Detaining people + false accusations.

Penny Tration

Query on the laws and rights surrounding this. My two sisters, one a minor, were detained in a well known shop.

The security guard twice accused them of stealing, explicitly stating that they took x amount of items and only paid for y amount.

He searched both the minor and the adult, and refused to allow them to leave, blocking the doors.

They were accused in front of numerous people, and were really embarrassed.

The elder sister asked for a manager. He said there was nothing he could do.

The security guard refused to give his name. They did however, get names and phone numbers of witnesses, both of whom said they were embarrassed for my sisters!

Was the security guard legally allowed to search a minor's bag?

Obviously the fact that he out right accused them is a big issue.

What's the best way to go about dealing with this? Not wrt compo, with regards to getting an apology, as the manager refuses to deal with it.

Timberrrrrrrr

green_screen wrote: »

Query on the laws and rights surrounding this. My two sisters, one a minor, were detained in a well known shop.

The security guard twice accused them of stealing, explicitly stating that they took x amount of items and only paid for y amount.

He searched both the minor and the adult, and refused to allow them to leave, blocking the doors.

They were accused in front of numerous people, and were really embarrassed.

The elder sister asked for a manager. He said there was nothing he could do.

The security guard refused to give his name. They did however, get names and phone numbers of witnesses, both of whom said they were embarrassed for my sisters!

Was the security guard legally allowed to search a minor's bag?

Obviously the fact that he out right accused them is a big issue.

What's the best way to go about dealing with this? Not wrt compo, with regards to getting an apology, as the manager refuses to deal with it.

Was this by any chance a well known girls accessory shop? 2 neices of mine were held and accused f the same a couple years ago. No apology or anything, solicitor got involved and compensation was paid out.

Penny Tration

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Was this by any chance a well known girls accessory shop? 2 neices of mine were held and accused f the same a couple years ago. No apology or anything, solicitor got involved and compensation was paid out.

No, but I know which shop you're on about!

It's a well known german supermarket.

They were accused when leaving the till, of stealing plastic bags, which they produced a receipt for. Then as they left, he blocked the door and said they stole vodka, which again, the elder sister had paid for.

Timberrrrrrrr

green_screen wrote: »

No, but I know which shop you're on about!

It's a well known german supermarket.

They were accused when leaving the till, of stealing plastic bags, which they produced a receipt for. Then as they left, he blocked the door and said they stole vodka, which again, the elder sister had paid for.

Demand an apology in writing, no apology go.to.a solicitor.

Carawaystick

You could have a look at section 15 of the non-fatal offences against the person act

Mikros

In general a private security guard has no power to search anyone without consent. However unless you said no, your consent may have been implied if you handed over your bag for searching.

There have been many well publicised defamation cases where a person has been wrongly accused of shoplifting in a public manner like you describe. Not suggesting they are directly applicable here (no legal advice etc.) but it does happen.

How you deal with it depends on what you are looking for - an apology or something further - and how far you are willing to take it. Options range from a (written) letter to the store manager, then to the head office, then finding yourself a solicitor I'd imagine.

tricky D

There's a principle for shop security personnel to follow: SCONE; selection, concealment, non-payment and egress need to be observed. Without those factors being satisfied, the shop is not in a good position. It appears from the account that they have been multiple failures and further action might well be available - defamation as well as possible false imprisonment referred to by Carawaystick^.

Tzardine

tricky D wrote: »

There's a principle for shop security personnel to follow: SCONE; selection, concealment, non-payment and egress need to be observed. Without those factors being satisfied, the shop is not in a good position. It appears from the account that they have been multiple failures and further action might well be available - defamation as well as possible false imprisonment referred to by Carawaystick^.

100% correct.

Was the security officer in plain clothes. I.E a store detective ?These German supermarkets employ the services of a contractor to do this for them.

You best bet is to get onto the security company directly and kick up a fuss.

The shop also has a vicarious liability however so they can not was their hands with it. You should also get in touch with them.

Depends on what outcome you want here to be honest. It is common for the security company to issue an apology / small token compensation pretty quickly. Anything more and you will have to consult a solicitor.

Penny Tration

Tzardine wrote: »

100% correct.

Was the security officer in plain clothes. I.E a store detective ?These German supermarkets employ the services of a contractor to do this for them.

You best bet is to get onto the security company directly and kick up a fuss.

The shop also has a vicarious liability however so they can not was their hands with it. You should also get in touch with them.

Depends on what outcome you want here to be honest. It is common for the security company to issue an apology / small token compensation pretty quickly. Anything more and you will have to consult a solicitor.

Thanks for your post, and thanks everyone for your posts!

The security guard was in his security uniform.

They're not looking for compensation. They want an apology. The adult sister works in a shop directly across the road, was in her work uniform, and is worried this will give her a bad reputation in work.

If they aren't forthcoming with an apology, a solicitor will be contacted.

Tzardine

green_screen wrote: »

Thanks for your post, and thanks everyone for your posts!

The security guard was in his security uniform.

They're not looking for compensation. They want an apology. The adult sister works in a shop directly across the road, was in her work uniform, and is worried this will give her a bad reputation in work.

If they aren't forthcoming with an apology, a solicitor will be contacted.

In that case you should contact the security company this officer works for. You should receive an apology without any problems.

I know the company that these officers work for and they are generally good for dealing with this. It actually happens quite commonly within this industry.

Penny Tration

Tzardine wrote: »

In that case you should contact the security company this officer works for. You should receive an apology without any problems.

I know the company that these officers work for and they are generally good for dealing with this. It actually happens quite commonly within this industry.

I know the company they guy works for myself, because all the security where I work are from the same crowd. I'll get their number for my sister tomorrow and I'll let my mam deal with them with regards to the minor sister.

Thanks again

Little CuChulainn

Security guards have an obligation to display ID.

They have no power to search.

They have no power to detain unless handing someone over to the Gardaí after a crime has been committed.

If it happened as you describe the security guard has no business being a security guard and the manager is an idiot. In your sisters position I would make a complaint to the Gardaí and the PSA in elation to the security guard. I would also make a complaint to the organisation about the behaviour of both the security guard and manager. There is also the option of consulting a solicitor if they wish to go down the road of a civil suit for compensation.

Zambia

I would just go to a solicitor . Security firm has either not trained this bloke or simply ignored his un suitability for the role.

Pat Mustard

green_screen wrote: »

My two sisters, one a minor, were detained in a well known shop.

The security guard twice accused them of stealing, explicitly stating that they took x amount of items and only paid for y amount.

He searched both the minor and the adult, and refused to allow them to leave, blocking the doors.

They were accused in front of numerous people, and were really embarrassed.

In this thread, it was suggested that your sister should ask for an apology. However, I don't think that your sister should say a single thing more to these people before speaking to a solicitor and asking about her rights regarding defamation and false imprisonment, etc.

See s.24 of the Defamation Act 2009, and the effect that an apology may have in respect of mitigation of damages.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2009/en/act/pub/0031/sec0024.html#sec24

Mitigation of damages means that a lesser amount of damages is payable by the wrongdoer.

conorh91

Much of the law is set out here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057292880

A security guard has no more right of arrest than an ordinary member of the public who believes a person may have committed an arrestable offence.

An ordinary person who arrests another, where that other person has not committed an arrestable offence, is liable to be sued.

Where someone is, in law, wrongfully arrested of having shoplifted, the member of the public undertaking the arrest will have no available defense.

Matters like this should be taken seriously, and legal advice sought.

Penny Tration

Thanks everyone for your advice and for the links!

My mam ended up speaking to our solicitor last night on the phone. They need to send him an email of everything that happened (which is fine because I made both sisters write out accounts of what happened as soon as they got home), and he'll take a look and call them in for a chat. He also mentioned a similar case which is ongoing, and told them to google it and have a look.

We also called the head office. They said they'd launch an investigation, but didn't seem bothered really, just kept questioning why my sister bought two bottles of vodka (the security guard had accused her of buying two but taking four).

tricky D

These people don't seem to be taking this matter anywhere near as seriously as they should. They should be falling over themselves to apologise and retrain or fire the security guard. While they might be investigating, the continued questioning is a poor attitude. A quick Google has 3 similar cases resulting in settlements of 6k, 21k and 45k, so it's no trite matter. Unless they change their tune pretty sharpish, I'd say sue them.

Penny Tration

tricky D wrote: »

These people don't seem to be taking this matter anywhere near as seriously as they should. They should be falling over themselves to apologise and retrain or fire the security guard. While they might be investigating, the continued questioning is a poor attitude. A quick Google has 3 similar cases resulting in settlements of 6k, 21k and 45k, so it's no trite matter. Unless they change their tune pretty sharpish, I'd say sue them.

My mum asked for my sister (the minor) to be sent a written apology, and it was refused, the lady was too busy trying to question the story of what happened.

From what I can gather, as it's not my decision to make, my adult sister and mum are giving it 5 working days for an apology and resolution. If that doesn't happen, they'll be taking a case.

Little CuChulainn

green_screen wrote: »

My mum asked for my sister (the minor) to be sent a written apology, and it was refused, the lady was too busy trying to question the story of what happened.

From what I can gather, as it's not my decision to make, my adult sister and mum are giving it 5 working days for an apology and resolution. If that doesn't happen, they'll be taking a case.

Their staff are not allowed sell alcohol to someone if they are accompanied by a minor. That's why they are likely making a big deal of that issue. Or they are trying to imply your sister was supplying alcohol to her underage sister.

Tzardine

tricky D wrote: »

These people don't seem to be taking this matter anywhere near as seriously as they should. They should be falling over themselves to apologise and retrain or fire the security guard. While they might be investigating, the continued questioning is a poor attitude. A quick Google has 3 similar cases resulting in settlements of 6k, 21k and 45k, so it's no trite matter. Unless they change their tune pretty sharpish, I'd say sue them.

The company was probably not aware of the incident until the person contacted them. It is most likely that the security officer said nothing to his company.

I suspect that once they check into it an apology will come quickly. It is natural that they would question the person making the complaint. They need to figure out what happened.

You can't expect to call them out of the Blue and expect they will just pull out the cheque book.

Do not be too focused on the settlement amounts you have quoted either. Each case is different and even though this one was of course distressing for the OP and persons involved it sounds relatively minor compared to some of the others I have seen.

I have dealt with a number of these situations so I speak from experience.

Penny Tration

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Their staff are not allowed sell alcohol to someone if they are accompanied by a minor. That's why they are likely making a big deal of that issue. Or they are trying to imply your sister was supplying alcohol to her underage sister.

I know they're not allowed, but they did, and didn't ask the adult sister for ID. She wasn't buying alcohol for the kid sister (my kid sister hates alcohol, smart girl!), but even if she were, they can't really blame my sisters for their staff'siinadequacy, can they? Especially since they were accused of theft, not of procuring alcohol for a minor.

Bepolite

I love it when people are so hell bent on having their say that they jeopadise their potential case.

OP stop talking to people and let your solicitor handle it. If you don't want to go legal ask for an apology from their head office. It will have little to no effect on their future policies, where as a judgement will.

Penny Tration

Bepolite wrote: »

I love it when people are so hell bent on having their say that they jeopadise their potential case.

OP stop talking to people and let your solicitor handle it. If you don't want to go legal ask for an apology from their head office. It will have little to no effect on their future policies, where as a judgement will.

It's not my case, I'm just posting as my mum asked me to.

They've asked for an apology, they don't care about taking a case or compensation or anything like that, unless the apology is not forthcoming.

Thanks.

Tzardine

Bepolite wrote: »

I love it when people are so hell bent on having their say that they jeopadise their potential case.

OP stop talking to people and let your solicitor handle it. If you don't want to go legal ask for an apology from their head office. It will have little to no effect on their future policies, where as a judgement will.

Good advice.

It is worth mentioning though that the shop themselves will not care and will fob you off.

The security guard will be from a contractor company. As soon as a solicitors letter is received by the shop they will get the security company to indemnify.

You need to go straight to the security company.

Pro Hoc Vice

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Their staff are not allowed sell alcohol to someone if they are accompanied by a minor. That's why they are likely making a big deal of that issue. Or they are trying to imply your sister was supplying alcohol to her underage sister.

There is no law saying you can not sell to an adult in the company of a minor. But a store is obliged to refuse to sell to an adult if they believe that that adult is buying on behalf of a minor.

Little CuChulainn

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

There is no law saying you can not sell to an adult in the company of a minor. But a store is obliged to refuse to sell to an adult if they believe that that adult is buying on behalf of a minor.

I never suggested there was a law. It's company policy.

Big Nasty

Can't see them apologising as the apology itself would be an admition of guilt.

They'd be better off taking their chances in court tbh.

Tzardine

Big Nasty wrote: »

Can't see them apologising as the apology itself would be an admition of guilt.

They'd be better off taking their chances in court tbh.

What usually happens is that you get a written apology and some small token compensation ( vouchers for shopping centre etc ).

In return they will ask you to sign off to say the matter is closed.

They don't want to go to court and get a judgement. It affects their insurance.

Paz-CCFC

Big Nasty wrote: »

Can't see them apologising as the apology itself would be an admition of guilt.

They'd be better off taking their chances in court tbh.

It wouldn't be an admission of guilt. At least to a defamation claim, anyway. Section 24(3) of the Defamation Act 2009. Any apology would likely be carefully phrased so as not to admit guilty, anyway - eg, "we apologise for any inconvenience caused" rather than "we apologise for falsely imprisoning and defaming you".

Pro Hoc Vice

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

It wouldn't be an admission of guilt. At least to a defamation claim, anyway. Section 24(3) of the Defamation Act 2009. Any apology would likely be carefully phrased so as not to admit guilty, anyway - eg, "we apologise for any inconvenience caused" rather than "we apologise for falsely imprisoning and defaming you".

It can be an open and frank apology, as the apology can not be used in court to prove liability. So if a defendant is going to give an apology then best to make it a good one.

Section 24 (4) Evidence of an apology made by or on behalf of a person in respect of a statement to which the action relates is not admissible in any civil proceedings as evidence of liability of the defendant.

Steve

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

It can be an open and frank apology, as the apology can not be used in court to prove liability. So if a defendant is going to give an apology then best to make it a good one.

Section 24 (4) Evidence of an apology made by or on behalf of a person in respect of a statement to which the action relates is not admissible in any civil proceedings as evidence of liability of the defendant.

That's very interesting.

How would that hold up in a criminal prosecution? Or if, for instance, a civil hearing leading to a criminal one - would the same apology be admissible / considerable?

Pro Hoc Vice

Steve wrote: »

That's very interesting.

How would that hold up in a criminal prosecution? Or if, for instance, a civil hearing leading to a criminal one - would the same apology be admissible / considerable?

My reading of the act yes it can be used in criminal prosecution but not sure if the value of it as it would usually be the company sending the letter about an event not witnessed.

Bepolite

Steve wrote: »

That's very interesting.

How would that hold up in a criminal prosecution? Or if, for instance, a civil hearing leading to a criminal one - would the same apology be admissible / considerable?

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

My reading of the act yes it can be used in criminal prosecution but not sure if the value of it as it would usually be the company sending the letter about an event not witnessed.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the apology couldn't be used as an admission of liability in respect of the defamation case but could be used as such in a civil case for false imprisonment.

A civil case for defamation is not going to lead to a criminal case obviously.

Steve

Bepolite wrote: »

A civil case for defamation is not going to lead to a criminal case obviously.

Point is, defamation is a civil action and testimony may be exempt under defamation law - if there's evidence given in court given of a criminal act (kidnapping / false imprisonment) what happens then?

Bepolite

Steve wrote: »

Point is, defamation is a civil action and testimony may be exempt under defamation law - if there's evidence given in court given of a criminal act (kidnapping / false imprisonment) what happens then?

I don't understand what you're asking. If you're asking would an apology be excluded from a criminal case then I would say it wouldn't. That said the standard of proof required in a criminal case is much higher and I suspect the apology would receive greater scrutiny.

What I find a bit odd is Section 24(4) use of the term any civil proceedings. I assume that means under the Defamation Act. I can't imagine in a civil proceeding under a number of heads the fact that one of them is defamation renders the evidence moot under all the others.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Gatling

I'd like to see what was on cctv first and foremost .
I'm sure there's more to this than the info we have so far

JillyQ

Fred Swanson wrote: »

If the security person was not exhibiting a PSA photo licence card, the PSA will slap a fine on the guard and the company concerned.

If they are showing a badge you can note down the number and get his name from the PSA website.

They can also fine the retailer as well

Penny Tration

Gatling wrote: »

I'd like to see what was on cctv first and foremost .
I'm sure there's more to this than the info we have so far

I doubt my sisters are lying, but there could be for all I know.

Gatling

green_screen wrote: »

I doubt my sisters are lying, but there could be for all I know.

What I get is 3rd/ 4th party info .

I come from the industry itself so I never base an opinion on what happened unless I either see it with my own eyes or on cctv .
You could be telling you believe Is the truth or a mix of what a sister said to your mam who said to you .
I seen it hundreds of times total innocence until a video is watched then you go oh ok.

Op did you edit a post re bottles of vodka

Pat Mustard

I think that if an apology was made in respect of the false imprisonment aspect, it should be admissable as confession evidence in a criminal prosecution. .

Penny Tration

No, I didn't edit my post?

Gatling

green_screen wrote: »

No, I didn't edit my post?

Thought I read your sister was accused of paying for 1 bottle while apparently concealing others .

My apologies if i misread .

But as I was saying there are essentially 6 stories to what happened here .
What the Security officer seen and done ,
What sister A did or didnt do

What sister B seen and heard ( or was told to
say) not that I'm implying actually happened.

What the store manager was told or seen .

what Mam heard after everything happened earlier .

The Gardaí should have been called been honest and the manager should have dealt with a lot better as well .
Shop managers can be pretty clueless about these situations too which makes things a lot worse .
I've been in situations where mangers have accused a customer of theft then blame the S/O and then leave him or her out to dry when the crap hits the fan .

Personally I wouldn't have touched the situation unless I was 110% I never lost eye contact with the item/s been concealed pass by final point payment ie tills then egress .

anything less is completely incompetent and in this day and age with licensing and staff training it shouldn't happen .

Big Nasty

If in doubt, let them out

Penny Tration

Yeah, gatling. She was told she paid for one bottle and took two.

I think I've gotten the info I need from this thread.

Thanks for the posts everyone. Mods, this can be closed

Pat Mustard

Thread reopened by request.

nitpick man

Fred Swanson wrote: »

If the security person was not exhibiting a PSA photo licence card, the PSA will slap a fine on the guard and the company concerned.

If they are showing a badge you can note down the number and get his name from the PSA website.

interesting topic. can some one clarify on why a plain clothes guard does not need to wear an I.d. but yet they only show that I.d. when making a stop ?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Penny Tration

Thanks for re-opening.

As so many of you posted here, I wanted to update.


The store's head office investigated, checked cctv and reported the security guard to the security company.

The head office also sent a letter to my sister, and to my mam (for my younger sister), apologising (without prejudice, carefully worded,of course!), and enclosing a 20 euro voucher each.

The vouchers were sent back, as my sisters won't shop in that shop anymore.

The security company contacted my mum and they are investigating and will be meeting with the security guard tomorrow to discuss. They have also promised a letter of apology to the child sister.

So, the sisters got what they wanted - an apology. They don't care about money/compensation, they just wanted an apology and are feeling happier to have gotten it.

Thanks again for all of the helpful information and links.

Bepolite

One thing I will add is if a shop makes a mistake and apologises for it I'd be more likely to shop there again tbh.

Penny Tration

Bepolite wrote: »

One thing I will add is if a shop makes a mistake and apologises for it I'd be more likely to shop there again tbh.

I was in there shopping with the boyfriend last night :pac: my sisters don't want to, but that's their choice.

Happy with the outcome