Is it legal to ask your employee to pay for theft in a shop?

Irwigs4

Someone I work with served a man in a shop where he got €1000 on pre paid cards and didn't pay. Guards couldnt find him. The boss has asked the person who served him to pay the money out of their own pocket for 'their mistake'. Is this even legal?

Asking is perfectly legal.

martingriff

Irwigs4 wrote: »

Someone I work with served a man in a shop where he got €1000 on pre paid cards and didn't pay. Guards couldnt find him. The boss has asked the person who served him to pay the money out of their own pocket for 'their mistake'. Is this even legal?

How did the person get the pre paid cards. Did you collegue give them. How did they not pay then

bigpink

How didn’t they pay??

Irwigs4

Irwigs4 wrote: »

Someone I work with served a man in a shop where he got €1000 on pre paid cards and didn't pay. Guards couldnt find him. The boss has asked the person who served him to pay the money out of their own pocket for 'their mistake'. Is this even legal?

I'd be telling him to f*ck off. Surely he has insurance that covers him against theft?

Irwigs4

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Asking is perfectly legal.

But are they legaly obliged to pay?

Irwigs4

martingriff wrote: »

How did the person get the pre paid cards. Did you collegue give them. How did they not pay then

I don't think I can explain in detail how he did it or people will get ideas and start doing it. Basically he got those swirl cards you put money on and got away with 1000€ on three of them.

hullaballoo

Usually, with this kind of fraud/theft, the retailer bears the financial cost of the fraud for having inadequate security checks in place.

The liability of the employee who dealt with the fraudster will be contained in their contract of employment, which usually includes following training and in retail, specifically regarding security checks around payment.

It may be of note that any clause purporting to hold an employee liable for losses to the employer is of dubious lawfulness. But, then again, maybe it isn't.

Best contact a solicitor in this situation, imo.

ScouseMouse

If it is in the contract that the employee is responsible for losses due to negligence, then they are liable as the employee will have agreed to these terms when they signed the contract.

It would depend on the circumstances of how it happened.

Gaillimh1976

Was the person able to get away with it because of a flaw in company procedures, or because the employee did not follow company procedures ?

Irwigs4

ScouseMouse wrote: »

If it is in the contract that the employee is responsible for losses due to negligence, then they are liable as the employee will have agreed to these terms when they signed the contract.

It would depend on the circumstances of how it happened.

We were never asked to sign contracts when we started working. It has been my first and only job so whatever they do or say I take it on the chin but this just seemed wrong.

Irwigs4

Gaillimh1976 wrote: »

Was the person able to get away with it because of a flaw in company procedures, or because the employee did not follow company procedures ?

Difficult to say if it was company procedure as we dont have official procedures or training. Basically if you do something wrong, you are told afterwards and told how to do it right. That is how you learn at this shop, do it wrong then taught how to do it right.

Irwigs4

hullaballoo wrote: »

Usually, with this kind of fraud/theft, the retailer bears the financial cost of the fraud for having inadequate security checks in place.

The liability of the employee who dealt with the fraudster will be contained in their contract of employment, which usually includes following training and in retail, specifically regarding security checks around payment.

It may be of note that any clause purporting to hold an employee liable for losses to the employer is of dubious lawfulness. But, then again, maybe it isn't.

Best contact a solicitor in this situation, imo.

This is really helpful, thank you

bigpink

So they scanned the 3 cards and the customer grabbed them and ran?
Shop would have the card details and maybe an address

seamus

ScouseMouse wrote: »

If it is in the contract that the employee is responsible for losses due to negligence, then they are liable as the employee will have agreed to these terms when they signed the contract.

It would depend on the circumstances of how it happened.

Any such clause would still have to be reasonable, and include reasonable terms for repayment of lost sums. For example, there would have to be an upper limit on the sum that an employee can be liable for, and repayment terms would not be permitted to leave the employee suffering financial hardship.

In addition, the employer would have to prove that it was negligence on the employee's part and not a procedural or systems failure or theft/fraud by a customer.

Employers will often chance their arm with this kind of stuff, especially in small retail businesses, because their employees feel less empowered to know or stand up for their rights.

To answer the OP's question, the employer is perfectly entitled to ask, but they cannot insist on payment or unilaterally take it out of the employee's wages.

Kristopherus

Is/was ccctv in or outside the shop?

TallGlass

You know what I find funny about this question is the fact that the employer is expect the employee to foot the 1000€ bill, having done nothing wrong.

Yet the scammer, if caught and brought before the courts would never have to pay anywhere near that sum if caught and convicted. Having committed the act and done wrong.

Classic. Tell your employer to back the fúck off, if they do not, take it via the courts and wipe the floor with them.

Bayb12

Depends on your contract but even so Contact NERA

Irwigs4

bigpink wrote: »

So they scanned the 3 cards and the customer grabbed them and ran?
Shop would have the card details and maybe an address

No, I suppose I phrased the question wrong. It wasnt a grab and go theft. It was a guy who knew where the cameras were so knew to hide his face. It was assumed the transaction was valid when it happened. I mean the employee even called the manager over to confirm and they showed the employee what to do. The manager has already accepted blame and is giving the money back in installments. This employee thinks they have rights here and they are being infringed.

Irwigs4

TallGlass wrote: »

You know what I find funny about this question is the fact that the employer is expect the employee to foot the 1000€ bill, having done nothing wrong.

Yet the scammer, if caught and brought before the courts would never have to pay anywhere near that sum if caught and convicted. Having committed the act and done wrong.

Classic. Tell your employer to back the fúck off, if they do not, take it via the courts and wipe the floor with them.

Totally agree with you here. The owner is only concerned with recouping the money lost ASAP. This guy will probably never be caught. The guards said he did the same trick in other shops and they are looking for him.

Its probably not my place to tell them where to stick it, but I've decided that if the employee is definitely made to pay the money back, I will quit. It means they could then make the other employees pay if a drive off happens (I.e someone gets fuel and doesa runner) this happens frequently in the shop and I dont want money coming out of my pay cheque because I didnt want to throw myself infront of a car!

Irwigs4

Kristopherus wrote: »

Is/was ccctv in or outside the shop?

They have cctv but the guy hid his face from the cameras. Also apparently used fake plates on his car. Cctv is currently being used to blame the manager and employee for letting it happen. I think this is wrong.

Irwigs4

Bayb12 wrote: »

Depends on your contract but even so Contact NERA

Great advice, thank you! I will tell the employee.