info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Rights when stopped exiting a store
1,013 views
Skip to first unread message
Scion
Sep 12, 2023, 6:45:18 AM9/12/23
to
I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt and if
anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
payment process?
If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
ask?
(The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt and if
anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
payment process?
If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
ask?
(The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
Martin Brown
Sep 12, 2023, 8:41:43 AM9/12/23
to
On 12/09/2023 07:45, Scion wrote:
> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
I expect this will be an increasing problem now that some items like
> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
expensive cuts of meat are hidden tagged.
>
> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
Strikes me that it shouldn't let you decline a paper printed receipt if
> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
you have bought items that the computer knows are hidden tagged.
> The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
> used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
> receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
> he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt and if
> anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
> have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
> and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
> laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
order. The system should never send you out of the store with an
uncancelled tagged purchase without a receipt.
In some stores shoplifting is totally out of hand so that quite modestly
priced items are now tagged and DIY self service checkouts don't cancel
them as effectively as a human till operative will do.
> My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
> that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
> off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
> payment process?
organised shoplifters have their own personal Nd magnets and RF zappers
to remove/neutralise physical security tags these days.
> If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
> legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
> ask?
alarm went off and he has to figure out why. Increasingly it is due to
shoplifting and knife wielding shoplifters are making some supermarkets
and corner stores close down in no-go areas (police CBA to attend).
'Project Pegasus' is supposed to help stem their huge losses.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/supermarkets-pay-police-scan-shoplifters-faces-nationwide-crackdown/
There was a piece about how bad it has got on the Today programme this
morning but nothing that I can see about it on their main news site.
> (The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
> receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
to store management/customer services about. It should be good for a £10
voucher or some such gift for your inconvenience if you complain
effectively.
--
Martin Brown
Adam Funk
Sep 12, 2023, 9:00:16 AM9/12/23
to
On 2023-09-12, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 12/09/2023 07:45, Scion wrote:
>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
> I expect this will be an increasing problem now that some items like
> expensive cuts of meat are hidden tagged.
>>
>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
> Strikes me that it shouldn't let you decline a paper printed receipt if
> you have bought items that the computer knows are hidden tagged.
I agree, but I'd be surprised if the database contained information
> On 12/09/2023 07:45, Scion wrote:
>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
> I expect this will be an increasing problem now that some items like
> expensive cuts of meat are hidden tagged.
>>
>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
> Strikes me that it shouldn't let you decline a paper printed receipt if
> you have bought items that the computer knows are hidden tagged.
about security tags.
Roger Hayter
Sep 12, 2023, 9:06:54 AM9/12/23
to
is insufficient grounds for arresting you. He would have had to see you do
something suspicious, like put the meat in your bag or apparently not scan it.
But he did not arrest you as far as I can see. I don't think resisting
possible arrest by just walking away would have been wise. Even if it was
legally your right it could have led to you committing some other offence in
the heat of the moment/struggle. It might have been reasonable to say you are
leaving unless he wants to tell you you are being arrested. But such a nicety
only really works if you have a witness on your side. So he did nothing
illegal by asking for your cooperation, and you had little practical choice
than to cooperate.
IANAL, and it is possible a court could say you were effectively detained. I
don't know. If so I think it would be wrongful arrest, unless the security
person invites a lie to cover his action.
--
Roger Hayter
Mark Goodge
Sep 12, 2023, 9:46:46 AM9/12/23
to
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 06:45:02 -0000 (UTC), Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
>I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
>The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
>used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
>receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
>he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt and if
>anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
>have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
>and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
>laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
>
>My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>payment process?
A couple of things here. Firstly, shoplifting is an increasing problem for
>I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
>I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
>The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
>used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
>receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
>he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt and if
>anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
>have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
>and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
>laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
>
>My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>payment process?
supermarkets, and the ultimate costs of that will inevitably fall onto
honest customers. So it's in every honest customer's interests to cooperate,
as far as is reasonably practical, with measures intended to reduce
shoplifting even if that results in minor inconvenience to them. Waiting to
print off a receipt would, I think, be a sufficiently minor inconvenience to
be acceptable.
However, I don't think it would be a minor inconvenience to sit and wait for
a member of staff to review the CCTV of your transaction. At least, not
unless you've got nothing better to do with your time and really don't mind
hanging around. And I don't think it would be justifiable for a member of
staff to attempt to detain you while they did so. A more reasonable solution
in these circumstances would be for the member of staff to ask you for your
name and address, backed up with photo ID if at all possible (eg, a driving
licence), which they can then cross-reference with the payment details and
the customer account (bearing in mind that to use a handheld scanner you
have to have a clubcard anyway). Only if you declined to provide them with
this information would it possibly be justifiable to detain you.
>If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
>ask?
>
>(The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
>receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
receipt if my trolley contains a tagged item. I don't know about the other
one, because I've never bought a tagged item there. It does seem a flaw in
their systems that it would allow you to do so. But, then again, possibly
the issue is that the checkout system didn't know that the item was tagged.
I've generally found that if my trolley contains a tagged item, the checkout
system flags that up when I go through the self-service payment system. But
it doesn't always. I suspect that if it doesn't, then it won't remove the
option to decline a receipt.
Mark
Jon Ribbens
Sep 12, 2023, 10:04:05 AM9/12/23
to
On 2023-09-12, Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
> where rights are concerned.
>
> Get a receipt.
Personally I would if I was paying with cash, but when paying
electronically there seems little point - if it came down to it
I'd be able to prove that I had paid an appropriate amount of
money.
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 06:45:02 +0000, Scion wrote:
>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service
>> checkout that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
> Having worked in tech since 198<mumble> I never ever trust it. Especially
>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service
>> checkout that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
> where rights are concerned.
>
> Get a receipt.
Personally I would if I was paying with cash, but when paying
electronically there seems little point - if it came down to it
I'd be able to prove that I had paid an appropriate amount of
money.
Jon Ribbens
Sep 12, 2023, 10:05:53 AM9/12/23
to
On 2023-09-12, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
> On 2023-09-12, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 12/09/2023 07:45, Scion wrote:
>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>>
>> I expect this will be an increasing problem now that some items like
>> expensive cuts of meat are hidden tagged.
>>>
>>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>>> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>
>> Strikes me that it shouldn't let you decline a paper printed receipt if
>> you have bought items that the computer knows are hidden tagged.
>
> I agree, but I'd be surprised if the database contained information
> about security tags.
I'd be surprised if it didn't ;-)
> On 2023-09-12, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 12/09/2023 07:45, Scion wrote:
>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>>
>> I expect this will be an increasing problem now that some items like
>> expensive cuts of meat are hidden tagged.
>>>
>>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>>> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>
>> Strikes me that it shouldn't let you decline a paper printed receipt if
>> you have bought items that the computer knows are hidden tagged.
>
> I agree, but I'd be surprised if the database contained information
> about security tags.
Jeff
Sep 12, 2023, 10:06:14 AM9/12/23
to
> My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
> that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
> off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
> payment process?
You can only be arrested by a person other than a constable if the
> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
> that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
> off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
> payment process?
offence concerned is indictable.
Jeff
Norman Wells
Sep 12, 2023, 10:07:23 AM9/12/23
to
On 12/09/2023 07:45, Scion wrote:
responsibility is it to ensure that it is removed? How does it normally
work in a self-checkout store?
David McNeish
Sep 12, 2023, 10:31:09 AM9/12/23
to
On Tuesday, 12 September 2023 at 07:45:18 UTC+1, Scion wrote:
> I understand
> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
> that I've been shoplifting
Was *any* force used, or did you voluntarily decide to humour their
> I understand
> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
> that I've been shoplifting
query about your goods?
Fredxx
Sep 12, 2023, 10:32:11 AM9/12/23
to
and no receipt at hand would be sufficient in my eyes.
Continued detention where they can't rebut a claim that it has been paid
for and can't quickly assemble the evidence to prove theft would be the
point at which I would suggest at which concerns of compensation might
start.
The fact that purchases at theses tills can't be accessed easily and
quickly by security staff is a major weakness in their system.
If I was running a store and a customer conformed to being detained, I
would provide a voucher for a future shop to convey thanks and goodwill.
Yet surprisingly it's not done.
billy bookcase
Sep 12, 2023, 10:32:38 AM9/12/23
to
"Scion" <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:udp1de$1ekkk$1...@dont-email.me...
Apparently increasing numbers of supermarket items are being tagged so
as to deter professional shoplifters; at the same time as store staff
are being cut back,
So that now you've got more tagged items with fewer staff around to
deactivate them
In "the old days" security tags were big heavy grey things which nobody
could miss which needed to be removed by a member of staff using some
sort of gadget,
But apparently that is no longer the case; so its possible to not even
realise that an item you've bought is security tagged. As in this case
Which should mean potentially that there are queue of shoppers all being
stopped by security guards requesting to see their receipts
It's been suggested upthread that the fact that an item is tagged
can't be added to the database. Why not ? Were this to be implemented
as soon as the tagged item was scanned this would trigger a low level
alarm on the till and an assistant would thus be alerted, so as to
eventually come along remove the tag,
This of course would be the most sensible solution but it
would cost money. So that instead any resulting problems are now
dumped at the feet of minimum wage security guards; many of whom it
would appear are deliberately selected on account of their ability
to successfully feign, as and when required, a limited command of
English. A comedy trope exploited both by "Twenty Twelve" (Boycott
Part 2 ) and "Curb Your Enthusiasm" (Larry versus the Asian Lady
parking lot attendant)
bb
notya...@gmail.com
Sep 12, 2023, 10:41:21 AM9/12/23
to
I had an alarm go off at the Coop. IIRC I had not even bought anything less still any unpaid items in my bag. As it happened I did have my partner's library books for renewal in my bag and the tags in these set the detector off. As the shop was near the library this was happening several times a day, so I got an apology as soon as I fluffed up!
GB
Sep 12, 2023, 10:53:58 AM9/12/23
to
On 12/09/2023 10:46, Mark Goodge wrote:
> A couple of things here. Firstly, shoplifting is an increasing problem for
> supermarkets, and the ultimate costs of that will inevitably fall onto
> honest customers. So it's in every honest customer's interests to cooperate,
> as far as is reasonably practical, with measures intended to reduce
> shoplifting even if that results in minor inconvenience to them. Waiting to
> print off a receipt would, I think, be a sufficiently minor inconvenience to
> be acceptable.
I'd want to know whether the security guard is arresting me, or merely
> A couple of things here. Firstly, shoplifting is an increasing problem for
> supermarkets, and the ultimate costs of that will inevitably fall onto
> honest customers. So it's in every honest customer's interests to cooperate,
> as far as is reasonably practical, with measures intended to reduce
> shoplifting even if that results in minor inconvenience to them. Waiting to
> print off a receipt would, I think, be a sufficiently minor inconvenience to
> be acceptable.
asking me questions. If I'm not arrested, I presume that I can leave,
and it's up to me whether I take time to set a security guard's mind at
rest.
Roger Hayter
Sep 12, 2023, 11:04:32 AM9/12/23
to
Though this may have changed for all I know.
>
> Continued detention where they can't rebut a claim that it has been paid
> for and can't quickly assemble the evidence to prove theft would be the
> point at which I would suggest at which concerns of compensation might
> start.
>
> The fact that purchases at theses tills can't be accessed easily and
> quickly by security staff is a major weakness in their system.
>
> If I was running a store and a customer conformed to being detained, I
> would provide a voucher for a future shop to convey thanks and goodwill.
> Yet surprisingly it's not done.
and invites being sued for a much more substantial compensation payment.
--
Roger Hayter
Jon Ribbens
Sep 12, 2023, 11:30:23 AM9/12/23
to
On 2023-09-12, Fredxx <fre...@spam.invalid> wrote:
> On 12/09/2023 10:06, Roger Hayter wrote:
>> But he did not arrest you as far as I can see. I don't think resisting
>> possible arrest by just walking away would have been wise. Even if it was
>> legally your right it could have led to you committing some other
>> offence in the heat of the moment/struggle. It might have been
>> reasonable to say you are leaving unless he wants to tell you you are
>> being arrested. But such a nicety only really works if you have a
>> witness on your side. So he did nothing illegal by asking for your
>> cooperation, and you had little practical choice than to cooperate.
>>
>> IANAL, and it is possible a court could say you were effectively
>> detained. I don't know. If so I think it would be wrongful arrest,
>> unless the security person invites a lie to cover his action.
>
> The guard can detain you with 'reasonable grounds'.
Oh goody, is it time for a re-run of the "citizen's arrest" threads
> On 12/09/2023 10:06, Roger Hayter wrote:
>> But he did not arrest you as far as I can see. I don't think resisting
>> possible arrest by just walking away would have been wise. Even if it was
>> legally your right it could have led to you committing some other
>> offence in the heat of the moment/struggle. It might have been
>> reasonable to say you are leaving unless he wants to tell you you are
>> being arrested. But such a nicety only really works if you have a
>> witness on your side. So he did nothing illegal by asking for your
>> cooperation, and you had little practical choice than to cooperate.
>>
>> IANAL, and it is possible a court could say you were effectively
>> detained. I don't know. If so I think it would be wrongful arrest,
>> unless the security person invites a lie to cover his action.
>
> The guard can detain you with 'reasonable grounds'.
from 2006 and 2011 again? :-)
Max Demian
Sep 12, 2023, 11:30:37 AM9/12/23
to
inconvenient if the store is one you like to use.
--
Max Demian
notya...@gmail.com
Sep 12, 2023, 11:39:55 AM9/12/23
to
Roger Hayter
Sep 12, 2023, 11:40:23 AM9/12/23
to
On 12 Sep 2023 at 10:06:47 BST, "Roger Hayter" <ro...@hayter.org> wrote:
>
> IANAL, and it is possible a court could say you were effectively detained. I
> don't know. If so I think it would be wrongful arrest, unless the security
> person invites a lie to cover his action.
"invents"!
>
> IANAL, and it is possible a court could say you were effectively detained. I
> don't know. If so I think it would be wrongful arrest, unless the security
> person invites a lie to cover his action.
--
Roger Hayter
Pancho
Sep 12, 2023, 11:58:07 AM9/12/23
to
lead the store to ban you. Which might be a problem if it is a
frequently used local store.
Martin Brown
Sep 12, 2023, 12:12:43 PM9/12/23
to
some attendant comes along and removed the tag for you. Even if it
doesn't you can wave the item at an attendant (more often than not it
also want an age verification as well).
However, the sort of items now being hidden tagged includes high value
cuts of meat and larger sizes of instant coffee. These are invisible
flat label tags that are disabled when the product is handled by a till
operative but may not be correctly cancelled at a self service checkout.
--
Martin Brown
Roland Perry
Sep 12, 2023, 12:24:56 PM9/12/23
to
In message <udp1de$1ekkk$1...@dont-email.me>, at 06:45:02 on Tue, 12 Sep
2023, Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> remarked:
print off the last receipt. It would require a manager to print off an
earlier one.
>and if
>anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
>have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
>and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
>laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
>
>My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>payment process?
I bought a bottle of gin last week which had a security/RFID sticker on
it which said "remove before microwaving". The checkout assistant just
looked blank when I asked how often they expected people to microwave
bottles of gin.
>If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
>ask?
>
>(The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
>receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
Part of that problem is they don't consistently tag items. You can often
find a shelf with say bottles of gin, where only about half of them are
tagged. "If I were thief, which would I chose".
--
Roland Perry
2023, Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> remarked:
>I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
>I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
>The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
>used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
>receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
>he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt
That's almost certainly a lie - what he means is he can only *easily*
>exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
>I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
>The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
>used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
>receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
>he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt
print off the last receipt. It would require a manager to print off an
earlier one.
>and if
>anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
>have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
>and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
>laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
>
>My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>payment process?
it which said "remove before microwaving". The checkout assistant just
looked blank when I asked how often they expected people to microwave
bottles of gin.
>If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
>ask?
>
>(The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
>receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
find a shelf with say bottles of gin, where only about half of them are
tagged. "If I were thief, which would I chose".
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Sep 12, 2023, 12:34:57 PM9/12/23
to
In message <slrnug0ds9.4...@raven.unequivocal.eu>, at 10:03:53
on Tue, 12 Sep 2023, Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> remarked:
I always get a receipt, because I increasingly find that (a) products
have mysteriously gone up in price since they last updated the shelf
labels, (b) when buying "clearance" items the scanner often picks up a
fragment of the original barcode, not the discounted amount.
Back in the day, Tesco had a price promise to refund you twice the
overcharge in such circumstances. But withdrew it (presumably because it
was costing them too much).
--
Roland Perry
on Tue, 12 Sep 2023, Jon Ribbens <jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> remarked:
have mysteriously gone up in price since they last updated the shelf
labels, (b) when buying "clearance" items the scanner often picks up a
fragment of the original barcode, not the discounted amount.
Back in the day, Tesco had a price promise to refund you twice the
overcharge in such circumstances. But withdrew it (presumably because it
was costing them too much).
--
Roland Perry
Mark Goodge
Sep 12, 2023, 12:41:00 PM9/12/23
to
may be one of the causes of the OP's problem.
Mark
Roger Hayter
Sep 12, 2023, 12:48:08 PM9/12/23
to
--
Roger Hayter
Roger Hayter
Sep 12, 2023, 12:50:06 PM9/12/23
to
- then complain.
--
Roger Hayter
Roland Perry
Sep 12, 2023, 12:54:58 PM9/12/23
to
In message <kmag4v...@mid.individual.net>, at 07:52:16 on Tue, 12
Sep 2023, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>How does it normally work in a self-checkout store?
The ones on bottles are fairly obvious, and as you'll need age
verification, then the person performing that should do the deed.
If it's a stick-on RFID, then if I saw it I might use the "summon
assistance" button, and then wave vigorously at the staff whose
job it seems to be to ignore the lights above the self checkout,
because chatting about their recent holiday with a colleague is
far more important.
If after about five seconds of waving doesn't interrupt their deep
discussion, I'll yell "Hello!!!" and usually they'll reluctantly
drag themselves over.
--
Roland Perry
Sep 2023, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>Who in normal circumstances would remove the tag? And whose
>responsibility is it to ensure that it is removed?
Not my circus, not my monkey.
>responsibility is it to ensure that it is removed?
>How does it normally work in a self-checkout store?
verification, then the person performing that should do the deed.
If it's a stick-on RFID, then if I saw it I might use the "summon
assistance" button, and then wave vigorously at the staff whose
job it seems to be to ignore the lights above the self checkout,
because chatting about their recent holiday with a colleague is
far more important.
If after about five seconds of waving doesn't interrupt their deep
discussion, I'll yell "Hello!!!" and usually they'll reluctantly
drag themselves over.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Sep 12, 2023, 1:04:58 PM9/12/23
to
In message <kmb500...@mid.individual.net>, at 12:48:00 on Tue, 12
Sep 2023, Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> remarked:
Inside the bottle of gin? The technology that store uses for stick-on
RFIDs would not allow one to be somehow hidden inside the Gordon's
label.
--
Roland Perry
Sep 2023, Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> remarked:
RFIDs would not allow one to be somehow hidden inside the Gordon's
label.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Sep 12, 2023, 1:05:00 PM9/12/23
to
In message <kmb53n...@mid.individual.net>, at 12:49:59 on Tue, 12
Sep 2023, Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> remarked:
That was before they introduced self-scan tills. So the error would be
by one of their employees.
--
Roland Perry
Sep 2023, Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> remarked:
by one of their employees.
--
Roland Perry
Andy Walker
Sep 12, 2023, 1:20:30 PM9/12/23
to
On 12/09/2023 13:12, Martin Brown wrote:
> If it is a normal physical tag than the terminal flashes a light and
> some attendant comes along and removed the tag for you. Even if it
> doesn't you can wave the item at an attendant (more often than not it
> also want an age verification as well).
This is the sort of reason why it is, IME, /invariably/ faster to
> If it is a normal physical tag than the terminal flashes a light and
> some attendant comes along and removed the tag for you. Even if it
> doesn't you can wave the item at an attendant (more often than not it
> also want an age verification as well).
use the personned tills than the self-scanned ones. I don't think I've
ever got through the scanning without needing assistance, and often with
needing to change till or get a new trolley or some such. The till
people just wave things through and that's it.
Mind you, since lockdown we've switched to getting supermarket
shopping delivered. Yes, there are occasional problems, but it saves
hours of time [getting to the shop, doing the shopping, waiting for the
till, loading the car, unloading back home] and gallons of petrol. For
the odd missing item, it's easy to do a two- or three-item top-up shop
while poddling into town for a coffee. Asda [other supermarkets are
available] are very good at picking out decent fruit and excellent at
refunding for anything that has gone wrong.
--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Valentine
The Todal
Sep 12, 2023, 1:27:00 PM9/12/23
to
force. It would be humiliating as any onlookers would assume you were
guilty.
The law used to be that a security guard only had the power to make a
citizen's arrest (google that) and that if no arrestable offence had
been committed the arrest would automatically be unlawful. However the
law seems to allow him "reasonable grounds for suspecting" and it's a
moot point whether the sounding of an alarm is reasonable grounds.
Martin Brown
Sep 12, 2023, 1:58:15 PM9/12/23
to
On 12/09/2023 13:48, Roger Hayter wrote:
> On 12 Sep 2023 at 13:18:48 BST, "Roland Perry" <rol...@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>> In message <udp1de$1ekkk$1...@dont-email.me>, at 06:45:02 on Tue, 12 Sep
>> 2023, Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> remarked:
> On 12 Sep 2023 at 13:18:48 BST, "Roland Perry" <rol...@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>> In message <udp1de$1ekkk$1...@dont-email.me>, at 06:45:02 on Tue, 12 Sep
>> 2023, Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> remarked:
>>> (The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
>>> receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
>>
>> Part of that problem is they don't consistently tag items. You can often
>> find a shelf with say bottles of gin, where only about half of them are
>> tagged. "If I were thief, which would I chose".
>
> The ones without obvious tags are the ones with the IEDs.
Protecting products from theft with Improvised Explosive Devices could
>>> receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
>>
>> Part of that problem is they don't consistently tag items. You can often
>> find a shelf with say bottles of gin, where only about half of them are
>> tagged. "If I were thief, which would I chose".
>
> The ones without obvious tags are the ones with the IEDs.
get more than a bit messy. But the new tendency of hidden sticky RFID
tags on some higher value items is a recipe for spurious false alarms.
--
Martin Brown
GB
Sep 12, 2023, 1:58:25 PM9/12/23
to
Me "Can I go?"
Guard "No"
Me "So, you are arresting me?"
Guard "No"
Me "In that case, I must be free to go then"
Guard "No"
Martin Brown
Sep 12, 2023, 2:46:50 PM9/12/23
to
On 12/09/2023 10:46, Mark Goodge wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 06:45:02 -0000 (UTC), Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>> legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
>> ask?
>>
>> If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>> legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
>> ask?
>>
>> (The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
>> receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
>
> One of the stores where I regularly self-scan won't allow me to decline a
>> receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
>
> receipt if my trolley contains a tagged item. I don't know about the other
> one, because I've never bought a tagged item there. It does seem a flaw in
> their systems that it would allow you to do so. But, then again, possibly
> the issue is that the checkout system didn't know that the item was tagged.
I suspect that is the new problem introduced by them tagging some items
with hidden tags in the packaging as opposed to obvious dye filled pins
on clothes and bottle neck snap on devices on DVDs and bottles.
Some places it has got so bad that any spirit worth more than £30 there
is an empty box or a token on the shelf and you have to wait at the
checkout for some poor drudge to trek off into the back of beyond to
fetch the actual product. I no longer bother to shop there...
> I've generally found that if my trolley contains a tagged item, the checkout
> system flags that up when I go through the self-service payment system. But
> it doesn't always. I suspect that if it doesn't, then it won't remove the
> option to decline a receipt.
What has changed recently I think is that there are newly tagged items
like some cuts of meat that are not in their database as being tagged.
--
Martin Brown
Roger Hayter
Sep 12, 2023, 3:21:45 PM9/12/23
to
On 12 Sep 2023 at 14:58:02 BST, "Martin Brown" <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk>
wrote:
On the contrary, I was implying fitting punishment for those choosing to take
the "unprotected" bottles without paying for them - but neither you nor Roland
seem to get my sense of humour.
--
Roger Hayter
wrote:
the "unprotected" bottles without paying for them - but neither you nor Roland
seem to get my sense of humour.
--
Roger Hayter
Adam Funk
Sep 12, 2023, 3:30:10 PM9/12/23
to
Adam Funk
Sep 12, 2023, 3:30:11 PM9/12/23
to
the flat adhesive kind on products that were not previously tagged,
someone may easily forget to update the database.
GB
Sep 12, 2023, 4:01:47 PM9/12/23
to
On 12/09/2023 15:46, Martin Brown wrote:
> What has changed recently I think is that there are newly tagged items
> like some cuts of meat that are not in their database as being tagged.
>
It may not be consistent, eg a shelf stacker is handed a pile of tags
> What has changed recently I think is that there are newly tagged items
> like some cuts of meat that are not in their database as being tagged.
>
and told to stick them on some of the higher priced packs of meat.
Scion
Sep 12, 2023, 4:29:41 PM9/12/23
to
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 13:25:33 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
<snip>
> I always get a receipt, because I increasingly find that (a) products
> have mysteriously gone up in price since they last updated the shelf
> labels, (b) when buying "clearance" items the scanner often picks up a
> fragment of the original barcode, not the discounted amount.
That's one of the advantages of the self-scan guns - you can immediately
check the price is what it should be.
<snip>
> I always get a receipt, because I increasingly find that (a) products
> have mysteriously gone up in price since they last updated the shelf
> labels, (b) when buying "clearance" items the scanner often picks up a
> fragment of the original barcode, not the discounted amount.
check the price is what it should be.
Scion
Sep 12, 2023, 4:33:48 PM9/12/23
to
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 16:26:58 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2023-09-12, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 10:05:44 -0000 (UTC), Jon Ribbens
>><jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2023-09-12, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2023-09-12, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>>> On 12/09/2023 07:45, Scion wrote:
>>>>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket
>>>>>> because the exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a
>>>>>> security tag.
>>>>>
>>>>> I expect this will be an increasing problem now that some items like
>>>>> expensive cuts of meat are hidden tagged.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service
>>>>>> checkout that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>>>>
>>>>> Strikes me that it shouldn't let you decline a paper printed receipt
>>>>> if you have bought items that the computer knows are hidden tagged.
>>>>
>>>> I agree, but I'd be surprised if the database contained information
>>>> about security tags.
Some logic could be applied though: We sometimes tag certain cuts of meat,
> On 2023-09-12, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 10:05:44 -0000 (UTC), Jon Ribbens
>><jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2023-09-12, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2023-09-12, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>>> On 12/09/2023 07:45, Scion wrote:
>>>>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket
>>>>>> because the exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a
>>>>>> security tag.
>>>>>
>>>>> I expect this will be an increasing problem now that some items like
>>>>> expensive cuts of meat are hidden tagged.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service
>>>>>> checkout that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>>>>
>>>>> Strikes me that it shouldn't let you decline a paper printed receipt
>>>>> if you have bought items that the computer knows are hidden tagged.
>>>>
>>>> I agree, but I'd be surprised if the database contained information
>>>> about security tags.
we sometimes tag clothing, we sometimes tag electricals, we sometimes tag
individual items over £5; if any of those apply then just print the
receipt.
>>>
>>>I'd be surprised if it didn't ;-)
>>
>> My experience is that it usually does, but not reliably so. Which I
>> think may be one of the causes of the OP's problem.
>
> Aha. I suppose that if employees are instructed to go around sticking
> the flat adhesive kind on products that were not previously tagged,
> someone may easily forget to update the database.
the packing stage.
Scion
Sep 12, 2023, 4:44:57 PM9/12/23
to
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 10:46:39 +0100, Mark Goodge wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 06:45:02 -0000 (UTC), Scion <a...@nospam.invalid>
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 06:45:02 -0000 (UTC), Scion <a...@nospam.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>>exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>>
>
>>I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>>exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>>
>>I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service
>>checkout that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>
>>checkout that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>
>>The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I
>>had used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the
>>last receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way,
>>however he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt
>>had used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the
>>last receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way,
>>however he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt
>>and if anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I
>>would have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV
>>footage and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although
>>it would be laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my
>>bag.
>>
>>My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>>from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>>detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>>that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper
>>going off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase
>>/ payment process?
>
>>would have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV
>>footage and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although
>>it would be laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my
>>bag.
>>
>>My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>>from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>>detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>>that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper
>>going off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase
>>/ payment process?
>
> A couple of things here. Firstly, shoplifting is an increasing problem
> for supermarkets, and the ultimate costs of that will inevitably fall
> onto honest customers. So it's in every honest customer's interests to
> cooperate,
> as far as is reasonably practical, with measures intended to reduce
> shoplifting even if that results in minor inconvenience to them. Waiting
> to print off a receipt would, I think, be a sufficiently minor
> inconvenience to be acceptable.
Agreed, although only being able to print off the last receipt almost
> for supermarkets, and the ultimate costs of that will inevitably fall
> onto honest customers. So it's in every honest customer's interests to
> cooperate,
> as far as is reasonably practical, with measures intended to reduce
> shoplifting even if that results in minor inconvenience to them. Waiting
> to print off a receipt would, I think, be a sufficiently minor
> inconvenience to be acceptable.
guarantees that in a busy store that would not be an option. I just
happened to be extremely lucky that no-one else had used the same checkout
in the two or three minutes in between.
> However, I don't think it would be a minor inconvenience to sit and wait
> for a member of staff to review the CCTV of your transaction. At least,
> not unless you've got nothing better to do with your time and really
> don't mind hanging around.
I was in a hurry at the time so I would have been very unhappy at being
asked to wait. I assume they'd be scrolling through the CCTV to find me,
then switching between different cameras to follow me round... and as I
pointed out it would be laughably easy to pretend to scan an item without
actually doing it.
> And I don't think it would be justifiable for
> a member of staff to attempt to detain you while they did so. A more
> reasonable solution in these circumstances would be for the member of
> staff to ask you for your name and address, backed up with photo ID if
> at all possible (eg, a driving licence), which they can then
> cross-reference with the payment details and the customer account
> (bearing in mind that to use a handheld scanner you have to have a
> clubcard anyway).
This was not Tesco; they have my mobile number and email address and the
name I gave them. Not that they seemed to be able to access the payment
details anyway, otherwise they could have just done that.
> Only if you declined to provide them with this
> information would it possibly be justifiable to detain you.
>
>>If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>>legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if
>>I ask?
>>
>>If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>>legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if
>>I ask?
>>
>>(The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
>>receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
>
>>receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
>
> One of the stores where I regularly self-scan won't allow me to decline
> a receipt if my trolley contains a tagged item. I don't know about the
> other one, because I've never bought a tagged item there. It does seem a
> flaw in their systems that it would allow you to do so. But, then again,
> possibly the issue is that the checkout system didn't know that the item
> was tagged. I've generally found that if my trolley contains a tagged
> a receipt if my trolley contains a tagged item. I don't know about the
> other one, because I've never bought a tagged item there. It does seem a
> flaw in their systems that it would allow you to do so. But, then again,
> possibly the issue is that the checkout system didn't know that the item
> item, the checkout system flags that up when I go through the
> self-service payment system. But it doesn't always. I suspect that if it
> doesn't, then it won't remove the option to decline a receipt.
>
> Mark
> self-service payment system. But it doesn't always. I suspect that if it
> doesn't, then it won't remove the option to decline a receipt.
>
Scion
Sep 12, 2023, 4:47:00 PM9/12/23
to
inevitable even if the customer follows the correct process* would be a
very dubious claim for reasonable grounds.
Scion
Sep 12, 2023, 4:49:56 PM9/12/23
to
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 03:31:02 -0700, David McNeish wrote:
> On Tuesday, 12 September 2023 at 07:45:18 UTC+1, Scion wrote:
>
>> I understand from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that
>> I can be detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable
>> suspicion that I've been shoplifting
>
> Was *any* force used, or did you voluntarily decide to humour their
> query about your goods?
Not on this occasion as it was sorted out back at the checkout, at minor
inconvenience to me. But if that hadn't happened and I declined to wait
for them to trawl through their CCTV then... who knows? As far as I'm
concerned the goods are mine not theirs and they have no right to detain
me. As far as they are concerned I'm a potential shoplifter.
> On Tuesday, 12 September 2023 at 07:45:18 UTC+1, Scion wrote:
>
>> I understand from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that
>> I can be detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable
>> suspicion that I've been shoplifting
>
> query about your goods?
Not on this occasion as it was sorted out back at the checkout, at minor
inconvenience to me. But if that hadn't happened and I declined to wait
for them to trawl through their CCTV then... who knows? As far as I'm
concerned the goods are mine not theirs and they have no right to detain
me. As far as they are concerned I'm a potential shoplifter.
Scion
Sep 12, 2023, 4:51:15 PM9/12/23
to
gin...
Roland Perry
Sep 12, 2023, 5:10:05 PM9/12/23
to
In message <udq3la$1kq4p$1...@dont-email.me>, at 16:29:30 on Tue, 12 Sep
2023, Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> remarked:
I refuse to do self-scan guns because when you get to the checkout more
often than not they insist of re-scanning everything anyway. And I don't
like being treated like a criminal.
--
Roland Perry
2023, Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> remarked:
often than not they insist of re-scanning everything anyway. And I don't
like being treated like a criminal.
--
Roland Perry
Mark Goodge
Sep 12, 2023, 5:46:11 PM9/12/23
to
than a regular user. That's because something which represents a significant
departure from your typical usage pattern is itself one of the flags for
potentially suspcious behaviour. By contrast, people who use the handheld
scanners every time are only very rarely re-scanned.
Mark
David McNeish
Sep 12, 2023, 6:15:10 PM9/12/23
to
a sample of a few items (unless they find a stray item among those, then
they treat your whole trolley as highly suspect...)
AnthonyL
Sep 12, 2023, 6:24:04 PM9/12/23
to
On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 06:45:02 -0000 (UTC), Scion <a...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:
>I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
>I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
>The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
>used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
>receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
>he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt and if
>anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
>have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
>and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
>laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
>
>My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
wrote:
>I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
>I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>
>The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
>used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
>receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
>he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt and if
>anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
>have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
>and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
>laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
>
>from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>payment process?
>
>off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>payment process?
>
>If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
>ask?
>
>legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
>ask?
>
>(The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
>receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
Doesn't a similar issue arise regarding lack of receipts with
>receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
contactless payments? A couple of times I've not bothered with a
receipt and then wondered what would happen if stopped as I walked out
of the store.
--
AnthonyL
Why ever wait to finish a job before starting the next?
Martin Brown
Sep 13, 2023, 1:31:08 AM9/13/23
to
On 12/09/2023 14:20, Andy Walker wrote:
> On 12/09/2023 13:12, Martin Brown wrote:
>> If it is a normal physical tag than the terminal flashes a light and
>> some attendant comes along and removed the tag for you. Even if it
>> doesn't you can wave the item at an attendant (more often than not it
>> also want an age verification as well).
>
> This is the sort of reason why it is, IME, /invariably/ faster to
> use the personned tills than the self-scanned ones. I don't think I've
> ever got through the scanning without needing assistance, and often with
> needing to change till or get a new trolley or some such. The till
> people just wave things through and that's it.
We only go self service or scan as you shop if no alcohol involved or
> On 12/09/2023 13:12, Martin Brown wrote:
>> If it is a normal physical tag than the terminal flashes a light and
>> some attendant comes along and removed the tag for you. Even if it
>> doesn't you can wave the item at an attendant (more often than not it
>> also want an age verification as well).
>
> This is the sort of reason why it is, IME, /invariably/ faster to
> use the personned tills than the self-scanned ones. I don't think I've
> ever got through the scanning without needing assistance, and often with
> needing to change till or get a new trolley or some such. The till
> people just wave things through and that's it.
the staffed tills have exceedingly long queues.
The latest M&S terminals are a royal PITA - too sensitive by half and
unable to cope with tiny weight variations of in store bakery produce.
> Mind you, since lockdown we've switched to getting supermarket
> shopping delivered. Yes, there are occasional problems, but it saves
Not that they present much of a problem for a physicist to remove...
> hours of time [getting to the shop, doing the shopping, waiting for the
> till, loading the car, unloading back home] and gallons of petrol. For
> the odd missing item, it's easy to do a two- or three-item top-up shop
> while poddling into town for a coffee. Asda [other supermarkets are
> available] are very good at picking out decent fruit and excellent at
> refunding for anything that has gone wrong.
since Covid and have never gone back to shopping IRL. My brother in law
and several neighbours now exclusively use internet online shopping.
--
Martin Brown
billy bookcase
Sep 13, 2023, 1:32:21 AM9/13/23
to
"Roland Perry" <rol...@perry.uk> wrote in message
news:JyKQ7Rpo1FAlFAs$@perry.uk...
>
> If it's a stick-on RFID, then if I saw it I might use the "summon
> assistance" button, and then wave vigorously at the staff whose
> job it seems to be to ignore the lights above the self checkout,
> because chatting about their recent holiday with a colleague is
> far more important.
>
> If after about five seconds of waving doesn't interrupt their deep
> discussion, I'll yell "Hello!!!" and usually they'll reluctantly
> drag themselves over.
Maybe you should try that in the boardrooms as well
> If it's a stick-on RFID, then if I saw it I might use the "summon
> assistance" button, and then wave vigorously at the staff whose
> job it seems to be to ignore the lights above the self checkout,
> because chatting about their recent holiday with a colleague is
> far more important.
>
> If after about five seconds of waving doesn't interrupt their deep
> discussion, I'll yell "Hello!!!" and usually they'll reluctantly
> drag themselves over.
While not on any way claiming to be an expert on the subject, I would
have thought one of the first priorities when designing any software
is to easily enable the user to "go back", or "undo" their last choice
or action. By way of contrast, both Sainsbury and Morrison* use self
service terminals with overly sensitive (on a purely random basis
natch ) or otherwise defective touch screens. So that having chosen the
category Fruit, for instance, the customers is faced with a screen
showing say a particular cake, along with the price paid say Ł1.50.
However there is no way for the customer to undo this choice - the cake
has already been added to their bill.
So that to undo it, an assistant must be summoned to enter their secret
code. And then make a number of attempts to eventually remove the cake
from the bill. None of which would be necessary were the customer able
to go back, and with items only being added to the bill once a subsequent
selection had been made, or the customer had chosen to pay.
Morons, the lot of them, from the top down.
And what's even worse is when you have to call for their assistance
solely as a result of *their inefficiency" and they automatically
assume that you're just another one of the dribblers and *insist* on
doing it all for you. "No it's all right I can manage now thank you"
bb
* Those are simply the two which spring readily to mind. Other rants
concerning Asda and Tesco, both of which have gone completely to pot
IMO, are available.
Fredxx
Sep 13, 2023, 1:32:43 AM9/13/23
to
On 12/09/2023 12:04, Roger Hayter wrote:
> On 12 Sep 2023 at 10:49:03 BST, "Fredxx" <fre...@spam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 12/09/2023 10:06, Roger Hayter wrote:
>>> is insufficient grounds for arresting you. He would have had to see you do
>>> something suspicious, like put the meat in your bag or apparently not scan it.
>>>
>>>
>>> But he did not arrest you as far as I can see. I don't think resisting
>>> possible arrest by just walking away would have been wise. Even if it was
>>> legally your right it could have led to you committing some other offence in
>>> the heat of the moment/struggle. It might have been reasonable to say you are
>>> leaving unless he wants to tell you you are being arrested. But such a nicety
>>> only really works if you have a witness on your side. So he did nothing
>>> illegal by asking for your cooperation, and you had little practical choice
>>> than to cooperate.
>>>
>>> IANAL, and it is possible a court could say you were effectively detained. I
>>> don't know. If so I think it would be wrongful arrest, unless the security
>>> person invites a lie to cover his action.
>>
>> The guard can detain you with 'reasonable grounds'. The alarm going off
>> and no receipt at hand would be sufficient in my eyes.
>
> This is what I am saying there is case law about it *not* being sufficient.
> Though this may have changed for all I know.
Can you cite the case? I thought the law allowed for "reasonable
grounds". Before I concede no, or failed, prosecution would pretty much
automatically lead to compensation.
>> Continued detention where they can't rebut a claim that it has been paid
>> for and can't quickly assemble the evidence to prove theft would be the
>> point at which I would suggest at which concerns of compensation might
>> start.
>>
>> The fact that purchases at theses tills can't be accessed easily and
>> quickly by security staff is a major weakness in their system.
>>
>> If I was running a store and a customer conformed to being detained, I
>> would provide a voucher for a future shop to convey thanks and goodwill.
>> Yet surprisingly it's not done.
>
> They may feel, rightly or wrongly, that compensation is an admission of fault
> and invites being sued for a much more substantial compensation payment.
Civil liability can always be denied as a condition of accepting the
voucher.
> On 12 Sep 2023 at 10:49:03 BST, "Fredxx" <fre...@spam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 12/09/2023 10:06, Roger Hayter wrote:
>>> On 12 Sep 2023 at 07:45:02 BST, "Scion" <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>>>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>>>>
>>>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>>>> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>>>
>>>> The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
>>>> used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
>>>> receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
>>>> he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt and if
>>>> anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
>>>> have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
>>>> and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
>>>> laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
>>>>
>>>> My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>>>> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>>>> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>>>> that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>>>> off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>>>> payment process?
>>>>
>>>> If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>>>> legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
>>>> ask?
>>>>
>>>> (The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
>>>> receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
>>>
>>> I suspect (unless the law's changed recently) that merely having a tagged item
>>>
>>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>>>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>>>>
>>>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
>>>> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>>>
>>>> The security guard asked me to show him which self-checkout machine I had
>>>> used and then asked one of the self checkout staff to print off the last
>>>> receipt. He could see I had paid for the meat so let me on my way, however
>>>> he informed me that they could only print off the last receipt and if
>>>> anyone else had used that checkout after I had finished with it I would
>>>> have had to wait until the security guard had looked through CCTV footage
>>>> and satisfied himself that I had done nothing wrong - although it would be
>>>> laughably easy to pretend to scan an item and put it in my bag.
>>>>
>>>> My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>>>> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>>>> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>>>> that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>>>> off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>>>> payment process?
>>>>
>>>> If I ask under what grounds I'm being detained, does the security guard
>>>> legally have to tell me? Does he have to inform me of my legal rights if I
>>>> ask?
>>>>
>>>> (The question of why on earth the checkout till allows you to decline a
>>>> receipt when your purchase includes tagged goods is one for the store.)
>>>
>>> is insufficient grounds for arresting you. He would have had to see you do
>>> something suspicious, like put the meat in your bag or apparently not scan it.
>>>
>>>
>>> But he did not arrest you as far as I can see. I don't think resisting
>>> possible arrest by just walking away would have been wise. Even if it was
>>> legally your right it could have led to you committing some other offence in
>>> the heat of the moment/struggle. It might have been reasonable to say you are
>>> leaving unless he wants to tell you you are being arrested. But such a nicety
>>> only really works if you have a witness on your side. So he did nothing
>>> illegal by asking for your cooperation, and you had little practical choice
>>> than to cooperate.
>>>
>>> IANAL, and it is possible a court could say you were effectively detained. I
>>> don't know. If so I think it would be wrongful arrest, unless the security
>>> person invites a lie to cover his action.
>>
>> The guard can detain you with 'reasonable grounds'. The alarm going off
>> and no receipt at hand would be sufficient in my eyes.
>
> This is what I am saying there is case law about it *not* being sufficient.
> Though this may have changed for all I know.
Can you cite the case? I thought the law allowed for "reasonable
grounds". Before I concede no, or failed, prosecution would pretty much
automatically lead to compensation.
>> Continued detention where they can't rebut a claim that it has been paid
>> for and can't quickly assemble the evidence to prove theft would be the
>> point at which I would suggest at which concerns of compensation might
>> start.
>>
>> The fact that purchases at theses tills can't be accessed easily and
>> quickly by security staff is a major weakness in their system.
>>
>> If I was running a store and a customer conformed to being detained, I
>> would provide a voucher for a future shop to convey thanks and goodwill.
>> Yet surprisingly it's not done.
>
> They may feel, rightly or wrongly, that compensation is an admission of fault
> and invites being sued for a much more substantial compensation payment.
Civil liability can always be denied as a condition of accepting the
voucher.
Tony The Welsh Twat
Sep 13, 2023, 1:33:19 AM9/13/23
to
On Tuesday, 12 September 2023 at 07:45:18 UTC+1, Scion wrote:
> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service checkout
> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
Yeah, there's your problem.
> that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
Right there.
Norman Wells
Sep 13, 2023, 1:33:38 AM9/13/23
to
On 12/09/2023 13:45, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <kmag4v...@mid.individual.net>, at 07:52:16 on Tue, 12
> Sep 2023, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>> responsibility is it to ensure that it is removed?
>
> Not my circus, not my monkey.
>
>> How does it normally work in a self-checkout store?
>
> The ones on bottles are fairly obvious, and as you'll need age
> verification, then the person performing that should do the deed.
to ensure the tag is removed or deactivated before leaving the store,
which is what I asked.
> In message <kmag4v...@mid.individual.net>, at 07:52:16 on Tue, 12
> Sep 2023, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>
>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
>> Who in normal circumstances would remove the tag? And whose
>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket because the
>>> exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a security tag.
>
>> responsibility is it to ensure that it is removed?
>
> Not my circus, not my monkey.
>
>> How does it normally work in a self-checkout store?
>
> The ones on bottles are fairly obvious, and as you'll need age
> verification, then the person performing that should do the deed.
>
> If it's a stick-on RFID, then if I saw it I might use the "summon
> assistance" button, and then wave vigorously at the staff whose
> job it seems to be to ignore the lights above the self checkout,
> because chatting about their recent holiday with a colleague is
> far more important.
>
> If after about five seconds of waving doesn't interrupt their deep
> discussion, I'll yell "Hello!!!" and usually they'll reluctantly
> drag themselves over.
All of which is a clear indication you regard it as your responsibility
> If it's a stick-on RFID, then if I saw it I might use the "summon
> assistance" button, and then wave vigorously at the staff whose
> job it seems to be to ignore the lights above the self checkout,
> because chatting about their recent holiday with a colleague is
> far more important.
>
> If after about five seconds of waving doesn't interrupt their deep
> discussion, I'll yell "Hello!!!" and usually they'll reluctantly
> drag themselves over.
to ensure the tag is removed or deactivated before leaving the store,
which is what I asked.
Norman Wells
Sep 13, 2023, 1:33:56 AM9/13/23
to
driven later based perhaps on past record. In my experience, my
purchases are rescanned no more than about 5% of the time, which means
95% of the time I'm being treated as totally honest. I accept the
checks in much the same way as I accept security checks at airports. I
certainly don't stop flying because of them, as it's much more
convenient than walking.
Roland Perry
Sep 13, 2023, 6:30:04 AM9/13/23
to
In message <nn81gile5keokggi9...@4ax.com>, at 18:46:01 on
Tue, 12 Sep 2023, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
that up? If you do, what does it say about checking out in a branch
other than your normal one.
For example I bought some alcohol free beer in Tesco in Fort William the
other day (because alcohol is banned on Scotrail and I had along trip on
a hot day, with the trolley service on the non-airconditioned train as
I suspected it might, failing to materialise). Would they be able to
reference my shopping pattern from Cambridgshire?
(Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
--
Roland Perry
Tue, 12 Sep 2023, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 18:03:48 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <udq3la$1kq4p$1...@dont-email.me>, at 16:29:30 on Tue, 12 Sep
>>2023, Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> remarked:
>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 13:25:33 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>> I always get a receipt, because I increasingly find that (a) products
>>>> have mysteriously gone up in price since they last updated the shelf
>>>> labels, (b) when buying "clearance" items the scanner often picks up a
>>>> fragment of the original barcode, not the discounted amount.
>>>
>>>That's one of the advantages of the self-scan guns - you can immediately
>>>check the price is what it should be.
>>
>>I refuse to do self-scan guns because when you get to the checkout more
>>often than not they insist of re-scanning everything anyway. And I don't
>>like being treated like a criminal.
>
>Oddly enough, a re-scan is far more likely to happen to an occasional user
>than a regular user. That's because something which represents a significant
>departure from your typical usage pattern is itself one of the flags for
>potentially suspcious behaviour. By contrast, people who use the handheld
>scanners every time are only very rarely re-scanned.
Speculation, or do you have a cite from the retailing industry to back
>On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 18:03:48 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <udq3la$1kq4p$1...@dont-email.me>, at 16:29:30 on Tue, 12 Sep
>>2023, Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> remarked:
>>>On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 13:25:33 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>> I always get a receipt, because I increasingly find that (a) products
>>>> have mysteriously gone up in price since they last updated the shelf
>>>> labels, (b) when buying "clearance" items the scanner often picks up a
>>>> fragment of the original barcode, not the discounted amount.
>>>
>>>That's one of the advantages of the self-scan guns - you can immediately
>>>check the price is what it should be.
>>
>>I refuse to do self-scan guns because when you get to the checkout more
>>often than not they insist of re-scanning everything anyway. And I don't
>>like being treated like a criminal.
>
>Oddly enough, a re-scan is far more likely to happen to an occasional user
>than a regular user. That's because something which represents a significant
>departure from your typical usage pattern is itself one of the flags for
>potentially suspcious behaviour. By contrast, people who use the handheld
>scanners every time are only very rarely re-scanned.
that up? If you do, what does it say about checking out in a branch
other than your normal one.
For example I bought some alcohol free beer in Tesco in Fort William the
other day (because alcohol is banned on Scotrail and I had along trip on
a hot day, with the trolley service on the non-airconditioned train as
I suspected it might, failing to materialise). Would they be able to
reference my shopping pattern from Cambridgshire?
(Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Sep 13, 2023, 6:30:06 AM9/13/23
to
In message <kmbmpt...@mid.individual.net>, at 18:51:57 on Tue, 12
Sep 2023, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
I found that rescanning was happening more often than not. And they
never ever found anything amiss, so I'm doubtful regarding it being
based on previous history. I've also had a Tesco Clubcard since pretty
much they day they were introduced.
--
Roland Perry
Sep 2023, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
never ever found anything amiss, so I'm doubtful regarding it being
based on previous history. I've also had a Tesco Clubcard since pretty
much they day they were introduced.
--
Roland Perry
Martin Brown
Sep 13, 2023, 7:46:04 AM9/13/23
to
We regularly use scan as you shop and almost never get selected for a
random check. When we do it is for at most 6 or 10 items (until computer
says OK). My brother in law does it once in a blue moon and almost
always gets stopped for a partial or full check.
>
> For example I bought some alcohol free beer in Tesco in Fort William the
> other day (because alcohol is banned on Scotrail and I had along trip on
> a hot day, with the trolley service on the non-airconditioned train as
> I suspected it might, failing to materialise). Would they be able to
> reference my shopping pattern from Cambridgshire?
Yes. We used to shop so often in Manchester at one point that despite
> For example I bought some alcohol free beer in Tesco in Fort William the
> other day (because alcohol is banned on Scotrail and I had along trip on
> a hot day, with the trolley service on the non-airconditioned train as
> I suspected it might, failing to materialise). Would they be able to
> reference my shopping pattern from Cambridgshire?
our physical address in North Yorkshire their computer system though
that was our "local" store. Their computer systems are national.
>
> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
ISTR "alcohol free" means <0.1% alcohol so that under the law as passed
> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
by parliament it "contains" alcohol.
--
Martin Brown
Pancho
Sep 13, 2023, 8:16:15 AM9/13/23
to
On 12/09/2023 14:25, The Todal wrote:
> Rather worse would be if the security guard insists on detaining you by
> force. It would be humiliating as any onlookers would assume you were
> guilty.
>
You appear to be missing the point of GB's statement, and Scion's
> force. It would be humiliating as any onlookers would assume you were
> guilty.
>
general query.
A shopper should have the right to object to a bag search. Faced with a
polite shopper who doesn't want their bag searched, the store
detective's only real legal option is to explicitly state they are
arresting the shopper and to say they must wait for the police.
If the shopper is willing to wait, a reasonable period, for the police
to arrive, any other use of force would be assault. The threat of force
is also inappropriate.
With respect to humiliation, I suspect most stores would not want a
disgruntled shopper, waiting on the shop floor, loudly expressing their
dissatisfaction to other customers.
I also suspect the police would be unhappy at being summoned, only to
find it was a false alarm.
So the point is that a store options for a response to “just a sounding
alarm” are somewhat limited.
In real life, when it happens to me, in Sainsbury's, I stand by the
barrier waving by bag back and forth through the barrier, looking like
Victor Meldrew. More often than not, staff just signal I should continue
and ignore the alarm.
Andy Leighton
Sep 13, 2023, 9:08:53 AM9/13/23
to
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 08:45:53 +0100, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
>> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
>> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
>
> ISTR "alcohol free" means <0.1% alcohol so that under the law as passed
> by parliament it "contains" alcohol.
Some alcohol free beer is 0.0% alcohol.
>> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
>> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
>
> ISTR "alcohol free" means <0.1% alcohol so that under the law as passed
> by parliament it "contains" alcohol.
Also there is Shandy Bass which is commonly sold as a soft-drink,
almost everywhere, to kids and adults alike. That's 0.5% ABV.
Also you can get similar amounts of alcohol from some breads (especially
brioche buns), very ripe fruit, soy sauce, white wine vinegar
--
Andy Leighton => an...@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams
Jeff
Sep 13, 2023, 9:38:25 AM9/13/23
to
On 12/09/2023 11:40, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
>> offence concerned is indictable.
>>
>> Jeff
>
> You can only be arrested by a person other than a constable if the offence concerned is arrestable. That is one with a sentence on conviction of five years or more.
Not correct, an indictable offence means an offence which, if committed
by an adult, is triable on indictment, whether it is exclusively so
triable or triable either way. Criminal Law Act 1977.
So it cover quite a wide range of offences.
Jeff
> On Tuesday, 12 September 2023 at 11:06:14 UTC+1, Jeff wrote:
>>> My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>>> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>>> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>>> that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>>> off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>>> payment process?
>> You can only be arrested by a person other than a constable if the
>>> My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>>> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>>> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>>> that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>>> off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>>> payment process?
>> offence concerned is indictable.
>>
>> Jeff
>
> You can only be arrested by a person other than a constable if the offence concerned is arrestable. That is one with a sentence on conviction of five years or more.
Not correct, an indictable offence means an offence which, if committed
by an adult, is triable on indictment, whether it is exclusively so
triable or triable either way. Criminal Law Act 1977.
So it cover quite a wide range of offences.
Jeff
Jeff
Sep 13, 2023, 9:38:57 AM9/13/23
to
On 12/09/2023 11:40, notya...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 12 September 2023 at 11:06:14 UTC+1, Jeff wrote:
>>> My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>>> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>>> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>>> that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>>> off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>>> payment process?
>> You can only be arrested by a person other than a constable if the
>> offence concerned is indictable.
>>
>> Jeff
>
> You can only be arrested by a person other than a constable if the offence concerned is arrestable. That is one with a sentence on conviction of five years or more. Theft is punishable by up to seven years, so a "citizen's" arrest is possible for shop lifting. Bad to get it wrong though.
> On Tuesday, 12 September 2023 at 11:06:14 UTC+1, Jeff wrote:
>>> My question is, at what point can I decline to be detained? I understand
>>> from the Internet (yes, I know, that's why I'm here) that I can be
>>> detained with proportionate force if the guard has reasonable suspicion
>>> that I've been shoplifting - but that surely can't include a beeper going
>>> off for a tag that no-one removes or disables during the purchase /
>>> payment process?
>> You can only be arrested by a person other than a constable if the
>> offence concerned is indictable.
>>
>> Jeff
>
>
> I had an alarm go off at the Coop. IIRC I had not even bought anything less still any unpaid items in my bag.
As it happened I did have my partner's library books for renewal in my
bag and the tags in these set the detector off. As the shop was near
the library this was happening several times a day, so I got an apology
as soon as I fluffed up!
Unfortunately Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 S22A makes shoplifting valued
at under £200 a summary only offence, with a few odd exceptions.
Jeff
Mark Goodge
Sep 13, 2023, 9:46:04 AM9/13/23
to
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 07:25:06 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.uk> wrote:
>In message <nn81gile5keokggi9...@4ax.com>, at 18:46:01 on
>Tue, 12 Sep 2023, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>remarked:
>>
>In message <nn81gile5keokggi9...@4ax.com>, at 18:46:01 on
>Tue, 12 Sep 2023, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>remarked:
>>
>>Oddly enough, a re-scan is far more likely to happen to an occasional user
>>than a regular user. That's because something which represents a significant
>>departure from your typical usage pattern is itself one of the flags for
>>potentially suspcious behaviour. By contrast, people who use the handheld
>>scanners every time are only very rarely re-scanned.
>
>Speculation, or do you have a cite from the retailing industry to back
>that up? If you do, what does it say about checking out in a branch
>other than your normal one.
I don't have a cite, that was communicated to me by a senior member of staff
>>than a regular user. That's because something which represents a significant
>>departure from your typical usage pattern is itself one of the flags for
>>potentially suspcious behaviour. By contrast, people who use the handheld
>>scanners every time are only very rarely re-scanned.
>
>Speculation, or do you have a cite from the retailing industry to back
>that up? If you do, what does it say about checking out in a branch
>other than your normal one.
at a retailer at a meeting I had in my capacity as a councillor.
I don't know about shopping in a different store to the one you normally
use; I didn't ask that question and the information wasn't volunteered.
It's easily determinable from experience and observation that people who use
the handheld scanners regularly are rarely re-scanned. It's been well over a
year now since I last had a rescan in Tesco, and I've never had one in
Waitrose. But other people's experience of using them infrequently is
similar to yours; it seems that trust is something which needs to be earned.
I suspect (but have no evidence for, since it's never happened to me) that
if a rescan ever finds an unscanned item then you'll get a rescan far more
frequently thereafter, as well.
Mark
Jon Ribbens
Sep 13, 2023, 9:51:01 AM9/13/23
to
non-alcoholic <0.05% is required.
Adam Funk
Sep 13, 2023, 10:15:10 AM9/13/23
to
Adam Funk
Sep 13, 2023, 10:15:11 AM9/13/23
to
it would occasionally tell the employee to rescan just some small
number (3, 5?) of items picked (by the employee, seemingly at random)
out of the trolley.
Pamela
Sep 13, 2023, 10:26:58 AM9/13/23
to
would it show all the items you purchased over the years?
The Todal
Sep 13, 2023, 2:56:07 PM9/13/23
to
On 13/09/2023 09:15, Pancho wrote:
> On 12/09/2023 14:25, The Todal wrote:
>
>> Rather worse would be if the security guard insists on detaining you
>> by force. It would be humiliating as any onlookers would assume you
>> were guilty.
>>
>
> You appear to be missing the point of GB's statement, and Scion's
> general query.
No, I don't think so.
> On 12/09/2023 14:25, The Todal wrote:
>
>> Rather worse would be if the security guard insists on detaining you
>> by force. It would be humiliating as any onlookers would assume you
>> were guilty.
>>
>
> You appear to be missing the point of GB's statement, and Scion's
> general query.
>
> A shopper should have the right to object to a bag search. Faced with a
> polite shopper who doesn't want their bag searched, the store
> detective's only real legal option is to explicitly state they are
> arresting the shopper and to say they must wait for the police.
store either because his bladder is full or because he needs to get to
an appointment? Does that affect the legal position?
>
> If the shopper is willing to wait, a reasonable period, for the police
> to arrive, any other use of force would be assault. The threat of force
> is also inappropriate.
If the shopper meekly agrees to go to the manager's office with the
store detective then it's almost certainly to be construed as an arrest.
The other shoppers will see what's happening and will assume that you
have tried to steal something.
If you are young and black, one or more store detectives will probably
pinion your arms and frogmarch you to the office, or kneel on your neck,
make you cry out in pain, and show you who's boss.
>
> With respect to humiliation, I suspect most stores would not want a
> disgruntled shopper, waiting on the shop floor, loudly expressing their
> dissatisfaction to other customers.
shoplifters will loudly protest their innocence and the other shoppers
will glare at them and mutter that it's their fault all the prices are
as high as they are.
>
> I also suspect the police would be unhappy at being summoned, only to
> find it was a false alarm.
>
> So the point is that a store options for a response to “just a sounding
> alarm” are somewhat limited.
>
> In real life, when it happens to me, in Sainsbury's, I stand by the
> barrier waving by bag back and forth through the barrier, looking like
> Victor Meldrew. More often than not, staff just signal I should continue
> and ignore the alarm.
>
Whereas if you're black....
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/23/boy-handcuffed-civilian-security-staff-shop-chichester-superdrug
GB
Sep 13, 2023, 3:59:32 PM9/13/23
to
On 13/09/2023 15:55, The Todal wrote:
>> A shopper should have the right to object to a bag search. Faced with
>> a polite shopper who doesn't want their bag searched, the store
>> detective's only real legal option is to explicitly state they are
>> arresting the shopper and to say they must wait for the police.
>
> How about faced with an angry impolite shopper who wants to leave the
> store either because his bladder is full or because he needs to get to
> an appointment? Does that affect the legal position?
>
The store must provide the shopper with somewhere to pee. Otherwise, if
>> A shopper should have the right to object to a bag search. Faced with
>> a polite shopper who doesn't want their bag searched, the store
>> detective's only real legal option is to explicitly state they are
>> arresting the shopper and to say they must wait for the police.
>
> How about faced with an angry impolite shopper who wants to leave the
> store either because his bladder is full or because he needs to get to
> an appointment? Does that affect the legal position?
>
nature's call is strong, the store staff will simply have some mopping
up to do.
The practical resolution of having an appointment elsewhere is to
cooperate with the security guard. It doesn't matter about the legal
niceties at that time.
Surely, the store should make it clear whether they are arresting the
customer. I suspect the guards work on the basis of "prove your
innocence, or we will arrest you". It's then up to the customer whether
to take the easier course or insist on being arrested.
Even if the guards do arrest the customer, I am quite surprised that
they then have a right to frisk him and go through his personal effects?
>
> Whereas if you're black....
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/23/boy-handcuffed-civilian-security-staff-shop-chichester-superdrug
Scion
Sep 13, 2023, 4:43:07 PM9/13/23
to
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 11:15:45 +0100, Pamela wrote:
<snip>
> If you did a subject access request for your personal data helf by
> Tesco,
> would it show all the items you purchased over the years?
It should do, if they still hold that data.
<snip>
> If you did a subject access request for your personal data helf by
> Tesco,
> would it show all the items you purchased over the years?
Scion
Sep 13, 2023, 4:49:13 PM9/13/23
to
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 07:25:06 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
<snip>
<snip>
> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
The wording on the options for the checkout staff vary by store.
> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
"Clearly over 25" is from Sainsbury's. Well, quite. I prefer Asda: "Do not
challenge". Maybe if Lidl bring in self-scan they can just press 'Alt'.
Mike Scott
Sep 13, 2023, 7:12:43 PM9/13/23
to
On 13/09/2023 16:59, GB wrote:
> Even if the guards do arrest the customer, I am quite surprised that
> they then have a right to frisk him and go through his personal effects?
I don't think they can.
> Even if the guards do arrest the customer, I am quite surprised that
> they then have a right to frisk him and go through his personal effects?
PACE (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/24A) says
"(3)But the power of summary arrest conferred by subsection (1) or (2)
is exercisable only if—
(a)the person making the arrest has reasonable grounds for believing
that for any of the reasons mentioned in subsection (4) it is necessary
to arrest the person in question; and
(b)it appears to the person making the arrest that it is not reasonably
practicable for a constable to make it instead.
(4)The reasons are to prevent the person in question—
(a)causing physical injury to himself or any other person;
(b)suffering physical injury;
(c)causing loss of or damage to property; or
(d)making off before a constable can assume responsibility for him. "
Nothing about searching anyone. All they can do is summon a constable
after an arrest.
(Or has that Act been superceded???)
--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England
Scion
Sep 13, 2023, 8:08:04 PM9/13/23
to
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 20:12:28 +0100, Mike Scott wrote:
> On 13/09/2023 16:59, GB wrote:
>> Even if the guards do arrest the customer, I am quite surprised that
>> they then have a right to frisk him and go through his personal
>> effects?
>
> I don't think they can.
They're well within their rights to ask, though. Same as I can go up to
> On 13/09/2023 16:59, GB wrote:
>> Even if the guards do arrest the customer, I am quite surprised that
>> they then have a right to frisk him and go through his personal
>> effects?
>
> I don't think they can.
any stranger and ask permission to rifle through their stuff.
Hence the part of my question that hasn't been answered as yet: If I ask
the security guard what my rights are under these circumstances, is he
obliged to tell me? Because if any other shoppers are like me, they're
unlikely to be sure of what requests they can and can't decline.
billy bookcase
Sep 13, 2023, 8:54:54 PM9/13/23
to
"Scion" <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:udsoq9$274a6$1...@dont-email.me...
unfounded or excessive. (n)
By which presumably is meant frivolous or simply so as to satisfy
idle curiosity. However if a convincing reason for such a request
could be produced then presumably that might not apply.
Which doubtless they would argue given that they would ultimately
bear any resulting expense (f)
quote:
At a glance
a.. Individuals have the right to access and receive a copy of their
personal data, and
b.. other supplementary information.
c.. This is commonly referred to as a subject access request or 'SAR'.
d.. Individuals can make SARs verbally or in writing, including via social
media.
e.. A third party can also make a SAR on behalf of another person.
f.. In most circumstances, you cannot charge a fee to deal with a request.
g.. You should respond without delay and within one month of receipt of
the request.
h.. You may extend the time limit by a further two months if the request
is complex or
i.. if you receive a number of requests from the individual.
j.. You should perform a reasonable search for the requested information.
k.. You should provide the information in an accessible, concise and
intelligible format.
l.. The information should be disclosed securely.
m.. You can only refuse to provide the information if an exemption or
restriction applies,
n.. or if the request is manifestly unfounded or excessive.
:unquote
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-resources/individual-rights/individual-rights/right-of-access/
bb
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 7:59:51 AM9/14/23
to
In message <udrpbj$21eob$1...@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:53 on Wed, 13 Sep
2023, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:
>> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
>>apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
>
>ISTR "alcohol free" means <0.1% alcohol so that under the law as passed
>by parliament it "contains" alcohol.
Do you have the name of the age-check law handy? here's lots of things
which contain traces of alcohol, so I doubt there isn't some threshold
mentioned.
Worst age-check I had was buying a corkscrew. The best the manager, when
summoned, could suggest was "because it's on the same aisle as the
wine". That's preposterous, because they were also available in the
kitchen section, and they don't age-check saucepans.
--
Roland Perry
2023, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:
>> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
>>apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
>
>ISTR "alcohol free" means <0.1% alcohol so that under the law as passed
>by parliament it "contains" alcohol.
which contain traces of alcohol, so I doubt there isn't some threshold
mentioned.
Worst age-check I had was buying a corkscrew. The best the manager, when
summoned, could suggest was "because it's on the same aisle as the
wine". That's preposterous, because they were also available in the
kitchen section, and they don't age-check saucepans.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 7:59:52 AM9/14/23
to
In message <fo03gi9t5hlvdeeab...@4ax.com>, at 10:45:56 on
Wed, 13 Sep 2023, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
I gave up on the self-scan years ago, because it simply didn't meet my
expectations. Therefore recent irregular use is a null set.
--
Roland Perry
Wed, 13 Sep 2023, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
expectations. Therefore recent irregular use is a null set.
--
Roland Perry
Pancho
Sep 14, 2023, 8:07:09 AM9/14/23
to
On 13/09/2023 15:55, The Todal wrote:
> On 13/09/2023 09:15, Pancho wrote:
>> On 12/09/2023 14:25, The Todal wrote:
>>
>>> Rather worse would be if the security guard insists on detaining you
>>> by force. It would be humiliating as any onlookers would assume you
>>> were guilty.
>>>
>>
>> You appear to be missing the point of GB's statement, and Scion's
>> general query.
>
> No, I don't think so.
>
>
>>
>> A shopper should have the right to object to a bag search. Faced with
>> a polite shopper who doesn't want their bag searched, the store
>> detective's only real legal option is to explicitly state they are
>> arresting the shopper and to say they must wait for the police.
>
> How about faced with an angry impolite shopper who wants to leave the
> store either because his bladder is full or because he needs to get to
> an appointment? Does that affect the legal position?
>
I was interested in the case of how *I* would be treated. I tend to use
>> On 12/09/2023 14:25, The Todal wrote:
>>
>>> Rather worse would be if the security guard insists on detaining you
>>> by force. It would be humiliating as any onlookers would assume you
>>> were guilty.
>>>
>>
>> You appear to be missing the point of GB's statement, and Scion's
>> general query.
>
> No, I don't think so.
>
>
>>
>> A shopper should have the right to object to a bag search. Faced with
>> a polite shopper who doesn't want their bag searched, the store
>> detective's only real legal option is to explicitly state they are
>> arresting the shopper and to say they must wait for the police.
>
> How about faced with an angry impolite shopper who wants to leave the
> store either because his bladder is full or because he needs to get to
> an appointment? Does that affect the legal position?
>
strict good manners in such situations.
>
>>
>> If the shopper is willing to wait, a reasonable period, for the police
>> to arrive, any other use of force would be assault. The threat of
>> force is also inappropriate.
>
> Unrealistic.
>
situation deserved it.
> If the shopper meekly agrees to go to the manager's office with the
> store detective then it's almost certainly to be construed as an arrest.
> The other shoppers will see what's happening and will assume that you
> have tried to steal something.
>
> If you are young and black, one or more store detectives will probably
> pinion your arms and frogmarch you to the office, or kneel on your neck,
> make you cry out in pain, and show you who's boss.
>
<https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12515103/Peckham-shopkeeper-centre-choking-row-takes-refuge-angry-demonstrators-secret-hideout-hits-racism-accusations-protesters-continue-gather-outside-shop-plastered-angry-notes.html>
>
>>
>> With respect to humiliation, I suspect most stores would not want a
>> disgruntled shopper, waiting on the shop floor, loudly expressing
>> their dissatisfaction to other customers.
>
> I suspect most stores don't give a rat's arse. It is to be expected that
> shoplifters will loudly protest their innocence and the other shoppers
> will glare at them and mutter that it's their fault all the prices are
> as high as they are.
>
>
>>
>> I also suspect the police would be unhappy at being summoned, only to
>> find it was a false alarm.
>
> It's never a false alarm when there is a potential breach of the peace.
>
is a feeling of the “The boy who cried wolf” about them. I do not see
that a polite refusal to allow someone to search my bag is me causing a
potential breach of the peace. I find it very unpleasant when people try
to intimidate other people into subjecting themselves to invasions of
their privacy, without consent, by suggesting they are breaking the law.
>>
>> So the point is that a store options for a response to “just a
>> sounding alarm” are somewhat limited.
>>
>> In real life, when it happens to me, in Sainsbury's, I stand by the
>> barrier waving by bag back and forth through the barrier, looking like
>> Victor Meldrew. More often than not, staff just signal I should
>> continue and ignore the alarm.
>>
>
> Is it cos you are white?
>
> Whereas if you're black....
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/23/boy-handcuffed-civilian-security-staff-shop-chichester-superdrug
are normally black. My recent experience of them has been good, polite,
respectful, even helpful.
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 8:09:51 AM9/14/23
to
In message <gce8tjx...@news.ducksburg.com>, at 11:09:52 on Wed, 13
Sep 2023, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> remarked:
That's a very good question. I think I'll ask them.
The byelaw simply mentions "intoxicating liquor" and I suspect it's
physically impossible to drink enough 0.5% beer to become intoxicated.
In certain USA Staes the maximum strength permitted is 3.2% (I have no
idea why that level of precision is required), and it's pretty difficult
to get drunk on.
--
Roland Perry
Sep 2023, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> remarked:
The byelaw simply mentions "intoxicating liquor" and I suspect it's
physically impossible to drink enough 0.5% beer to become intoxicated.
In certain USA Staes the maximum strength permitted is 3.2% (I have no
idea why that level of precision is required), and it's pretty difficult
to get drunk on.
--
Roland Perry
GB
Sep 14, 2023, 8:38:54 AM9/14/23
to
On 13/09/2023 21:07, Scion wrote:
> Hence the part of my question that hasn't been answered as yet: If I ask
> the security guard what my rights are under these circumstances, is he
> obliged to tell me? Because if any other shoppers are like me, they're
> unlikely to be sure of what requests they can and can't decline.
I don't see why a security guard should be required to provide you with
> Hence the part of my question that hasn't been answered as yet: If I ask
> the security guard what my rights are under these circumstances, is he
> obliged to tell me? Because if any other shoppers are like me, they're
> unlikely to be sure of what requests they can and can't decline.
free legal advice.
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 9:00:00 AM9/14/23
to
In message <fo03gi9t5hlvdeeab...@4ax.com>, at 10:45:56 on
Wed, 13 Sep 2023, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
>On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 07:25:06 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <nn81gile5keokggi9...@4ax.com>, at 18:46:01 on
>>Tue, 12 Sep 2023, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>remarked:
>>>
>>>Oddly enough, a re-scan is far more likely to happen to an occasional user
>>>than a regular user. That's because something which represents a significant
>>>departure from your typical usage pattern is itself one of the flags for
>>>potentially suspcious behaviour. By contrast, people who use the handheld
>>>scanners every time are only very rarely re-scanned.
>>
>>Speculation, or do you have a cite from the retailing industry to back
>>that up? If you do, what does it say about checking out in a branch
>>other than your normal one.
>
>I don't have a cite, that was communicated to me by a senior member of staff
>at a retailer at a meeting I had in my capacity as a councillor.
I often find people in positions like that repeat something they've been
>On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 07:25:06 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <nn81gile5keokggi9...@4ax.com>, at 18:46:01 on
>>Tue, 12 Sep 2023, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>>remarked:
>>>
>>>Oddly enough, a re-scan is far more likely to happen to an occasional user
>>>than a regular user. That's because something which represents a significant
>>>departure from your typical usage pattern is itself one of the flags for
>>>potentially suspcious behaviour. By contrast, people who use the handheld
>>>scanners every time are only very rarely re-scanned.
>>
>>Speculation, or do you have a cite from the retailing industry to back
>>that up? If you do, what does it say about checking out in a branch
>>other than your normal one.
>
>I don't have a cite, that was communicated to me by a senior member of staff
>at a retailer at a meeting I had in my capacity as a councillor.
told to say. Sometimes it's even a genuine reflection of senior
management's aspirations. But delivery in the field is often somewhat
different.
In other news, BBC Breakfast doing a magnificent piece of shroud-waving
misdirection today, with a story that shoplifting has increased 60% in
the last two years. Only problem was they illustrated it with a
smash-and-grab raid, not someone smuggling an RFID past the checkouts.
Almost 10,000 incidents a year, which with a turnover in that sector of
around £200 billion a year is a shrinkage of one item per £20 million of
sales. Shrinkage has traditionally been regarded as a problem with staff
pinching things, not customers.
And not just from the store, from customers.
The classic fraud vector pre-barcoding was a packet of biscuits next to
the till, which they added to the bill over and over again, and if the
customer complained the total was more than they were expecting (and
demanded a re-count) they'd say "Sorry aren't those your biscuits".
>I don't know about shopping in a different store to the one you normally
>use; I didn't ask that question and the information wasn't volunteered.
>
>It's easily determinable from experience and observation that people who use
>the handheld scanners regularly are rarely re-scanned. It's been well over a
>year now since I last had a rescan in Tesco, and I've never had one in
>Waitrose. But other people's experience of using them infrequently is
>similar to yours; it seems that trust is something which needs to be earned.
>I suspect (but have no evidence for, since it's never happened to me) that
>if a rescan ever finds an unscanned item then you'll get a rescan far more
>frequently thereafter, as well.
>
>Mark
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 9:00:04 AM9/14/23
to
In message <9ge8tjx...@news.ducksburg.com>, at 11:11:53 on Wed, 13
Sep 2023, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> remarked:
I tend only to buy things-for-today, so never a large number of items
anyway. Apart from being treated like a criminal, it's having to wait
for the Gestapo to come and re-scan.
--
Roland Perry
Sep 2023, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> remarked:
anyway. Apart from being treated like a criminal, it's having to wait
for the Gestapo to come and re-scan.
--
Roland Perry
Martin Brown
Sep 14, 2023, 9:26:38 AM9/14/23
to
On 14/09/2023 08:50, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <udrpbj$21eob$1...@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:53 on Wed, 13 Sep
> 2023, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:
>
>>> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
>>> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
>>
>> ISTR "alcohol free" means <0.1% alcohol so that under the law as
>> passed by parliament it "contains" alcohol.
>
> Do you have the name of the age-check law handy? here's lots of things
> which contain traces of alcohol, so I doubt there isn't some threshold
> mentioned.
Parliamentarians with a handful of notable exceptions are scientifically
> In message <udrpbj$21eob$1...@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:53 on Wed, 13 Sep
> 2023, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:
>
>>> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
>>> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
>>
>> ISTR "alcohol free" means <0.1% alcohol so that under the law as
>> passed by parliament it "contains" alcohol.
>
> Do you have the name of the age-check law handy? here's lots of things
> which contain traces of alcohol, so I doubt there isn't some threshold
> mentioned.
illiterate. They don't let expert evidence or facts bother them much.
>
> Worst age-check I had was buying a corkscrew. The best the manager, when
> summoned, could suggest was "because it's on the same aisle as the
> wine". That's preposterous, because they were also available in the
> kitchen section, and they don't age-check saucepans.
I suspect it is because it is a sharp pointy thing. You could do some
> Worst age-check I had was buying a corkscrew. The best the manager, when
> summoned, could suggest was "because it's on the same aisle as the
> wine". That's preposterous, because they were also available in the
> kitchen section, and they don't age-check saucepans.
serious damage to someone (albeit rather slowly) with a corkscrew.
I think it was age restricted like some garden tools are for being sharp
and so a potential weapon rather than being alcoholic.
--
Martin Brown
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 9:30:01 AM9/14/23
to
In message <XnsB07E7292...@135.181.20.170>, at 11:15:45 on Wed,
13 Sep 2023, Pamela <uk...@permabulator.33mail.com> remarked:
If we believe what's being said, then yes it should.
Tesco got in a pickle when they introduced a new version of their
Clubcard and wrote to all the existing holders saying "please upgrade".
The problem being that wasn't one of the things their Mk1 clubcard
Privacy Policy allowed them to do. Ooops.
--
Roland Perry
13 Sep 2023, Pamela <uk...@permabulator.33mail.com> remarked:
Tesco got in a pickle when they introduced a new version of their
Clubcard and wrote to all the existing holders saying "please upgrade".
The problem being that wasn't one of the things their Mk1 clubcard
Privacy Policy allowed them to do. Ooops.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 9:30:05 AM9/14/23
to
In message <kmbm6s...@mid.individual.net>, at 18:41:49 on Tue, 12
>> In message <kmag4v...@mid.individual.net>, at 07:52:16 on Tue, 12
>>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket
>>>>because the exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a
>>>>security tag.
>>
>>> Who in normal circumstances would remove the tag? And whose
>>>responsibility is it to ensure that it is removed?
>> Not my circus, not my monkey.
>>
>>> How does it normally work in a self-checkout store?
>> The ones on bottles are fairly obvious, and as you'll need age
>>verification, then the person performing that should do the deed.
>> If it's a stick-on RFID, then if I saw it I might use the "summon
>>assistance" button, and then wave vigorously at the staff whose
>> job it seems to be to ignore the lights above the self checkout,
>> because chatting about their recent holiday with a colleague is
>> far more important.
>> If after about five seconds of waving doesn't interrupt their deep
>>discussion, I'll yell "Hello!!!" and usually they'll reluctantly
>> drag themselves over.
>
>All of which is a clear indication you regard it as your responsibility
>to ensure the tag is removed or deactivated before leaving the store,
>which is what I asked.
I regard it as helpful to make sure they are removed, to avoid having to
call the manager (who probably has better things to do) when falsely
accused of shoplifting.
What I found unusual in Scotland, on my recent trip, is how virtually
every supermarket or convenience store actually had a uniformed
bouncer/security guard stood at the door. In England it's a rarity.
--
Roland Perry
Sep 2023, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>On 12/09/2023 13:45, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <kmag4v...@mid.individual.net>, at 07:52:16 on Tue, 12
>>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket
>>>>because the exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a
>>>>security tag.
>>
>>> Who in normal circumstances would remove the tag? And whose
>>>responsibility is it to ensure that it is removed?
>> Not my circus, not my monkey.
>>
>>> How does it normally work in a self-checkout store?
>> The ones on bottles are fairly obvious, and as you'll need age
>>verification, then the person performing that should do the deed.
>> If it's a stick-on RFID, then if I saw it I might use the "summon
>>assistance" button, and then wave vigorously at the staff whose
>> job it seems to be to ignore the lights above the self checkout,
>> because chatting about their recent holiday with a colleague is
>> far more important.
>> If after about five seconds of waving doesn't interrupt their deep
>>discussion, I'll yell "Hello!!!" and usually they'll reluctantly
>> drag themselves over.
>
>All of which is a clear indication you regard it as your responsibility
>to ensure the tag is removed or deactivated before leaving the store,
>which is what I asked.
I regard it as helpful to make sure they are removed, to avoid having to
call the manager (who probably has better things to do) when falsely
accused of shoplifting.
What I found unusual in Scotland, on my recent trip, is how virtually
every supermarket or convenience store actually had a uniformed
bouncer/security guard stood at the door. In England it's a rarity.
--
Roland Perry
Martin Harran
Sep 14, 2023, 9:54:47 AM9/14/23
to
usually twice per week and have been using their Scan and Go for
several years. I would say I have been "quality checked" on average
about once in something like every 20 scans. A couple of months ago,
an unscanned item turned up in a check, much to my embarrassment but
the assistant was very friendly about it and told me not to worry,
nobody was going to think that I was stealing a 79p item in a shopping
of something like £70. I did expect to get rescanned more often after
that but it was quite a while before I did get another check and my
frequency of checks did not increase..
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 10:00:03 AM9/14/23
to
In message <udujju$2ir8h$2...@dont-email.me>, at 10:26:20 on Thu, 14 Sep
The rules generally only mention knives.
--
Roland Perry
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 10:21:37 AM9/14/23
to
In message <udpr6j$1j424$2...@dont-email.me>, at 15:05:06 on Tue, 12 Sep
>> On 12/09/2023 13:12, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> If it is a normal physical tag than the terminal flashes a light and
>>> some attendant comes along and removed the tag for you. Even if it
>>> doesn't you can wave the item at an attendant (more often than not it
>>> also want an age verification as well).
>> This is the sort of reason why it is, IME, /invariably/ faster
>>to
>> use the personned tills than the self-scanned ones. I don't think I've
>> ever got through the scanning without needing assistance, and often with
>> needing to change till or get a new trolley or some such. The till
>> people just wave things through and that's it.
>
>We only go self service or scan as you shop if no alcohol involved or
>the staffed tills have exceedingly long queues.
>
>The latest M&S terminals are a royal PITA - too sensitive by half and
>unable to cope with tiny weight variations of in store bakery produce.
>
>> Mind you, since lockdown we've switched to getting supermarket
>> shopping delivered. Yes, there are occasional problems, but it saves
>
>I've had spirits delivered that way with the security tags still on!
>
>Not that they present much of a problem for a physicist to remove...
>
>> hours of time [getting to the shop, doing the shopping, waiting for the
>> till, loading the car, unloading back home] and gallons of petrol. For
>> the odd missing item, it's easy to do a two- or three-item top-up shop
>> while poddling into town for a coffee. Asda [other supermarkets are
>> available] are very good at picking out decent fruit and excellent at
>> refunding for anything that has gone wrong.
>
>I know a lot of people who have taken to online supermarket shopping
>since Covid and have never gone back to shopping IRL. My brother in law
>and several neighbours now exclusively use internet online shopping.
That's difficult in Fort William when the delivery address is "Seat 14
in carriage 3, and the train leaves in ten minutes".
--
Roland Perry
2023, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> remarked:
>On 12/09/2023 14:20, Andy Walker wrote:
>> On 12/09/2023 13:12, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> If it is a normal physical tag than the terminal flashes a light and
>>> some attendant comes along and removed the tag for you. Even if it
>>> doesn't you can wave the item at an attendant (more often than not it
>>> also want an age verification as well).
>> This is the sort of reason why it is, IME, /invariably/ faster
>>to
>> use the personned tills than the self-scanned ones. I don't think I've
>> ever got through the scanning without needing assistance, and often with
>> needing to change till or get a new trolley or some such. The till
>> people just wave things through and that's it.
>
>We only go self service or scan as you shop if no alcohol involved or
>the staffed tills have exceedingly long queues.
>
>The latest M&S terminals are a royal PITA - too sensitive by half and
>unable to cope with tiny weight variations of in store bakery produce.
>
>> Mind you, since lockdown we've switched to getting supermarket
>> shopping delivered. Yes, there are occasional problems, but it saves
>
>I've had spirits delivered that way with the security tags still on!
>
>Not that they present much of a problem for a physicist to remove...
>
>> hours of time [getting to the shop, doing the shopping, waiting for the
>> till, loading the car, unloading back home] and gallons of petrol. For
>> the odd missing item, it's easy to do a two- or three-item top-up shop
>> while poddling into town for a coffee. Asda [other supermarkets are
>> available] are very good at picking out decent fruit and excellent at
>> refunding for anything that has gone wrong.
>
>I know a lot of people who have taken to online supermarket shopping
>since Covid and have never gone back to shopping IRL. My brother in law
>and several neighbours now exclusively use internet online shopping.
That's difficult in Fort William when the delivery address is "Seat 14
in carriage 3, and the train leaves in ten minutes".
--
Roland Perry
Sara Merriman
Sep 14, 2023, 11:18:20 AM9/14/23
to
don't happen in the Caledonian Sleeper to Euston. Just a data point :)
--
Billy is silly
Clive Arthur
Sep 14, 2023, 11:35:01 AM9/14/23
to
On 14/09/2023 08:50, Roland Perry wrote:
<snip>
> Worst age-check I had was buying a corkscrew. The best the manager, when
> summoned, could suggest was "because it's on the same aisle as the
> wine". That's preposterous, because they were also available in the
> kitchen section, and they don't age-check saucepans.
to drink wine?
:-) just in case.
--
Cheers
Clive
Tony The Welsh Twat
Sep 14, 2023, 4:38:27 PM9/14/23
to
On Wednesday, 13 September 2023 at 10:08:53 UTC+1, Andy Leighton wrote:
>
> Also you can get similar amounts of alcohol from some breads (especially
> brioche buns), very ripe fruit, soy sauce, white wine vinegar
>
> --
> Andy Leighton => an...@azaal.plus.com
Or as I bought in Lidl today, some profiteroles drenched in chocolate sauce that contained 0.7% alcohol.
>
> Also you can get similar amounts of alcohol from some breads (especially
> brioche buns), very ripe fruit, soy sauce, white wine vinegar
>
> --
> Andy Leighton => an...@azaal.plus.com
Or as I bought in Lidl today, some profiteroles drenched in chocolate sauce that contained 0.7% alcohol.
Norman Wells
Sep 14, 2023, 4:38:59 PM9/14/23
to
credit cards, direct debits, 78s, cassette players, personal computers,
video recorders, cars or the internet.
Thank goodness, though, that some of us had the vision to see the future.
Scion
Sep 14, 2023, 4:40:23 PM9/14/23
to
about your lawful business, they should be obliged to clarify the
situation if asked.
Norman Wells
Sep 14, 2023, 4:42:07 PM9/14/23
to
GB
Sep 14, 2023, 5:11:24 PM9/14/23
to
brief training, but may not have remembered it well.
So, you ask the guard for legal info, and he misinforms you. Does that
leave you any better off?
Roland Perry
Sep 14, 2023, 5:42:17 PM9/14/23
to
In message <kmgkqg...@mid.individual.net>, at 15:48:48 on Thu, 14
The technology worked perfectly well, and hasn't changed. It's
their human intervention which sucked, and that should have been
sorted out in their pilot stores, before being inflicted on everyone.
--
Roland Perry
Sep 2023, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
their human intervention which sucked, and that should have been
sorted out in their pilot stores, before being inflicted on everyone.
--
Roland Perry
Norman Wells
Sep 14, 2023, 6:16:28 PM9/14/23
to
progress at all.
Scion
Sep 14, 2023, 8:11:15 PM9/14/23
to
that could have some ramifications surely?
GB
Sep 14, 2023, 8:41:37 PM9/14/23
to
ramifications. You could sue them. It makes no difference whether they
also gave you some incorrect legal advice.
If the law changes, and guards are required to give legal advice to
people they detain, that will probably be in the form of a leaflet.
Adam Funk
Sep 15, 2023, 1:30:11 PM9/15/23
to
On 2023-09-12, Scion wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 16:26:58 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:
>
>> On 2023-09-12, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 10:05:44 -0000 (UTC), Jon Ribbens
>>><jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 2023-09-12, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-09-12, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>>>> expensive cuts of meat are hidden tagged.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service
>>>>>>> checkout that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Strikes me that it shouldn't let you decline a paper printed receipt
>>>>>> if you have bought items that the computer knows are hidden tagged.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree, but I'd be surprised if the database contained information
>>>>> about security tags.
>
> Some logic could be applied though: We sometimes tag certain cuts of meat,
> we sometimes tag clothing, we sometimes tag electricals, we sometimes tag
> individual items over £5; if any of those apply then just print the
> receipt.
I'm sure logic could be applied to all of it, and some logic is
applied to some of it. ;-)
>
>>>>
>>>>I'd be surprised if it didn't ;-)
>>>
>>> My experience is that it usually does, but not reliably so. Which I
>>> think may be one of the causes of the OP's problem.
>>
>> Aha. I suppose that if employees are instructed to go around sticking
>> the flat adhesive kind on products that were not previously tagged,
>> someone may easily forget to update the database.
>
> The tag on the meat I bought was under the product label i.e. applied at
> the packing stage.
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 16:26:58 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:
>
>> On 2023-09-12, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 10:05:44 -0000 (UTC), Jon Ribbens
>>><jon+u...@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 2023-09-12, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-09-12, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/09/2023 07:45, Scion wrote:
>>>>>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket
>>>>>>> because the exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a
>>>>>>> security tag.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I expect this will be an increasing problem now that some items like
>>>>>>> I was stopped by a security guard when leaving a supermarket
>>>>>>> because the exit alarm went off - I had some meat that had a
>>>>>>> security tag.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> expensive cuts of meat are hidden tagged.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I had used the store's self-scan handheld and at the self-service
>>>>>>> checkout that asks whether I wanted a receipt and I had said no.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Strikes me that it shouldn't let you decline a paper printed receipt
>>>>>> if you have bought items that the computer knows are hidden tagged.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree, but I'd be surprised if the database contained information
>>>>> about security tags.
>
> Some logic could be applied though: We sometimes tag certain cuts of meat,
> we sometimes tag clothing, we sometimes tag electricals, we sometimes tag
> individual items over £5; if any of those apply then just print the
> receipt.
I'm sure logic could be applied to all of it, and some logic is
applied to some of it. ;-)
>
>>>>
>>>>I'd be surprised if it didn't ;-)
>>>
>>> My experience is that it usually does, but not reliably so. Which I
>>> think may be one of the causes of the OP's problem.
>>
>> Aha. I suppose that if employees are instructed to go around sticking
>> the flat adhesive kind on products that were not previously tagged,
>> someone may easily forget to update the database.
>
> The tag on the meat I bought was under the product label i.e. applied at
> the packing stage.
Adam Funk
Sep 15, 2023, 1:45:09 PM9/15/23
to
understood that some random re-scans are carried out, so I certainly
wouldn't make any negative assumptions about someone in a supermarket
getting a re-scan.
Adam Funk
Sep 15, 2023, 1:45:10 PM9/15/23
to
On 2023-09-14, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <gce8tjx...@news.ducksburg.com>, at 11:09:52 on Wed, 13
> Sep 2023, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> remarked:
>>On 2023-09-13, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-09-13, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 13/09/2023 07:25, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
>>>>> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
>>>>
>>>> ISTR "alcohol free" means <0.1% alcohol so that under the law as passed
>>>> by parliament it "contains" alcohol.
>>>
>>><0.5% is unrestricted by licensing law, but to be labelled as
>>> non-alcoholic <0.05% is required.
>>
>>How low does it have to be to be allowed on ScotRail?
>
> That's a very good question. I think I'll ask them.
>
> The byelaw simply mentions "intoxicating liquor" and I suspect it's
> physically impossible to drink enough 0.5% beer to become intoxicated.
Several web pages cite the same study [1] that indicates it's
> Sep 2023, Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> remarked:
>>On 2023-09-13, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-09-13, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 13/09/2023 07:25, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> (Of course, they had to age-check me, because alcohol free beer is
>>>>> apparently something you need to be over-18 to buy).
>>>>
>>>> ISTR "alcohol free" means <0.1% alcohol so that under the law as passed
>>>> by parliament it "contains" alcohol.
>>>
>>><0.5% is unrestricted by licensing law, but to be labelled as
>>> non-alcoholic <0.05% is required.
>>
>>How low does it have to be to be allowed on ScotRail?
>
> That's a very good question. I think I'll ask them.
>
> The byelaw simply mentions "intoxicating liquor" and I suspect it's
> physically impossible to drink enough 0.5% beer to become intoxicated.
difficult, at least, to get your BAC up to the level of "minor effects
of alcohol" that way.
[1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00194-012-0835-8#page-1
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages