shoplifting

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by dave33

At this point you have nothing to prove. You were not required to show a receipt then, why now? No action was taken against you. They are saying they have no record of it because they realize they made a mistake, and do not want to be held liable. They sent you a fine, hoping you would pay and by doing so admitting guilt therefor relieving them of any liability. goodluck.

If this were the standard, then retailers in such a state would never apprehend shoplifters.

If they used force in the detention, or failed to turn the person over to the police if force was used, then liability MIGHT attach. But, if they were held to a strict liability standard if they eventually did not charge the person with a crime, then in this mythical state retailers would not stop shoplifters at all.

- Carl

[dave33]

Carl, Usually if an innocent person is detained and questioned than you can request to be compensated. Most times if you have a lawyer contact their legal department they agree to a small (2-3k) cash settlement. Most likely a business decision, but if force was used or an injury was a result of their wrongdoing than the numbers increase. They could of course deny such a request, but the cost of litigation could easily be more than 2-3k. Although they are security, in most states they have very little official authority.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by dave33

Carl, Usually if an innocent person is detained and questioned than you can request to be compensated. Most times if you have a lawyer contact their legal department they agree to a small (2-3k) cash settlement. Most likely a business decision, but if force was used or an injury was a result of their wrongdoing than the numbers increase. They could of course deny such a request, but the cost of litigation could easily be more than 2-3k. Although they are security, in most states they have very little official authority.

Google shopkeeper's privilege and then return to apologize.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by dave33

Carl, Usually if an innocent person is detained and questioned than you can request to be compensated.

You can REQUEST anything. But, the key will be whether the act was REASONABLE. Being certain is not going to be a legal requirement.

Retailers tend to rely on consent. In other words, they ask the suspect to come with them rather than going hands on. Some states frown on physical force being used by private persons for an arrest or detention, but this varies by state. Force is a different issue than the detention.

Most times if you have a lawyer contact their legal department they agree to a small (2-3k) cash settlement.

That's not what the people I know that are in the retail security biz tell me. I think your info is a little skewed, or based upon a rare or extreme set of circumstances. If this were commonplace then it would not be worth it for ANY retailer to detain shoplifters.



- Carl

[ncmom18]

Well, I filled out the online form asking for free legal help. I appreciate all of your responses, but I am so confused on what to do. All I know is that my daughter is a mess over this.

[outonbail]

Originally Posted by ncmom18

Well, I filled out the online form asking for free legal help. I appreciate all of your responses, but I am so confused on what to do. All I know is that my daughter is a mess over this.

Here's what I suggest you do:

You posted:

When she called the store back today to find out what happened, they said that he must have filed the incident with corporate, because they have no record of it at the store.

Then you said that the store manager believed her and in fact allowed her to leave their property with the blind they mistakenly thought she was trying to shoplift.

With these being the facts, no one in their right mind would pay the civil penalty. It is a penalty that is charged to people who steal merchandise, to people who break the law. It is not a penalty they can legally charge to any customer they want to charge it to. So I would refuse to pay.

However, you can't just ignore it. Your daughter, or as I suggested, your daughter's attorney, must notify the company making the civil demand, that it will not be paid as it was issued in error. They must be notified in writing, send by certified mail, receipt requested.
Explain to them that it was the store who made the mistake and that the store is aware of the fact that your daughter did not shoplift anything and that the manager will verify this.

Or, if letter writing and speaking to an attorney is too much trouble, you can forget about the whole thing and allow your daughter to pay them for this wonderful experience.

We can not dictate what your daughter should do. We just try to present the options available and the ramifications (if any) in choosing each option.

This is your daughters situation, so it calls for her to make a decision.

Good luck

[ncmom18]

Well, just in case this happens to anyone else, here is an answer I received from an attorney:


It sounds like an unfortunate situation. Fortunately this is a civil claim and not a criminal charge against your daughter. In civil matters agreeing to pay does not admit guilt or liability, but can be just an agreement to settle things.



As I see it you have three main options--



1. Pay the damages asked for by Wal Mart. This is not an admission of guilt, and will resolve the entire situation. If all you have received is a letter, then it is likely that the case has not been filed with any court yet,and paying the fee will prevent the case from progressing further.



2. Call the attorney and explain the facts and try to negotiate the fee down. You may be successful in getting the fees reduced or even dropped. The attorney is a collections attorney and may be willing to settle for less money. One way to do this would be to figure out what you would be willing to pay, and to call the attorney and tell him you will pay x and see if he accepts it. This may be a way to get the fee lowered, and if the attorney rejects it, you can still choose option 1 or option 3.



3. Don't pay the fine. I would call the attorney, explain the situation and tell him that you are not paying a dime. The attorney would then either choose to pursue the matter, or let it drop. $150 is not a lot of money and it will cost more than that for Wal Mart to pursue this through the courts, so they may choose not to pursue it, or they may continue to pursue the fee. If Wal Mart continues to pursue the fee, the amount sought will increase because court fees, collection fees and attorney fees will be added on.



If you really want this to go away and not have any more problems, I would look at option 1 or 2.

I hope this can help anyone else in this situation. Or just stay out of Wal-Mart.

[IsabellaSoriano]

i'm sorry. i've been following along, and seriously, if they allowed her to walk out of the store with the merchandise, then that's their bad. there are some instances where this is not a hill to die on, but i don't know. i'd still tell them to pound sand.

[apprehended]

I just tried submitting a comment similar to the one below but it did not seem to go through. I am trying again.

Good that you consulted an attorney.

I appreciate everyone's point about the principle of the thing, but, really, the focus should be on what is in your daughter's best interests. The longer this goes on the longer the memory of the indignity of being detained and interrogated for suspected theft will remain fresh. I don't think that's worth $150. (That is cheap, by the way, compared to some states, like California, where it can be $500.)

Personally, I favor attorney option 1 or 2.

[ncmom18]

Yes, I agree with you 100%. She will choose either option 1 or 2, it is entirely up to her, now that I have consulted an attorney. She will then put this behind her and move on. That is such a horrible memory for her, she will NEVER step foot in a Wal-Mart again.

[apprehended]

You're comment about never shopping at the store again reminded me of one other thing which I don't think was talked about in this thread. I understand that it is common for stores to give a "store ban" or "no trespassing order" to someone in this kind of incident. The idea is, if the person comes back to the store for the period of the ban, and they are caught on the premises, they can be charged with criminal trespass even if they absolutely no intent to steal anything. I have heard that sometimes these bans are applied all across a whole chain of stores.

Well, I have no idea whether a ban was issued to your daughter or not. If you're daughter truly never sets foot into the store again, it's not really an issue. However, there can always be one of those, "I'm in a hurry" or "with a friend" kind of situations, so if there is any doubt about whether a store ban was issued I would check that out. Probably, you're daughter would have got a copy.

I hope things work out well for both of you.

[ncmom18]

There was no such ban. Like I said, the manager believed her. they let her leave, with her package. When she called the store after receiving the letter, they had no record of it, so it was the lp guy, who was not a direct employee of walmart, that reported her. Just the way he treated her was enough to make her not ever want to go back. I'm sure the horrible memory will fade.

[IsabellaSoriano]

Originally Posted by ncmom18

There was no such ban. Like I said, the manager believed her. they let her leave, with her package. When she called the store after receiving the letter, they had no record of it, so it was the lp guy, who was not a direct employee of walmart, that reported her. Just the way he treated her was enough to make her not ever want to go back. I'm sure the horrible memory will fade.

see, i dunno, i'd push it so far, i'd want to see paperwork of inventory stating that exact item was unaccounted for.

[ncmom18]

If it was me, I would fight it. But I am a middle aged white lady who has never been in trouble in her life. However, my daughter is a mixed, 20 year old, very busy college student who has too much on her plate already. Whatever choice she makes from the attorney's answer is fine with me.

[rhinocl]

I believe some of the advice here is bad.
1)Do not assume that paying this means she will not be prosecuted or vice versa. They are probably not related.
2)You do not need to respond. (If you search the web re the CA civil penalties,there is one lawyer who states that stores almost never sue over this, so there is no advantage to paying it).
I suppose they could try to place it on her credit file as an unpaid charge but it could be disputed off.
3)To be 100% safe reply and state why you are not paying it and ask for some reasonable compensation for her detention-like some discount cards (unless they have banned her from the store in which case she should ask for cash and them to lift the banning).