78 year old grandmother wrongly accused of shoplifting

Orbion

repsol wrote: »

It means the next granny will not have to suffer at the hands of the morons working in that shop.The lady obviously lives close to this shop yet she will now feel afraid to go near that or possibly any other shop in the future.At her age it takes very little to frighten a lady.When the owner has to put his hand in his pocket he might invest in a bit of training for his staff.Do you think it is acceptable to accuse people in the wrong on a whim and get away with it? That is the thin end of the wedge and will lead to random searching if it goes unpunished.I don't see what bankers and politicians has to do with this matter.

So the old lady is scared, give her a wad of cash and she is not scared anymore. For the owner/manager, surely they would be embarressed in to action anyway. I just dont get why it needs court action other than someone being opportunistic. The bankers jibe was off topic and more to do with the cost of these actions to a bankrupt country, so ignore that.

jluv

I understand how the "sue for any little thing" mentality can be frustrating, however companies won't put the time/money into training their staff properly,or be cautious, so as not to hurt your feelings. It has to hurt their P&L.Only thing they fear..

Orbion

I dont think you can train common sense, which obviously the staff members involved lacked. For me I'd expect a grovelling apology from the manager and be told what steps were being taken to make sure its not repeated.

The legal route is basically saying a) I want those involved fired for revenge purposes b) I want money as its a recession and the law is a joke so I might as well 'milk' it. I can see why people are suggesting this, I just dont agree with it as a fair solution.

Thoie

If this had happened to any of my elderly relatives, and I felt they were distressed by it, I'd make sure to make them a cup of tea and be available to listen to them at any time if they wanted to talk about it.

repsol

The only people who don't get upset when accused of theft are thieves.The shop wanted the "Hard Option" when they thought the old lady was in the wrong,they showed this by calling the cops.They should not expect the "Soft Option" now the shoe is on the other foot.They either operate within the law or they do not.They cannot choose which bits of the law they like and disregard the rest.They thought they were the dog,see how they like being the lamp post!

foggy_lad

I would be very concerned about two staff who are strangers and could be absolute scumbags following any elderly person to find out where they live!

alphabeat

falsely accused of stealing - SUE

and if gets the staff fired so be it .

Orbion

Maybe the OP should have added a poll....

WildCardDoW

Everyone seems to be concentrating on age in this matter, but should that be taken into consideration? I mean, if I was 21 and accused of this and complained on here, what would the response be?

The staff made a mistake, certainly the store should be contacted but all this bull about suing is over the top. A personal apology was offered by staff, I think a fair option from this stage would be an apology from the store owner, if they wish to offer some other compensation, that's their choice.

I don't see the grounds on which your grandmother could sue, the accusation was made in private , so no defamation of character took place (I doubt saying two guards walking to your house counts as defamation of character , even accompanied by two members of a shop as the issue could pertain to anything, not a defamation.).

repsol

Any solicitor will see this as an easy win for the lady in question.I expect the shop owners solicitor would advise him to make an offer to save on costs fighting a losing battle.And I think age is unimportant legally,but it is a factor in making the shop staff actions look even worse if made public.

elfy4eva

WildCardDoW wrote: »

Everyone seems to be concentrating on age in this matter, but should that be taken into consideration? I mean, if I was 21 and accused of this and complained on here, what would the response be?

I think age matters, you and I may be able to
take an incident like this in our stride. But elderly
people are much more vulnerable and much more
succeptable to fear and intimidation.

P. Breathnach

repsol wrote: »

Any solicitor will see this as an easy win for the lady in question....

Really? What would the claim be?

repsol

elfy4eva wrote: »

I think age matters, you and I may be able to
take an incident like this in our stride. But elderly
people are much more vulnerable and much more
succeptable to fear and intimidation.

I agree with your points.Unfortunately some people think profit margins and keeping some moron in a job they are clearly unsuited to are more important than protecting innocent people from false accusations.Good character is like virginity.You only have one and once it is taken it is gone forever

Procrastastudy

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Really? What would the claim be?

Clear case of defamation with a possible defence, however. These sorts of claims are pretty common in retail, going rate is 5 - 10K in settlement.

repsol

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Really? What would the claim be?

I would say defamation of character and possibly personal injury if the incident has caused undue stress or upset. Dunnes Stores in the Ilac recently paid 15,000 to a schoolgirl they falsely accused of theft.

Orbion

I think some people actually believe these actions are some sort of moral crusade, its laughable. The fact is its all about the money that you and your solicitor can make and revenge. I am sure after seeking legal aid, the granny will remember having nightmares/depression/fear of leaving home after the incident. You'll never see a solicitor complaining about a recession....

Procrastastudy

Orbion wrote: »

I think some people actually believe these actions are some sort of moral crusade, its laughable. The fact is its all about the money that you and your solicitor can make and revenge. I am sure after seeking legal aid, the granny will remember having nightmares/depression/fear of leaving home after the incident. You'll never see a solicitor complaining about a recession....

No legal aid available for defamation. Many many solicitors have gone out of business due to the recession. Most of the work in Ireland was conveyancing. We don't have the claim culture many think we do, unfortunately, for future lawyers!

flutered

ResearchWill wrote: »

There may very well be a case for defamation, while the shop could raise the defence of qualified privilege same may or may not succeed.

her good name has been questioned, to have got the gardai with store dectives to arrive at her home is bounding on the redecellous, one thing bothers me how did the keystones arrive at her house so fast, has she been known to the store, or perhaps she drove there, then they got her reg, back in the day i worked for a well known chain as a store dective, the law then was one had to stop and search the customers trolly before or as they left the store, otherwise that was the end of the story, one had to arrest the customer and bring them inside, then ring the keystones, there was no way that the cops would take me to a persons home and accuse them of stealing, something here needs perfume. edit to say the following, back then some one wrongly accused of shoplifting usually got 15k from the courts, or on the steps of the court.

repsol

Orbion wrote: »

I think some people actually believe these actions are some sort of moral crusade, its laughable. The fact is its all about the money that you and your solicitor can make and revenge. I am sure after seeking legal aid, the granny will remember having nightmares/depression/fear of leaving home after the incident. You'll never see a solicitor complaining about a recession....

So as well as the shop saying she is a thief,you are now implying she may turn her hand to fraud as well by inventing symptoms.This Granny is a one woman crime wave.We can go on and on about this all day.What you need to ask yourself is ,If I was the shop owner would I be worried ? My answer is yes I would.

LeftBlank

I was falsley accused of shoplifting many years ago in a much more public way (prevented from leaving shopping centre and publicly marched back to the shop). I spoke to a solicitor about it as I was fairly shook up and without much effort (and a lot of waiting) I got a decent payout. At the end of the day, the shop wronged me in a potentially bad way and the only language they understand is money.

My understanding is that claims of these nature are usually paid out of an insurance fund i.e. the shop is indemnified against false shoplifting by an insurance policy.

I would recommend speaking to a solicitor if you want to take it further.

Orbion

repsol wrote: »

So as well as the shop saying she is a thief,you are now implying she may turn her hand to fraud as well by inventing symptoms.This Granny is a one woman crime wave.We can go on and on about this all day.What you need to ask yourself is ,If I was the shop owner would I be worried ? My answer is yes I would.

Going by most of the posters on this thread, she should probably sue me too for defamation.

knotknowbody

To be honest if it was me I would let something like that go were it not for the following her home part, that is a bit concerning. Perhaps a strongly worded letter to both the store manager and the area manager if it's part of a chain would be appropriate.

Outline the facts of what occurred, enclose a copy of the receipt and request an official apology from the store, a gesture of goodwill such as some compensation or a charitable donation, a explanation of their procedure for such scenarios and how this incident will alter it and finally some disciplinary action against the staff. I wouldn't want them dismissed, as I think it was most likely an honest mistake on their part, just disciplined so it won't happen again.

If the above was forthcoming I would be happy enough, however if not you can always take it further. It's obviously a fairly local shop to her, if she walked home from it, you don't want to be needlessly souring relations with a store you may use regularly to buy cheap everyday items.

Orbion

LeftBlank wrote: »

I was falsley accused of shoplifting many years ago in a much more public way (prevented from leaving shopping centre and publicly marched back to the shop). I spoke to a solicitor about it as I was fairly shook up and without much effort (and a lot of waiting) I got a decent payout. At the end of the day, the shop wronged me in a potentially bad way and the only language they understand is money.

My understanding is that claims of these nature are usually paid out of an insurance fund i.e. the shop is indemnified against false shoplifting by an insurance policy.

I would recommend speaking to a solicitor if you want to take it further.

And were you less shook up after the decent pay out? :rolleyes:

LeftBlank

Orbion wrote: »

And were you less shook up after the decent pay out? :rolleyes:

You are missing the point. It's not that the money is going to make things all better (just like way people who sue after hospital negligence are not cured after they get a payout) but it does help with the feeling of vindication and like I said it's the only language that shops understand. An apology costs nothing.

repsol

Orbion wrote: »

And were you less shook up after the decent pay out? :rolleyes:

If I broke a red light and ran you over breaking your legs, any compensation would not take away your pain. So you would not want any payment and let me off,is that your position?

P. Breathnach

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Clear case of defamation with a possible defence, however. ...

I'd see a strong defence, which why I questioned repsol's suggestion of an easy win.

P. Breathnach

LeftBlank wrote: »

I was falsley accused of shoplifting many years ago in a much more public way (prevented from leaving shopping centre and publicly marched back to the shop). ...

And, as you imply, it was the public way in which it was done that made the difference.

Orbion

repsol wrote: »

If I broke a red light and ran you over breaking your legs, any compensation would not take away your pain. So you would not want any payment and let me off,is that your position?

The obvious difference in that case is that I wouldnt be able to work and would actually lose earnings and have medical expenses ie I would need compensation for actual money loss. Where is the financial loss here? Has the granny actually lost anything you could put a price on?

borderlinemeath

repsol wrote: »

If I broke a red light and ran you over breaking your legs, any compensation would not take away your pain. So you would not want any payment and let me off,is that your position?

Completely different situation, you would be far more entitled to compensation for medical bills, loss of earnings due to incapacity etc. Granny is still going to be pushing her trolley around the shops irrespective of a payout or not.

Duggys Housemate

Being accused of being a shoplifter is clearly defamatory. You can sue for defamation. It does depend on whether the other party is malicious or not though.