Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Aldi navan accused of shoplifting at the checkout

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Stoner
    Registered Users Posts: 10,952 ✭✭✭✭Stoner


    fritzelly wrote:
    Lidl are the exact same as this - eagle eyed you are not trying to rob something On continental Europe some shops don't even let you in with shopping/bags etc, you have to put it in a locker and collect it on the way out.


    That is the way it was in France when I was there years ago . I'd to wait outside with the other purchases


  • Options
    #93
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Dear God, you aren’t Mairéad Bailey’s solicitor by any chance?


    Snide comments - which I notice is even more prevalent in this forum than usual - don't change the facts. These cases happen all the time and are usually settled out of court.


  • Options
    #94
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,582 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Snide comments - which I notice is even more prevalent in this forum than usual - don't change the facts. These cases happen all the time and are usually settled out of court.

    The op wasn’t accused of theft, he/she was asked if the teller could look in her bag, if she whipped out a Dunne’s receipt, this would have been over in seconds. In the case linked, the person who did buy the item had the good sense to pass it off. The judge made no comment whatsoever about the illegality of the search.


  • Options
    #95
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    Dav010 wrote: »
    The op wasn’t accused of theft, he/she was asked if the teller could look in her bag, if she whipped out a Dunne’s receipt, this would have been over in seconds. In the case linked, the person who did buy the item had the good sense to pass it off. The judge made no comment whatsoever about the illegality of the search.

    There is no right to stop and search given to anyone other than the Gardaí. You're conflating a number of issues.

    Why were they asking to look in to her bag, in case Nessie was in there?
    Namespace12345 wrote: »
    Was in Aldi navan yesterday when I got to the checkout ,I was told by the cashier that he wanted to check my bag as he thought I had items in the bag that I wasn't paying for...

    That's an accusation of theft.

    The damage had already been done at the 'whipping out' stage anyway.


  • Options
    #96
    bladespin
    Registered Users Posts: 7,357 ✭✭✭bladespin


    Dav010 wrote: »
    The op wasn’t accused of theft, he/she was asked if the teller could look in her bag, if she whipped out a Dunne’s receipt, this would have been over in seconds. In the case linked, the person who did buy the item had the good sense to pass it off. The judge made no comment whatsoever about the illegality of the search.

    It certainly reads like they were - things in the bag that hadn't been paid for, but I think there's a level of preciousness happening everywhere lately.

    No need for the Dunnes receipt either, it would have been common sense but they're not under any onus to do this.

    IMO search would be illegal until a garda was present unless the OP consented.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Xterminator
    Registered Users Posts: 4,740 ✭✭✭Xterminator


    anyone can ask to look in your bag. Literally a stranger on the street can. And if you say yes, you have no comeback. It only gets interesting if you say no, i don't consent.

    now the words the cashier used are also important. If he accused you of stealing that would be actionable, but again, was he simply doing his job, or did he overreach, and accuse you?

    i would suggest you write to the store lay out the facts, and ask for an apology. If they made you feel uncomfortable, then you may well be due an apology.


  • Options
    #98
    metricspaces
    Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭metricspaces


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Sorry, my response was to metricspaces statement that Gardai have no automatic right to search you.

    You misread my post and are confusing the term "right to search" with "automatic right to search". Once again, for your reference:
    metricspaces wrote: »
    A Garda has no automatic right to search you. That is the law and no you do not have to prove it. If a Garda wants to search you they must tell you under what law otherwise you can refuse.

    For the most part the only automatic right a Garda has is to stop you and ask for your name and address. Anything further and they need reason to believe a law has been broken, or is about to be, at which point they could caution and arrest you. A Garda will not want to be done for wrongful arrest.


    Dav010 wrote: »
    The op wasn’t accused of theft,.

    You are incorrect again. The original poster was accused of shop lifting:
    "I was told by the cashier that he wanted to check my bag as he thought I had items in the bag that I wasn't paying for"


  • Options
    #99
    metricspaces
    Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭metricspaces


    Xterminator wrote: »
    i would suggest you write to the store lay out the facts, and ask for an apology. If they made you feel uncomfortable, then you may well be due an apology.

    I would concur. However, if you feel you were shamed in front of people who may know you, and thus damaged your right to your reputation and good name, then you may want to consider contacting a solicitor for advice.


  • Options
    #100
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    They can arrest of suspicion of theft. They would have to wait until the Gardaí arrive for a search to be carried out.

    No. They absolutely cannot 'arrest' anyone on a suspicion. They must know that an adjustable offence has occurred.
    Only Gardai can do it on a suspicion, and that must be a reasonable suspicion


  • Options
    #101
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    bubblypop wrote: »
    No. They absolutely cannot 'arrest' anyone on a suspicion. They must know that an adjustable offence has occurred.
    Only Gardai can do it on a suspicion, and that must be a reasonable suspicion


    Criminal Law Act, 1997 S4

    4 (1) Subject to subsections (4) and (5), any person may arrest without warrant anyone who is or whom he or she, with reasonable cause, suspects to be in the act of committing an arrestable offence.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    bladespin
    Registered Users Posts: 7,357 ✭✭✭bladespin


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Criminal Law Act, 1997 S4

    Subject to subsections (4) and (5), any person may arrest without warrant anyone who is or whom he or she, with reasonable cause, suspects to be in the act of committing an arrestable offence.

    You would need to know an arrestable offence has been committed. Ie something has been stolen - something has gone.


  • Options
    #103
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Criminal Law Act, 1997 S4

    Subject to subsections (4) and (5), any person may arrest without warrant anyone who is or whom he or she, with reasonable cause, suspects to be in the act of committing an arrestable offence.

    Yep, so if you see someone breaking into a house or car, for example, or maybe assaulting someone etc, then you can hold onto them until the Gardai arrive. Just guessing that someone may have something they didn't pay for is not reasonable suspicion.
    If the security know that a person has shoplifted, they need to stop them, after they have left the store or are just about to leave, having made no attempt to pay.


  • Options
    #104
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    bladespin wrote: »
    You would need to know an arrestable offence has been committed. Ie something has been stolen - something has gone.


    No you can suspect, on reasonable grounds, the person is in the act. The cashier in this case would have been (foolish) but within their rights to arrest the OP.


  • Options
    #105
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    No you can suspect the person is in the act. The cashier in this case would have been (foolish) but within their rights to arrest the OP.

    No, they would not. Where is their reasonable suspicion? Just thinking someone has something in the it's bag is not reasonable suspicion.
    Trust me, they are leaving themselves wide open for false arrest claims.


  • Options
    #106
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Yep, so if you see someone breaking into a house or car, for example, or maybe assaulting someone etc, then you can hold onto them until the Gardai arrive. Just guessing that someone may have something they didn't pay for is not reasonable suspicion.
    If the security know that a person has shoplifted, they need to stop them, after they have left the store or are just about to leave, having made no attempt to pay.


    Assault is not an arrestable offence. Just for clarity of anyone foolish enough to try this.


  • Options
    #107
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    Assault is not an arrestable offence. Just for clarity of anyone foolish enough to try this.

    Section 3 assault is an arrestable offence.


  • Options
    #108
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    bubblypop wrote: »
    No, they would not. Where is their reasonable suspicion? Just thinking someone has something in the it's bag is not reasonable suspicion.
    Trust me, they are leaving themselves wide open for false arrest claims.


    They're doing that anyway, but the statute is clear - it's suspicion, on reasonable grounds. Seeing something being concealed are reasonable grounds, but not in of itself a crime.


  • Options
    #109
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Section 3 assault is an arrestable offence.


    That's assault causing harm not assault which is section 2.


  • Options
    #110
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    That's assault causing harm not assault which is section 2.

    Assault causing harm is an assault. If you see someone assaulting somebody, then it's assault causing harm. 'Assault' to ordinary people on the street.
    Of course you can arrest anyone you see assaulting someone else!


  • Options
    #111
    metricspaces
    Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭metricspaces


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    No you can suspect, on reasonable grounds, the person is in the act. The cashier in this case would have been (foolish) but within their rights to arrest the OP.

    They would be absolutely foolish indeed. There would be a company policy on how to deal with such events, and a very limited number of people would have authority to sanction and carry out such an action.

    The consequence for the company of getting it wrong could be extremely costly both financially and in terms of reputation. So you can be sure that a shop assistant accusing a shopper of theft at the till in full view of the public, and following on to search them in full view of the public would not be company policy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Assault causing harm is an assault. If you see someone assaulting somebody, then it's assault causing harm. 'Assault' to ordinary people on the street.
    Of course you can arrest anyone you see assaulting someone else!


    No you can't. You can arrest if it rises to the standard of Section 3. An assault can be simply making someone think there is going to be an impact etc. You were the one who brought up false arrest claims which is a very real possibility - especially when you're sloppy about the offence committed.


  • Options
    #113
    bladespin
    Registered Users Posts: 7,357 ✭✭✭bladespin


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    No you can suspect, on reasonable grounds, the person is in the act. The cashier in this case would have been (foolish) but within their rights to arrest the OP.

    Cashier would be on very shaky ground there, detaining someone against their will without any real evidence of a crime being committed - madness, especially considering the cashier is not a qualified security person.


  • Options
    #114
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »
    No you can't. You can arrest if it rises to the standard of Section 3. An assault can be simply making someone think there is going to be an impact etc. You were the one who brought up false arrest claims which is a very real possibility - especially when you're sloppy about the offence committed.

    Every assault can be described as a section 3 assault causing harm, subsequent charges may be under section 2, but you can arrest for a section 3 assault.
    It's not a very high standard for section 3 assault.

    Anyway, kind of off topic I guess


  • Options
    #115
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    bladespin wrote: »
    Cashier would be on very shaky ground there, detaining someone against their will without any real evidence of a crime being committed - madness, especially considering the cashier is not a qualified security person.


    They're on extremely shaky ground anyway - even without an arrest it's defamation. I'm not countenancing such actions, merely pointing out people can put themselves in all sorts of stupid situations if they don't think things through.


  • Options
    #116
    Samuel T. Cogley
    Registered Users Posts: 10,684 ✭✭✭✭Samuel T. Cogley


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Every assault can be described as a section 3 assault causing harm, subsequent charges may be under section 2, but you can arrest for a section 3 assault.
    It's not a very high standard for section 3 assault.

    Anyway, kind of off topic I guess


    You're right we're off topic - one for Legal Discussions.


  • Options
    #117
    dmc17
    Registered Users Posts: 3,751 ✭✭✭dmc17


    I bring a reusable Aldi bag with me when shopping. Sometimes the cashier will ask if I brought the bag in with me. I say yes and proceed to pay for my groceries and go about my day. Maybe they are accusing me of trying to steal it? What kind of a payout am I looking at here?? :pac:


  • Options
    #118
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,582 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Honestly, some people just can’t help but over react to simple situations. This thread has gone from the op being asked to show what was in her grocery bag so that the teller could be sure she paid for everything, to a clear case of defamation, to a discussion about assault. Is it any wonder why people like Gary Cosgrove and Mairead Bailey take cases when ejits think like this.


  • Options
    #119
    metricspaces
    Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭metricspaces


    Dav010 wrote: »
    This thread has gone from the op being asked to show what was in her grocery bag so that the teller could be sure she paid for everything,

    At this stage you are just trolling.
    "I was told by the cashier that he wanted to check my bag as he thought I had items in the bag that I wasn't paying for"


  • Options
    #120
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,582 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    metricspaces wrote: »
    At this stage you are just trolling.

    When you hear hoofbeats, think of horses not zebras

    When you get asked to show your bag, think they are checking to see if you have paid, not that they are calling you a thief.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    metricspaces
    Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭metricspaces


    Dav010 wrote: »
    When you hear hoofbeats, think of horses not zebras

    When you get asked to show your bag, think they are checking to see if you have paid, not that they are calling you a thief.

    Well horse, rather than arguing with yourself about something you have made up, have another go at reading what the OP reported. You can bring a horse to water...
    "I was told by the cashier that he wanted to check my bag as he thought I had items in the bag that I wasn't paying for"


Advertisement