78 year old grandmother wrongly accused of shoplifting

Branoic

My grandmother has one of those little canvas carts on two wheels that you always see old ladies wheeling about with them.

Doing her shopping she'd often put items in the cart then take them out to pay at the tills. She was in a euro shop today in the local shopping centre, and was buying two crappy microwave dish thingies.

She paid for the items and then walked home. After she'd been home a few minutes a Garda squad car pulled up with two gardai and two shop assistants who accused her of stealing their sh1te 2euro dishes. Luckily she still had her receipt with the dishes in her bag. It looks like some shop assistant saw her putting the dishes in her little cart, but then didn't see her paying for them at the checkout and called the guards!

The assistants apologised at the house and the gardai said their actions were out of order, but to be honest that's not good enough - my grandmother was left very upset by the whole thing. It was way OTT - why they shop assistants couldnt just approach her in the store i do not know - did they feel they needed back up?? She's 78 ffs.

Anyway, I just wanted to check if there was any course of action open to her at this point or what her rights would be here?

im invisible

coures of action: do nothing
she has the right to accept the appology

Procrastastudy

Branoic wrote: »

My grandmother has one of those little canvas carts on two wheels that you always see old ladies wheeling about with them.

Doing her shopping she'd often put items in the cart then take them out to pay at the tills. She was in a euro shop today in the local shopping centre, and was buying two crappy microwave dish thingies.

She paid for the items and then walked home. After she'd been home a few minutes a Garda squad car pulled up with two gardai and two shop assistants who accused her of stealing their sh1te 2euro dishes. Luckily she still had her receipt with the dishes in her bag. It looks like some shop assistant saw her putting the dishes in her little cart, but then didn't see her paying for them at the checkout and called the guards!

The assistants apologised at the house and the gardai said their actions were out of order, but to be honest that's not good enough - my grandmother was left very upset by the whole thing. It was way OTT - why they shop assistants couldnt just approach her in the store i do not know - did they feel they needed back up?? She's 78 ffs.

Anyway, I just wanted to check if there was any course of action open to her at this point or what her rights would be here?

They would call the guards as it was probably a shop policy to avoid various legal avenues being used against them and also on advice of their insurance company.

If they have only informed the Gardai it's likely they can relay on the defence of qualified privilege to any defamation action your granny might take. Consult a solicitor if you're in anyway serious about progressing this.

jordainius

Allegation was made, and it was proven to be untrue. The assistants apologised and got a telling off from the gardai. This seems about right to me so I ask one question; What more do you want? The two assistants who made the complaint probably rightfully ended up feeling like idiots.

Write a letter to or call in to see the manager of the store, make a complaint based on the poor communication between staff in that shop. A quick word by the floor staff concerned with the till workers who served your grandmother would have cleared this up very quickly. Wasting gardai time and causing undue distress to an eldery lady is unacceptable.

Wait until you've calmed down (not that I'm suggesting you're not calm; I haven't a clue But I'd understand if you're rather ticked off!) because otherwise they'll just dissmiss you as an over emotive pest out for blood!

And lastly, sorry that happened your grandmother, what a ****ty thing for anyone to go through. I know people may say they were just doing their job but proper communication between the employees in the store would have nipped this in the bud very quickly.

Procrastastudy

jordainius wrote: »

And lastly, sorry that happened your grandmother, what a ****ty thing for anyone to go through. I know people may say they were just doing their job but proper communication between the employees in the store would have nipped this in the bud very quickly.

How so? someone saw someone nicking and called the guards. Before anyone tries to tell me pensioners don't steal - I can assure I know better.

jordainius

Procrastastudy wrote: »

How so? someone saw someone nicking and called the guards. Before anyone tries to tell me pensioners don't steal - I can assure I know better.

How can someone see someone nicking something when nobody actually nicked anything? Being wrongly accused of something is a ****ty thing for anyone to go through, particularly when gardai become involved.

Branoic

Procrastastudy wrote: »

How so? someone saw someone nicking and called the guards. Before anyone tries to tell me pensioners don't steal - I can assure I know better.

they did?

P_1

Branoic wrote: »

they did?

They didn't rather than using a basket the grandmother used her cart/trolley to carry the goods around the shop before paying for them.

keithclancy

Honestly you'd only have a case if they held her in the store. (False imprisonment)

But this is the reason they ask you to use baskets in the store.

3ndahalfof6

At least the cops were doing their job, they got info about something which was illegal, and they acted accordingly, while not intercepting some bad sorts on the way, HEY I get paid to work not to disect, what is easier, to climb up or down.

ResearchWill

keithclancy wrote: »

Honestly you'd only have a case if they held her in the store. (False imprisonment)

But this is the reason they ask you to use baskets in the store.

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.

Procrastastudy

jordainius wrote: »

How can someone see someone nicking something when nobody actually nicked anything? Being wrongly accused of something is a ****ty thing for anyone to go through, particularly when gardai become involved.

Branoic wrote: »

they did?

P_1 wrote: »

They didn't rather than using a basket the grandmother used her cart/trolley to carry the goods around the shop before paying for them.

I should have inserted the word *thought* but that still doesn't answer the question of how better staff communication solves the issue.

Bit daft all round in all honesty. If you're not happy with the apology see a solicitor, people have cashed in on less when in comes to shops I can assure you.

3ndahalfof6

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.

So in not succeeding, which I think would be the end, granny 1 will win, in this instance.

P_1

Procrastastudy wrote: »

I should have inserted the word *thought* but that still doesn't answer the question of how better staff communication solves the issue.

Bit daft all round in all honesty. If you're not happy with the apology see a solicitor, people have cashed in on less when in comes to shops I can assure you.

Yeah both parties fcuked up truth be told.

The granny should have used a basket and the staff should've made sure the items were paid for before calling the guards.

I can't see what satisfaction the granny would get from getting a few min wage retail staff the sack.

bmwguy

It happened to my grandmother a few years ago, she was older than your grandmother. It happened in a large supermarket in Maynooth ( that sounds like Desco!) where a security guard detained her wrongly. I wouldnt say she even knew the word shoplift!! It got settled out of court but was in the region of 10k, she was genuinely frightened and upset over it. Her progress was physically impeded by a heavy handed security man. Only claim I've ever heard of any family member making, so it was because she was genuinely wronged, we're not in the habit of it if people think that. Only look for compensation if you think its warranted though

elfy4eva

It is absolutely disgusting. Absolutely poor staff etiquette.

Anybody who's suffered through a false allegation of theft
will know how indignified it is. An apology does little to
rectify that.

And all over a pair of €2 dishes. Disgusting.

ResearchWill

P_1 wrote: »

Yeah both parties fcuked up truth be told.

The granny should have used a basket and the staff should've made sure the items were paid for before calling the guards.

I can't see what satisfaction the granny would get from getting a few min wage retail staff the sack.

Why would the shop staff get the sack, they made a mistake but I would guess they only followed procedure.

P_1

ResearchWill wrote: »

Why would the shop staff get the sack, they made a mistake but I would guess they only followed procedure.

Well the sack might be an overreaction but it would be the logical conclusion to the granny or their family taking legal action against the shop.

They apologised for their mistake, what more would she want?

jluv

Can I ask how did they know who your granny was and where she lives? Very strange also that the guards took 2 assistants with them to someones house over a few euro. The company also taking a big risk for a few euro..

ResearchWill

P_1 wrote: »

Well the sack might be an overreaction but it would be the logical conclusion to the granny or their family taking legal action against the shop.

They apologised for their mistake, what more would she want?

She may want to make sure it does not happen again, she may want the company to introduce better procedures. She may want the company to compensate her for the upset caused.

Calling the police for 2 €2 microwave dishes is a bit of an over reaction. Having a police car pull up to a 78 year old women and have them question her would cause severe upset, many old people could become very upset by the action of this company and this women is entitled to do anything she wishes to help set her right.

If the company fires the workers, they may well deserve that if they don't then they would have a claim for unfair dismissal.

P_1

ResearchWill wrote: »

She may want to make sure it does not happen again, she may want the company to introduce better procedures. She may want the company to compensate her for the upset caused.

Calling the police for 2 €2 microwave dishes is a bit of an over reaction. Having a police car pull up to a 78 year old women and have them question her would cause severe upset, many old people could become very upset by the action of this company and this women is entitled to do anything she wishes to help set her right.

If the company fires the workers, they may well deserve that if they don't then they would have a claim for unfair dismissal.

That's fair enough I suppose, waste of money and time for all concerned IMO though. if we sued for everybody's fcukups we'd all go fairly broke fairly quickly.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

jluv wrote: »

Can I ask how did they know who your granny was and where she lives? Very strange also that the guards took 2 assistants with them to someones house over a few euro. The company also taking a big risk for a few euro..

I wondered that too. OP??

ResearchWill

P_1 wrote: »

That's fair enough I suppose, waste of money and time for all concerned IMO though. if we sued for everybody's fcukups we'd all go fairly broke fairly quickly.

If we don't sue when people ****ups people would not be as careful as the law forces them to be.

If this lady thinks that court is the answer she has that right, she may decide not to she may. But the fact that people do sue can help put manners on people.

P_1

ResearchWill wrote: »

If we don't sue when people ****ups people would not be as careful as the law forces them to be.

If this lady thinks that court is the answer she has that right, she may decide not to she may. But the fact that people do sue can help put manners on people.

Yes but the granny also fcuked up by not using a basket in the shop.

I'm no legal eagle but I can see the case going like this:

Lawyer A - My client suffered emotional distress due to the store staff not following procedure.

Lawyer B - Your client brought this on themselves by not following my client's procedure.

Judge - Both arguments cancel each other out, case dismissed.

Lawyer A & Lawyer B - That will be x euro please.

Both parties - Well that was a monumental waste of time and money

Procrastastudy

P_1 wrote: »

Yes but the granny also fcuked up by not using a basket in the shop.

I'm no legal eagle but I can see the case going like this:

Lawyer A - My client suffered emotional distress due to the store staff not following procedure.

Lawyer B - Your client brought this on themselves by not following my client's procedure.

Judge - Both arguments cancel each other out, case dismissed.

Lawyer A & Lawyer B - That will be x euro please.

Both parties - Well that was a monumental waste of time and money

Your describing contributory negligence but this is a potential defamation case.

What actually happens in the jury retire - like the looks of the old dear - come back out and award €150,000 because that's the figure they've pulled out of their arses.

cookie1977

P_1 wrote: »

Yes but the granny also fcuked up by not using a basket in the shop.

I'm no legal eagle but I can see the case going like this:

Lawyer A - My client suffered emotional distress due to the store staff not following procedure.

Lawyer B - Your client brought this on themselves by not following my client's procedure.

Judge - Both arguments cancel each other out, case dismissed.

Lawyer A & Lawyer B - That will be x euro please.

Both parties - Well that was a monumental waste of time and money

There's no guarantee that a basket was the "outlined" procedure.

I use the bottom of my pram for carrying my goods when I'm shopping in superquinn as I've a double buggy with 2 kids occupying both seats so I've no way to handle a basket or trolley. I've never had an issue and there's no notices instructing me to use a basket or trolley in the store. Trolleys and baskets are provided for my convenience but I dont have to nor does the store require me to use them. I doubt many stores have such policies in writing.

ResearchWill

P_1 wrote: »

Yes but the granny also fcuked up by not using a basket in the shop.

I'm no legal eagle but I can see the case going like this:

Lawyer A - My client suffered emotional distress due to the store staff not following procedure.

Lawyer B - Your client brought this on themselves by not following my client's procedure.

Judge - Both arguments cancel each other out, case dismissed.

Lawyer A & Lawyer B - That will be x euro please.

Both parties - Well that was a monumental waste of time and money

Your so right I forgot about the law that says people should use the basket provided in the shop, ya I remember now the sign in all shops "only use our baskets"

You are also right when you said "I'm no legal eagle" the case would not go as you said.

hare

Seek legal advise where theres blame theres a claim your granny was treated badly.as for the JOBS WORTHS push it the whole way to have them sacked.

Pawwed Rig

P_1 wrote: »

Yes but the granny also fcuked up by not using a basket in the shop.

Who cares if she used a basket or not? I often walk around with my bag for life thing and use that instead of a basket and have never had an issue.
She didn't steal anything.
Fullstop
It doesn't matter if she used a trolley or her pockets you only steal if you leave the store without paying which she didn't. So she didn't f**k up the shop did.

It sounds like the shop assistants got a bit excited and jumped the gun a bit here. They must have checked with the cashier.
But they accused her without evidence instead. Bad PR and is worth a strong letter. Not sure what else I would want though. If she is genuinely distressed tell her to consult a solicitor.

Tipp man running

Breaking into a sweat reading this post, as most retail professionals probably are......sloppy work by the retail assistants but at least they are trying to do their jobs.

I've seen 4yrs to 90 year olds shop lift, everything from 25c up so value and age doesn't come into it...very surprised they went to the length of arriving at the lady's house with the guards...normal procedure would be to check the cameras and be 100% sure, there are always cameras over the till points..then call in the guards.

However, the lady in question was apologized to for the mistake, which it was, and the shop assistants were trying to do their job...and I'm sure they got no satisfaction in calling the guards. Shoplifting is rife at the moment and the feedback I get from the shop floors is its heartbreaking at the moment trying to protect stock. On top of that everyone is looking for a claim, or to engineer one.

This isn't a case of someone been held against their will which is a very serious thing to get wrong...The lady is well within her rights to complain to head office and explain she was embarrassed, I can sympathize with her and I'm sure staff will get a ticking off, but that's about it, I don't see a claim here...but I'm not a solicitor.

P_1

ResearchWill wrote: »

Your so right I forgot about the law that says people should use the basket provided in the shop, ya I remember now the sign in all shops "only use our baskets"

You are also right when you said "I'm no legal eagle" the case would not go as you said.

That's true, maybe I've been watching too many episodes of Suits

Most of those discount shops tend to have signs up that say 'Please use a basket'. Now would that count as a policy in a court, I don't know, I have never studied the theory of the Law.

looksee

I have seen lots of people using their bags to collect goods, presumably with the intention of paying, but I think it is very unfair to do that. Its almost challenging shop staff to stop you so you can get indignant.

I do sympathise with people trying to manage a shopping trolly (like the granny's) or a buggy and a basket, it is awkward, but if you put things in a bag, you really cannot get too uptight if a subsequent error is made.

Pawwed Rig

looksee wrote: »

, but if you put things in a bag, you really cannot get too uptight if a subsequent error is made.

Course you can. It is a serious accusation to make against someone so they should be sure of themselves before making it.
If you put stuff in a bag and walk out without paying then let them accuse. If you bring the back upto the counter and empty it in front of the cashier before paying then they have no right to accuse you of anything

Nolimits

I'm surprised how this was handled by the shop, feel terrible for the lady involved. I work in a large Supermarket, if I see someone that I think is shoplifting then I'll go to security and point them out on the cameras. The security guards will not take my word for it (even if I am friends with some of them ) they need to see the person take something off the shelves themselves, and then they follow it all the way through watching the transaction or lack there of. This is the correct way to do it and pretty much eliminates what happened to the lady in the OP

dubstarr

If she had used the basket then the problem wouldnt have arisen in the first place

athtrasna

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Your describing contributory negligence but this is a potential defamation case.

What actually happens in the jury retire - like the looks of the old dear - come back out and award €150,000 because that's the figure they've pulled out of their arses.

For defamation to occur there has to have been independent witnesses ie not the Grandmother, shop assistants or Gardai. The witnesses must have seen/heard the grandmother being accused of theft. If the gardai said they were investigating an alleged theft, no defamation has occurred.

ResearchWill

athtrasna wrote: »

For defamation to occur there has to have been independent witnesses ie not the Grandmother, shop assistants or Gardai. The witnesses must have seen/heard the grandmother being accused of theft. If the gardai said they were investigating an alleged theft, no defamation has occurred.

Informing AGS would be the publication, then the question is does qualified privialage apply to that communication.

Procrastastudy

athtrasna wrote: »

For defamation to occur there has to have been independent witnesses ie not the Grandmother, shop assistants or Gardai. The witnesses must have seen/heard the grandmother being accused of theft. If the gardai said they were investigating an alleged theft, no defamation has occurred.

If one of the shop assistants said something in earshot of anyone but the gardai they'd be wide open. If it was ONLY the gardai they have a possible defence only.

The only thing that stops a flood of defamation cases is the cost and risk. Defamation can happen very, very easily.

daithi1970

..what about Aldi or Lidl? they don't have baskets..i always go to either and put my purchases into a carrier bag and take them to the till for payment..no point in using a trolley for the few thing i get there...

daithi

Furious_George

If she so feels she can take a case for defamation of character (not sure if that is the correct technical term for it). I worked as a security guard for 4 years during college and we were well taught by our bosses that if you falsely accuse someone of stealing, then its going to cost the shop you work for a few grand. We were told no matter how sure we were that they had stolen an item, if you lost sight of the person for a millisecond after they put the item in a bag/under a coat, you let them go because they could put it back or pay for it when you cant see them and if you falsely accuse someone they are getting a payout.

I am 100% certain about this and especially in this case since the gardai are witness they cant deny it. Its up to your grandmother how to proceed but if she wants to follow up on it she should get onto the garda who called out and then consult a solicitor.

The behaviour of the shop assistants was completely wrong, in this country you cant accuse someone of stealing without repercussion, much worse bringing the gardai to their door to falsely accuse them. I'm sorry your grandmother was embarrassed in this manner.

Procrastastudy

Just to throw this out there - I actually feel differently.

No harm was done, people really need to develop a thicker skin. An apology was intimidate and the accusation was done fairly privately. I've heard of defamation cases taken for the bloody beepers going off in shops. There is a current high court case involving the theft of a plastic duck!

If the OP feels they want to take this to court - that's their right and I encourage them to exercise it. What they shouldn't do is mope around because someone was trying to protect their employers property from theft. We all pay for shoplifting in the price we pay for goods.

ZENER

These threads really are complete conjecture unless the OP continues to contribute. Accusations and assumptions leading to further accusations and assumption leading to over-reaction and more assumptions. . . . :rolleyes:

Procrastastudy hit the nail on the head, the lady appears not to have used the store provided baskets and not every OAP is as innocent as we'd like to believe.

Ken

the groutch

while I agree that the shop should have had greater evidence before making the accusation, they were fair in doing it in private to avoid public embarassment.
and customers (of all ages) don't exactly do retailers any favours using bags to carry stuff around before buying it. by removing items from view pre-purchase it makes it harder for security to seperate out the real shoplifters.

P_1

I remember from my days working in retail that when theft was suspected nothing was to be done until

1 - The tills were balanced
2 - The stock system was checked
3 - The CCTV footage was checked

Only then could any action be taken, of course at that stage it was generally too late to do anything useful

borderlinemeath

daithi1970 wrote: »

..what about Aldi or Lidl? they don't have baskets..i always go to either and put my purchases into a carrier bag and take them to the till for payment..no point in using a trolley for the few thing i get there...

daithi

And it's only since Aldi & Lidl started trading here with their pared back costs of no baskets that people have started using their own bags. TBH - they're the ONLY stores I shop in that I would use my own reusable shopping bag as the option to use a basket isn't available. I'm sure that there is a sign up in my local Dunnes asking that patrons use baskets provided rather than their own bags probably for the very reasons this thread is here.

Maybe it's because I worked in retail for so long that I am more aware of store security procedures, how staff and security view potential shoplifters, how brazen some shoplifters can be (and for the poster who uses the bottom of their buggy, that's one place I would always look if I thought somebody was robbing)

Unfortunately OP all grannies may not be as innocent and honest as yours and staff have to view them all as a risk, particularly if they potter around with those wheelie trolleys. Their major mistake was not checking the cameras (if they had them) or with the staff on the register or even to see was a sale logged for the items that they thought were taken.

Branoic

jluv wrote: »

Can I ask how did they know who your granny was and where she lives? Very strange also that the guards took 2 assistants with them to someones house over a few euro. The company also taking a big risk for a few euro..

One of my mates is a guard in a different station, but we checked with him earlier tonight to see if he could find out how exactly that happened. Turned out the two staff members actually followed her home (unknown to her), and then when she got home they called the guards. Mate said the guards would be required to turn up, but when they did and realised what was going on they were pretty embarressed by it and gave out to the staff.

elfy4eva

Branoic wrote: »

One of my mates is a guard in a different station, but we checked with him earlier tonight to see if he could find out how exactly that happened. Turned out the two staff members actually followed her home (unknown to her), and then when she got home they called the guards. Mate said the guards would be required to turn up, but when they did and realised what was going on they were pretty embarressed by it and gave out to the staff.

That is absolutely shocking who in their right mind
would be posessed to follow an old lady
with a wheelybag to her house. There's no way
in hell that's part of their store policy. It's basically stalking
I'd say the gards rightly eat the head offa them for that.

dudara

The staff assistants got admonished by the Gardaí for wasting their time, and rightly so.

I personally wouldn't be looking to take any legal action here. There has been no false imprisonment or defamation (IMO). But the fact that the assistants appear to have followed your grandmother home is a little unnerving. I'd be writing a registered letter to the shop manager and the head office of the shop chain (assuming it's a shop chain).

Furious_George

dudara wrote: »

The staff assistants got admonished by the Gardaí for wasting their time, and rightly so.

I personally wouldn't be looking to take any legal action here. There has been no false imprisonment or defamation (IMO). But the fact that the assistants appear to have followed your grandmother home is a little unnerving. I'd be writing a registered letter to the shop manager and the head office of the shop chain (assuming it's a shop chain).

Im not arguing as to whether a case should be taken because thats a personal decision but a case definitely exists for defamation. The shop assistants came to her house and accused her of stealing. Im guessing the lady has neighbours due to her living walking distance from the shop. She can claim all sorts of distress and shame if she so pleases and fear of leaving the house. Im not one for this claim culture but when someone is so clearly wronged by representatives of a company i would consider a claim.

Oh and if there is a sIgn in the shop saying to use baskets provided all this would mean is that when in the shop staff could politely provide the lady with one and point out store policy. Again this would have to be done politely and would be a rather stupid thing to do anyway as i cant imagine many 78 yr olds who would manage to lug a basket and a rolling carrier around while shopping. Suggestions that the lady was in the wrong are ridiculous but also lack empathy.

Teagwee

I cannot understand how the assistants managed to follow this lady out of the shop to her home after seeing her 'take' the items off the shelf and failed to follow her to the till inside the shop when she paid for them. How did they miss that?
The issue of holding onto the receipt for these items also bugs me - she could have lost it or disposed of it anywhere or at any time between leaving the store and (likely) being at home a while before the guards arrived. Then it would have involved a lot more hassle for both her and the assistants, especially if CC cameras were not available. They clearly could not swear that she didn't pay for the goods, since they obviously lost track of her at the till.
All in all, very sloppy work by the store assistants.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.