Can supermarket lock people in

Honorable

My friend was leaving a supermarket and went to go out the wrong door of a supermarket. There is an in door and an out door apparently.

He was not shoplifting had nothing as they didn't have what he wanted. There was a girl coming in so he thought he would rush out when she was coming in. Beeper beeped. The doors locked both the in and out. My friend and two others were locked in for maybe 30 secs and the approaching girl could not get in. A manager appeared quite a way across the shop and the doors opened.

Can they do that? If my friend was stealing, what about the other two girls being locked in as well. My friend has anxiety and didn't like it

mondeoman72

So he tried to exit from a one way entry security door?

jaffa20

It was 30 seconds...

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058296255/can-supermarket-lock-people-in

Clearly they can do it. Just make sure your friend uses the correct entry/exit next time and he shouldn't have any of his anxiety issues.

elperello

What shop was it ?

The short answer is no they can't lock people into their shop.

There could also be a problem with this in the event of a fire or other type of emergency.

phildub

It is technically false imprisonment but shopkeers do this on a daily basis and get away with and I'm not really sure of the precedent they use to justify it.

Honorable

How would they get planning permission with the possibility of locking people in. The girls who were locked in didn't try to go out the wrong way. I expect it is to avoid having a security person

Lewis_Benson

The doors would have defaulted to the closed position.

They aren't actually locked. Your friend could have just pulled them apart to open them, the manager didnt open them, the doors timed out and went back to the normal setting.

sydthebeat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590373#Comment_120590373

Planning permission!?

Lol

They weren't locked in.

If your friend truly suffers from anxiety then tell him next time not to run out the "entry" door.

You cannot account for all incidents of stupidity. Sometimes it's up to the stupid to "live and learn"

Honorable

They were locked in. And keep your insulting comments re anxiety stupidity to yourself. This is a legal discussion.

Honorable

From the point of view of the three people they were locked in. They were unable to leave.

Citrus_8

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590121#Comment_120590121

Sounds like those Aldi and Lidl front doors split separately for entry and exit. I noticed that Lidl is slightly changing the layout. I would only blame the person, not the shop, as it's clearly signed that there's on door for exit and another for entry. What is with this society to always think others are at fault, but not themselves...

Honorable

The girls were going out the right way and couldn't leave

sydthebeat

Are you "locked out" of an elevator while waiting for it arrive?

They weren't locked in. They were inconvenienced for 30 seconds.

I'm not surprised the OP created a new account to troll with this. Mr feg is alive and well.

super_furry

They weren't 'locked in'. They were waiting for the doors to be opened.

L1011

Your friend locked the other two people in, if you want to get down to ridiculous blaming.

Fr Tod Umptious

Why do people always post these types of questions on behalf of their friends?

phormium

Funny as I went out the Entrance door of a supermarket yesterday when someone else was coming in and I heard the beeping and was wondering why it beeped! Before anyone says I should have gone out the Exit door the problem is in Aldi/Lidl anyway to get out you either have to be buying something or manage to get past the queue of people with trolleys, there is no separate exit as such. I didn't see what I wanted and there were big queues at checkouts and they are narrow enough so easier duck out the entrance door when someone is coming in. Don't know if it caused them to lock as I was out and gone!

Lenar3556

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058296255/can-supermarket-lock-people-in

It doesn’t sound ideal, although your friend was a significant contributor to the situation in attempting to leave through an incorrect door. The short duration involved would also be a mitigating factor in the shops defence.

Would the arrangement comply with the buildings fire safety certificate as issued by the local authority? Doubtful.

sydthebeat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590701#Comment_120590701

It 100% would.

In the case of a fire any mechanical lock is released.

This is not a planning permission / fire regulation / building regulation issue.....

Because it's a total non issue

Oscar_Madison

As this is the legal forum, I guess the question to ask is, could their be any liability or payout?

I think most would agree no, as:

1. the wrong exit was used thus the person majorly contributed to this situation arising
2. the time “detained” was limited
3. no reasonable person could deduce that this incident would lead to long term trauma of any kind

If the detention was for considerably longer, say 1 hour or so, there might well be a case - while the claimant still would have contributed greatly to the situation, the supermarket has a duty of care, even towards silly twats who use the entrance to exit the shop.

A lot of banks have a tow door entry system - for like less than 5 seconds, as you close the first door and before the second door is activated, you’re technically locked in a glass cage or indoor porch- hardly traumatic or life threatening- one would hope there’s a plan B if electricity fails and a customer happens to be in the process of awaiting door 2 to open

sydthebeat

^

Electricity holds the door closed.

So in the event of a loss of electricity, the door is released

Citrus_8

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590678#Comment_120590678

This is to prevent easy run away for those who steal. Exit through the opened tills via the queueing people and the exit door. Do you need more specific directions?

Oscar_Madison

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590678#Comment_120590678

Totally agree- it’s likely such an exit is an invitation to shop lifters and that’s why they don’t have them but the German supermarkets are like prisons (ok bit of an exaggeration) compared to say Dunnes or SuperValu - do Aldi or Lidil have self checkouts in any of their stores? I haven’t seen any in the ones I’ve attended?

Dial Hard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590678#Comment_120590678

There is, it's the same exit door everyone else uses. You just have to go through a till to use it.

Those of you clutching your pearls at being "forced" to use a dedicated exit door should probably avoid supermarkets in much of Europe, where not only is that set-up the norm, shoppers are also often required to leave their bags, backpacks etc in lockers before they enter the shopfloor.

phormium

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590758#Comment_120590758

How come Dunnes/Tesco/Supervalu survive without that system, you can easily get out without trying to squeeze past queues of people and trolleys, seriously how much stuff gets stolen that way I wonder! Maybe it's a European thing! Is it the middle aisle stuff that's the risk maybe, either way it's awkward when you can't get out any other way than through a packed till queue.

L1011

Most supervalus have one way gates, they just aren't glass double door setups

Citrus_8

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590902#Comment_120590902

They probably use more advanced (and more expensive) methods. Don't forget that Lidl and Aldi are the low cost supermarket chains. It is not a European thing, because other European supermarkets, as far I know doesn't have that. It's just their strategy to have this way.

Victor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590762#Comment_120590762

Certainly some Lidl shops do have self-service tills.

freshpopcorn

Did your friend try and push the doors apart?

Lenar3556

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590733#Comment_120590733

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590752#Comment_120590752

You are making considerable assumptions, and what you suggest is neither particularly likely, or meet the requirements of Part B of building regulations.

We don’t know the particular arrangement in operation here, but most sliding doors at supermarkets are motorised in both directions and require power to both open and close them in the normal manner. Contrary to what you suggest, an arrangement whereby the door reverts to a fail safe open position on loss of power or malfunction is not typical by any means.

In many cases it is possible to pull the doors apart/open in the event of a sudden power failure, and assuming the doors are unlocked, but few fire authorities would consider that as acceptable on a means of escape. The average individual wouldn’t know how, or otherwise be in a position to open it. An alternative emergency exit with conventional panic hardware would typically be required.

We don’t know is the arrangement interconnected with the fire alarm system to automatically open in the event of alarm activation. While there is a good chance it is, it is unlikely that there is standby power supply to the door to meet the requirements of EN54.

It is also unlikely that any of these impediments to escape are featured on the fire certificate application approved by the local authority at planning stage.

It is further unlikely that the requirements of BS7273 are met. (This is a British Standard but remains the authority on the interfacing of access control systems in buildings in Ireland.

As I said, doubtful that it would meet the relevant regulatory requirements .

Victor

Left: main entrance with automatic sliding doors.

Right: fire exit with swing doors (and curious boxes).

Not seen: rear fire escape door.

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3257474,-6.2650681,3a,60y,264.66h,85.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJIkMIkJ8-ilsMJ2YdB--LQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DJIkMIkJ8-ilsMJ2YdB--LQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D74.6318%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

sydthebeat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120591024#Comment_120591024

I prepare fire safety certificate applications.

From what you've written I can assure you I know considerably more than you do on this issue.

Honorable

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120591004#Comment_120591004

No

Lenar3556

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120591179#Comment_120591179

Doubtful.

Did I suggest something that was untrue?

Jim_Hodge

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590414#Comment_120590414

They were not locked in. They triggered a 30second delay in the doors due to their own error. Get real!

NewbridgeIR

Your friend is the architect of his own downfall. Completely his own fault.

If he's that anxious then he should stay at home and send someone else out to do his shopping.

Oscar_Madison

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590969#Comment_120590969

Not a regular as have only used to the local store and even then, only a few times-cheers for the information. Sounds like even if the store in question had an easy exit such as a self service checkout section, to get to it, would have been similar to most other supermarkets- I.e walk half way around the store to get to it .

xyz13

The insurer won't entertain his bogus claim.

Peregrinus

What is described is, technically, a false imprisonment.

False imprisonment is not a crime, but it is a tort. So the OP's friend could sue for damages.

But, other considerations aside, what damages could he hope to recover for a false imprisonment lasting 30 seconds, and that by his own admission was triggered by his attempt to rush a self-closing door from the wrong side? He'd be laughed out of court.

The entirely blameless person who was trapped in there with him might have a slightly stronger case, since she didn't cause her own (brief) imprisonment in between the two doors. But I'm fairly confident that she, too, would not succeed. Self-closing and self-locking doors can sometimes imprison people. The supermarket spotted the problem and sorted it out in a few seconds. It certainly wasn't unreasonable of them to have security measures of this kind, and they didn't allow anyone to cause anybody any significant delay or restraint when the door was triggered by a careless customer.

Victor

"But, other considerations aside, what damages could he hope to recover for a false imprisonment lasting 30 seconds, and that by his own admission was triggered by his attempt to rush a self-closing door from the wrong side? He'd be laughed out of court." - by this reckoning, if I pull a 'push' door, am I falsely imprisoned? What about a revolving door or turnstile that refuses to turn the wrong way?

I suspect is was quite clear that they were automatic doors and that one was for 'in' and one was for 'out'. I can't see how the friend could sue.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058296255/can-supermarket-lock-people-in

He wasn't locked in. He tried to exit an entry only door. That "exit" didn't exist. The actual exists were availible.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590121#Comment_120590121

That is incorrect. There is no fire escape issue.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590123#Comment_120590123

You would be doing very well to successfully argue a charge of false imprisonment here.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120590701#Comment_120590701

There would be no issue complying with fire safety. Most buildings in the built environment are lockable. People do not actually are free reign or right of access. Public shops are the exception.

In the event of a fire, people exit via fire exits, that may or may not be the front door.

Lenar3556

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120598075#Comment_120598075

The potential fire safety issue is that a situation arose where persons were trapped between two doors without access to a fire escape. Granted this was for a very short period, but in the event of a malfunction or power outage a more serious situation could arise.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120591024#Comment_120591024

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120592116#Comment_120592116

Yup you did. Almost everything you've said there was incorrect in some way or another. Kind of strange that you are aware of part B, the relevant BS codes etc, but completely unaware of application in the real world. It's getting a bit off topic to go through it in detail, this isn't the construction forum. But I'm not assuming how these doors, or how they can engaged and powered. I've designed similar systems countless times. It's not an issue.

Sliding doors are used commercially in almost every building type all over the world. If their existence was contrary to fire regulations, it would have been picked up by now. Planning stage is not the final check, fyi.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120598032#Comment_120598032

Is it not also included in the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, where it could carry a prison sentence? I was only reading about a case the other day where a man was charged with false imprisonment and detained without bail .

Lenar3556

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120598119#Comment_120598119

I think it would be helpful, and in the spirit of the forums that you would highlight what you think is incorrect.

I would put it to you that it isn’t at all incorrect, and ‘in the real world’ it is entirely possible to construct these arrangements in a manner that meets the relevant standards, the fire safety certificate grant and building regulations. There are many recent constructions where this is the case, but more often than not, in my experience, these elements aren’t met and hence my original point that it is doubtful that what has been described would be seen by a competent person to tick all the boxes in terms of fire safety.

Just because shortcomings are prevalent, commonplace and tend not to cause issue in most instances doesn’t mean that it satisfactory.

That attitude could be likened to the type of work carried on in various developments during the celtic tiger era. It’s grand, it’s the way we always did it, what is suppose to happen ‘doesn’t work in the real world’ etc.

Sadly in many cases it was the end clients who ended up paying for such ineptitude.

hullaballoo

Mod: very much at the de minimis end - not really a good use of anyone's time to keep this thread open.