'm not going to waste my time convincing the employee of some multibillion dollar corporation that I'm not a thief by showing him proof that MY property is my property. Like I said, if they don't trust me or more likely their CASHIERS, they should pay them more to get a more honest employee. But then profits would be down. They might even have to raise prices and (GASP) have to compete with the mom and pop stores, OR cut profits for the shareholders in order to hire either more honest cashiers or more cashier checkers.

After all, they're not checking your bags because they're afraid you stole something between the register and the door, they're checking your bag because they don't trust THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES!

[cpd169]

I don't want to stir up the pot too much, but in Alabama, one can be found guilty of shoplifting if they made an attempt to get out of the store, they need not have left. I've arrested plenty of suspects for shoplifting and gotten convictions when the store employees saw the suspects hiding items on or about their person. One may be charged for shoplifting while still inside the store as long as there is evidence of their intent. Concealing, or even trying to conceal an item is evidence of their intent.

The only time I've ever been asked by a store employee at a store besides Sam's Club or Costco has been when an item I had bought had made the store's anti-theft alarm go off. The store employee checked my receipt, wrote the number down and apologized for the delay. I believe the alarm going off gives them all the PC they need.

[Frank Booth]

I believe the alarm going off gives them all the PC they need.

Not in MI. I believe there is case law that establishes the notion that store anti-theft alarms give so many spurious alerts that an alert by itself does not equal reasonable suspicion for a stop, let alone probable cause.

[Freeze849]

just to play devils advocate......

If im LP and You are refusing to show me your receipt, which probably is holding up other people from leaving, which then causes a scene and you start yelling......see where i am going with this. The business is private property and I have every right to conduct my business the way I want to. If you don't like it, then dont shop there. Just because you are a LEO or CEO or 90 year old grandma, it doesn't give you the right to dictate how my business is run.

[FutureTrooper28]

Nevermind... wrong forum

[LPI]

This may be the story the above poster is referring to. Shopper calls police after being detained by Circuit City employee, police respond and ask shopper for ID, shopper refuses and gets hooked for Obstructing Official Business. (According to arrestee.)

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/09/01...se-arrest.html


edit) Direct Link:
http://www.michaelrighi.com/2007/09/...-circuit-city/

[t150vsuptpr]

Just a thought .....

Why be an ***....? Just show them your receipt and be done with it.... Is that such a hard thing to do....??

If I was a store manager or LP person....and someone was being an *** like that just to be an ***....I would bar you from the store....and get you arrested for tresspass the next time you come in.....

My brother manages a large Super Target....and bars folks all the time.......including a few LEOs......

I have a Costco Card and show my reciept all the time, it's usually taped on a box in the buggy actually. No biggy, I accepted it with the card when I wrote the check for the card. If a person has a problem, maybe they should avoid the stores like Circuit City, Sam's, Costco, Fry's, etc???

I've never known of it causing a problem though.

[just joe]

In Ohio you can't force someone to show you a receipt and you can't detain them if they don't. You either saw them steal something or you didn't--simple as that.

[SgtScott31]

I remember a thread such as this one where several officers got into a tiff about store policies regarding checking receipts. The only store I am aware of in middle TN is Sam's Wholesale.

In the criminal aspect, many of you are right, the store personnel (including loss prevention) cannot and will not physically detain you.

In the civil aspect, they do have a right to ban you from their property for failure to go by their rules. It is their store, their property. If you do not want to have your receipt verified, then fine, shop somewhere else.

I don't have a problem with it. Those of you that decide to make a scene just tell everyone around you that you obviously have something to hide. One reason for the high rise in prices that you and I pay for is obviously due to theft. Many stores have enough problems than folks who want to be anal about showing their receipt. Anyone who refuses to show the receipt at a store where they know it is common practice (i.e. Sam's) is either stealing or acting like a 10-yr old in my opinion.