shoplifting first offense

[carldee]

California Penal Code 409.5
Is paying a civil penalty claim the same as paying restitution in court?

I'm currently 17 and was caught shoplifting at an H&M store about a month ago, and I stole about $100 worth of clothing. The clothes were returned in merchantable condition. And they called the police and told me that there would be a court case. I have not received any court case letter, but I did receive a letter from the law firm of H&M asking my parents to pay $500. I have reviewed under the Cal. Penal Code Section 490.5 that the store has a right to ask for civil penalty claim up to $500. But I was wondering if paying this $500 fee would make the company drop the court case or is the court case mandatory? I don't want my mother to pay over $500 worth of fines and fees and was wondering if this confusion can be cleared. I have a clean record.

 

[JETX]

I was wondering if paying this $500 fee would make the company drop the court case or is the court case mandatory?

Two separate things.

The CRIMINAL matter will proceed its course.
The CIVIL matter of restitution to the store to help reimburse the costs they incur in trying to prevent your THEFT is a civil issue.

I have a clean record.

Not true. You NOW have a CRIMINAL record.

 

[carldee]

So does that mean I should pay the $500 fee that the company is asking for? Like will it help me in my case or is it just some ploy that the company is trying to do to make money?

 

[JETX]

So does that mean I should pay the $500 fee that the company is asking for?

You don't have a choice. If you don't pay, they will sue you for more (to include filing fees, legal fees, etc.) and will get a judgment against you and/or your parents.

Like will it help me in my case or is it just some ploy that the company is trying to do to make money?

As said before, your paying the CIVIL penalty won't help or hinder your CRIMINAL case. They are entirely separate.

 

[michellesguy]

no stealing in the future

California Penal Code 409.5
Is paying a civil penalty claim the same as paying restitution in court?

I'm currently 17 and was caught shoplifting at an H&M store about a month ago, and I stole about $100 worth of clothing. The clothes were returned in merchantable condition. And they called the police and told me that there would be a court case. I have not received any court case letter, but I did receive a letter from the law firm of H&M asking my parents to pay $500. I have reviewed under the Cal. Penal Code Section 490.5 that the store has a right to ask for civil penalty claim up to $500. But I was wondering if paying this $500 fee would make the company drop the court case or is the court case mandatory? I don't want my mother to pay over $500 worth of fines and fees and was wondering if this confusion can be cleared. I have a clean record.

maybe this whole situation will teach you a lesson about taking things that dont belong to you. and this will also make it difficult for you to find employment, noone wants to hire a thief. personally, shoplifting is NOT something ive ever been tempted to do

 

[Antigone*]

I don't want my mother to pay over $500 worth of fines and fees and was wondering if this confusion can be cleared. I have a clean record.

What makes you think your mom should pay that fine? She isn't the one with sticky fingers.

Thank God you're not my daughter because you'd pay for the fine by scrubbing toilets with a toothbrush in every store in the mall with a sign on your back that says "I'm a thief."

My daughters know that I'm a person of my word and the mall's toilets would be waiting for them, so they wouldn't ever dare steal.

But even more impactful than the threats is the sense of good moral character that's been instilled in them. Guess that must be lacking in your life.

 

[Just Blue]

maybe this whole situation will teach you a lesson about taking things that dont belong to you. and this will also make it difficult for you to find employment, noone wants to hire a thief. personally, shoplifting is NOT something ive ever been tempted to do

Shut up Kelly.

 

[racer72]

The clothes were returned in merchantable condition.

This is not the problem the retailer has. The store cannot sell the items you attempted to sell because it is evidence that might be needed in case there is a trial. The store is required to hold the stuff you attempted to steal till you criminal case is completed. By then the merchandise could be out of date or no longer carried by the store so it must be sold at a discount or returned to the vendor for a credit. This credit is generally a fraction of the price the retailer originally paid for the item. Part of the civil demand goes to pay the retailer for this loss too.

 

[JETX]

This is not the problem the retailer has. The store cannot sell the items you attempted to sell because it is evidence that might be needed in case there is a trial. The store is required to hold the stuff you attempted to steal till you criminal case is completed. By then the merchandise could be out of date or no longer carried by the store so it must be sold at a discount or returned to the vendor for a credit. This credit is generally a fraction of the price the retailer originally paid for the item. Part of the civil demand goes to pay the retailer for this loss too.

ACTUALLY... the civil restitution laws have little, if anything, to do with the merchandise. The laws were passed to compensate the retailer for part of the costs of SECURITY. The retailers lobbied state legislatures claiming that it wasn't 'fair' that the costs of security should be paid by normal shoppers and that the THIEF should be liable for them. The civil restitution laws were then written to pass some of the costs on to the person who caused the expense... the criminals.

 

[racer72]

ACTUALLY... the civil restitution laws have little, if anything, to do with the merchandise. The laws were passed to compensate the retailer for part of the costs of SECURITY. The retailers lobbied state legislatures claiming that it wasn't 'fair' that the costs of security should be paid by normal shoppers and that the THIEF should be liable for them. The civil restitution laws were then written to pass some of the costs on to the person who caused the expense... the criminals.

I am fully aware of this and it is up to the retailer on how the funds are used. My daughter works as an area loss prevention specialist for Walmart, her area covers 24 stores. In Walmart's case, they do designate a portion of the money received from the civil penalties to cover the loss of merchantiblilty of items that are stolen and recovered. This covers only about 5% of the total losses Walmart suffers because of theft. Some items can be returned to the sales floor but much of it ends up being sold large discounts or donated to charity. I have been able to take advantage of some the discounts and resold the items on eBay at a pretty good profit. I recently sold an out of box Valentine's Day promo item for $77, it cost me 25 cents.

 

[carldee]

Not true. You NOW have a CRIMINAL record.

I just got back from my case today, and no I did not get any criminal charges or a criminal record. I just had to do 8 hours of class.

 

[Antigone*]

I just got back from my case today, and no I did not get any criminal charges or a criminal record. I just had to do 8 hours of class.

Oh really... Remember us when you apply for a job, have a bakground check done and...BAM

Oh how did that get there come back and let's us know ok, sticky fingers

 

[Isis1]

I just got back from my case today, and no I did not get any criminal charges or a criminal record. I just had to do 8 hours of class.

you have a case. a criminal case. if you stepped in a courthouse, with a case number, you have a criminal record, honey.

 

[JETX]

I just got back from my case today, and no I did not get any criminal charges or a criminal record. I just had to do 8 hours of class.

Let me help you to clear this up.

From your original post:

I'm currently 17 and was caught shoplifting at an H&M store about a month ago, and I stole about $100 worth of clothing. The clothes were returned in merchantable condition. And they called the police and told me that there would be a court case.

You now have a CRIMINAL arrest record.

You also now have a CRIMINAL conviction record... since you either:
1) Pled guilty to the original charge or offer.
2) Pled 'nolo' ('nolo contendre', which means 'no contest' to the charge).

If neither of the above happened, you would not have gotten the "8 hours of class" punishment/sentence.

You now get to answer 'yes' to any employment application that asks if you have been arrested (yes), charged (yes) and convicted (yes) of a crime.

I did receive a letter from the law firm of H&M asking my parents to pay $500.

Oh, and yes, you will still have to pay H&M for the CIVIL matter.

 

[carldee]

You also now have a CRIMINAL conviction record... since you either:
1) Pled guilty to the original charge or offer.
2) Pled 'nolo' ('nolo contendre', which means 'no contest' to the charge).

If neither of the above happened, you would not have gotten the "8 hours of class" punishment/sentence.

If that's the case, why is it that when I was "convicted" the people at the court even said that it would not hinder me for any job or college applications? So I don't know who to believe, the court or you. I mean I went to a group hearing and everything the judge said, "If you complete these 8 hours I'm assigning you, you will not be charged with a $295 fine and your record would be clear." So pretty much I can legally say that I'm not convicted. Sure I can say I was arrested and explain what happened. But It is not on my criminal conviction record according to the Superior Court of California, County of San Diego Juvenile court. I mean I probably got it easy, but still no convictions for me.