Store security - what powers, if any?
Discussion
markmullen said:
Those machines are absolute s
t. Their sole purpose is to cut costs, at the expense of the customer, who has to tolerate "UNEXPECTED ITEM IN THE ING BAGGING AREA" and random things not scanning, then have to wait for some sour faced old harridan to begrudingly shuffle over and manually override them.
The cause me almost inconceivable levels of fury which is why I don't use them.
t. Their sole purpose is to cut costs, at the expense of the customer, who has to tolerate "UNEXPECTED ITEM IN THE ING BAGGING AREA" and random things not scanning, then have to wait for some sour faced old harridan to begrudingly shuffle over and manually override them.The cause me almost inconceivable levels of fury which is why I don't use them.
There was a guard who started in the M&S by my old place. He must have thought I looked really dodgy as he followed me about every bloody day. Eventually I turned around and asked him if I could help him and he never followed me again.
It was pretty bizarre, I went in their most days to pick bits and bobs up. In the middle of the summer the queue could be very very long and I can only assume that one of those days I put whatever I was going to buy back and he thought I'd nicked it?!?
It was pretty bizarre, I went in their most days to pick bits and bobs up. In the middle of the summer the queue could be very very long and I can only assume that one of those days I put whatever I was going to buy back and he thought I'd nicked it?!?
Edited by rpguk on Tuesday 23 September 17:36
La Liga said:
PACE said:
Arrest without warrant: other persons
(1)A person other than a constable may arrest without a warrant—
(a)anyone who is in the act of committing an indictable offence;
(b)anyone whom he has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be committing an indictable offence.
They have the same powers as anyone else. It's much more limited than the powers a Constable has. (1)A person other than a constable may arrest without a warrant—
(a)anyone who is in the act of committing an indictable offence;
(b)anyone whom he has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be committing an indictable offence.
One of the following needs to be present, too:
Necessity Test said:
(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.
Security guards have no power to search you / your bags etc. 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.
TNTom said:
Being a guard myself in retail i'll answer that for you, Security have no more powers than you average joe on the street. We have to work on civil law. We have no powers to search unless we gain consent of who we are searching. If we make a stop and detain a person we would of had to follow a process called SCONE, Selection Concealment Observation Non-payment Exit.
In my opinion the law favors the criminal, in theory someone could walk out of the store exit with items in their hand, and according to the law i would of had to see them pick the items off the shelf to be able to ask them to stop.
Which bit of the law gives this SCONE thingy? In my opinion the law favors the criminal, in theory someone could walk out of the store exit with items in their hand, and according to the law i would of had to see them pick the items off the shelf to be able to ask them to stop.
None of it!
Also only one of those 5 things is actually necessary for the offence of theft (with other things). For example if i pick an item up off a shelf and at the time i pick it up my intention is to steal it then the offence of theft is complete. There is no legal requirement for anyone to leave the store for a theft to be made out. Leaving the store before being detained makes it easier to prove but it isn't a requirement.
markmullen said:
Those machines are absolute st. Their sole purpose is to cut costs, at the expense of the customer, who has to tolerate "UNEXPECTED ITEM IN THE ING BAGGING AREA" and random things not scanning, then have to wait for some sour faced old harridan to begrudingly shuffle over and manually override them.
The cause me almost inconceivable levels of fury which is why I don't use them.
.
At my local it's (too) often a bearded bloke a little younger than me (so firmly middle aged) who is such a sarcastic git that it amazes me he hasn't been laid out yet - that wouldn't be so bad if he could do the job, but he is useless compared to the women, and almost always has to summon one, taking extra time.t. Their sole purpose is to cut costs, at the expense of the customer, who has to tolerate "UNEXPECTED ITEM IN THE ING BAGGING AREA" and random things not scanning, then have to wait for some sour faced old harridan to begrudingly shuffle over and manually override them.The cause me almost inconceivable levels of fury which is why I don't use them.
.
Edited by V8forweekends on Tuesday 23 September 21:02
We usually get told we have to challenge the thieves and a security guard will be present. I'm not paid to confront shoplifters, so when I see a walkout I just follow them out and get the reg number of whatever car they get into.
Its the perhaps mistaken belief that the Police will be keener to follow it up if a vehicle is involved. Easy identification, potential markers being placed on the car etc.
Its the perhaps mistaken belief that the Police will be keener to follow it up if a vehicle is involved. Easy identification, potential markers being placed on the car etc.
ED209 said:
Which bit of the law gives this SCONE thingy?
None of it!
Also only one of those 5 things is actually necessary for the offence of theft (with other things). For example if i pick an item up off a shelf and at the time i pick it up my intention is to steal it then the offence of theft is complete. There is no legal requirement for anyone to leave the store for a theft to be made out. Leaving the store before being detained makes it easier to prove but it isn't a requirement.
SCONE is a well used training technique that the SIA put into use when being trained for you license, Every security company will use this as well. I can't mind read, I've been in the industry for 6 years, you can legally walk into a shop, place an item in your ruck sack for example and walk around the store with it you haven't committed a crime. Your example will only work when a person is quite obviously trying to conceal an item in how ever way that are trying, but then again it's not always that obvious. None of it!
Also only one of those 5 things is actually necessary for the offence of theft (with other things). For example if i pick an item up off a shelf and at the time i pick it up my intention is to steal it then the offence of theft is complete. There is no legal requirement for anyone to leave the store for a theft to be made out. Leaving the store before being detained makes it easier to prove but it isn't a requirement.
TNTom said:
SCONE is a well used training technique that the SIA put into use when being trained for you license, Every security company will use this as well. I can't mind read, I've been in the industry for 6 years, you can legally walk into a shop, place an item in your ruck sack for example and walk around the store with it you haven't committed a crime. Your example will only work when a person is quite obviously trying to conceal an item in how ever way that are trying, but then again it's not always that obvious.
That all depends on what your intention is - the offence of theft is complete when you dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with intent to permanently deprivei.e. you don't need to leave the store - it all depends what your intention is - but you have committed the crime
Try not to confuse "SIA techniques/ policy/ whatever" with law.
Red 4 said:
pork911 said:
And don't wrongly assume theory of itself has much practical application, especially for store security.
Theory ? Who's talking about theories ?
Red 4 said:
pork911 said:
You, since the definition of theft or any other offence is nothing but theory when you wish to discuss it in a vacuum
OK.All law is theory ....
If you say so Dude.
Red 4 said:
TNTom said:
SCONE is a well used training technique that the SIA put into use when being trained for you license, Every security company will use this as well. I can't mind read, I've been in the industry for 6 years, you can legally walk into a shop, place an item in your ruck sack for example and walk around the store with it you haven't committed a crime. Your example will only work when a person is quite obviously trying to conceal an item in how ever way that are trying, but then again it's not always that obvious.
That all depends on what your intention is - the offence of theft is complete when you dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with intent to permanently deprivei.e. you don't need to leave the store - it all depends what your intention is - but you have committed the crime
Try not to confuse "SIA techniques/ policy/ whatever" with law.
Red Devil said:
Indulge me. How do prove (beyond reasonable doubt, remember) such intention when the person is still in store and hasn't passed the check-out line? Your mind-reading powers must be truly amazing.
Erm ... questioning.All you have to prove is dishonesty, appropriation of property belonging to another and intent to permanently deprive.
The Theft Act doesn't mention people passing through a checkout, strangely enough.
Red 4 said:
Red Devil said:
Indulge me. How do prove (beyond reasonable doubt, remember) such intention when the person is still in store and hasn't passed the check-out line? Your mind-reading powers must be truly amazing.
Erm ... questioning.All you have to prove is dishonesty, appropriation of property belonging to another and intent to permanently deprive.
The Theft Act doesn't mention people passing through a checkout, strangely enough.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff