I think my post made quiet clear that we don't actually know enough about what actually happened here to take anyone's side, and the OP has not returned to the thread to clarify anything, so we are left to guess.
I'm not taking the security guard's side, but I know that their version of what happened might sound perfectly reasonable if they joined us on this thread and shared it. There might be elements of the story which the OP has chosen to leave out which are crucial in determining who might be at fault.
Not really......seemed to me you're entirely on 'the side' of the security guard.
Considering acker had a load of items in his trolley, that suggests to me he didn't use the self scanner & went through a manned checkout.
My understanding is that at that time of night you sometimes don't have a choice as the manned tills are all closed - however this is more speculation as it's a long time since I was in a store that late.
A little more information really would be helpful but it's clear that the staff had a suspicion, and we don't know how the OP reacted when challenged. All we've been told is how they felt afterwards.
Honestly, shoplifing is a serious matter and security staff have to challenge people if they think they might be doing it. If the person is innocent there is no need for acrimony on either side, and this is probably the key point here. If the OP reacted badly that is naturally going to make them more suspicious and so the whole incident escalates to a point where neither side is going to walk away with a particularly favourable opinion of the other..
Seems to me, if this was after using the self scanners, that the security guard had every right to stop him to see what item had been bagged but not scanned.It's the OP who should have apologised for that happening.
I dont think there was any need for the OP to apologise, if as suspected this was self service I can see why someone would just assume they scan one item and not the free one especially if they are not aware that the bar code takes account of this and the security guard could have explained this to ensure that the OP was aware that in future BOGOF items both need to be scanned. Sounds like the security guard wasnt very helpful at all and didnt bother to explain the position to the OP. Crap customer service whatever way you look at it.
We only have one side of the story here, so - typically for DS - many posters side with the person telling it!
As they were specifically mentioned, the hot cross buns seem to be the key here, and I'll wager that the OP perhaps did something suspicious such as not put the second pack through the till, which you have to do even if you know you are getting it free. That would account for the 'technically shoplifting' comment.
We also don't know anything about the OP's behaviour when challenged - were they in some way abusive or aggressive? They tell the story in a way which suggests not, but many people would when telling such a story, wouldn't they?
It might be that the manager in question behaved perfectly reasonably in the circumstances.
Maybe a tad hasty to 'wager' on the basis of very little information. I hope if the same thing ever happens to you, you won't mind if those you tell assume that you're gulty:)
Well theres the question on the bottom of my till receipt . I was in your store last night at just gone midnight and as I was wheeling my stuff away one of your management appeared and blocked my path with an " Excuse me sir have you paid for those hot cross buns " ?....now I did have two packs of said item in my bag , they were two for one and I told him this ,I also told him that I had a receipt for absolutely everything which I did cos I havent got a criminal bone in my body , at which point he started going through the items in my carrier bag and looking at the receipt whilst muttering about " technically shoplifting " :eek:
. Other customers were now watching my being apprehended by this goon and the more he looked the more he realised he was wrong . In the end he gave me my receipt back and walked away muttering to his associate , whilst I was left to red facedly put my shopping back . So in answer to your question....I came in your store did my shop and paid for my goods at which point one of your management appeared and in front of other customers accused me of stealing then upon having been shown to be completely wrong , never even apologised . :mad:.......THAT is how you did .......well done.
I have mental health problems. Sometimes I might be like a gob on a stick when I visit ds but getting out of the house can take a massive effort for me . I already felt awful for being in a store that so openly embraced workfare but I can get in there when there are few people about , thats all its got going for it really . I was physically shaking with it all by the time I got home ....... How did you do ?......not very well.
I can see both sides here.
You must have done something to warrant the attention of the security guard? Did you scan both packs of buns, even though 1 was free? They don't know you haven't got a criminal bone in your body, nor do they know you have health issues. Did you cooperate fully with the guard or did you get argumentative?
On the other side, if the store didn't apologise, then it sounds like they are bad at their job and didn't handle the situation well.
Maybe a tad hasty to 'wager' on the basis of very little information. I hope if the same thing ever happens to you, you won't mind if those you tell assume that you're gulty:)
In the absence of information from the OP about exactly what aroused the suspicion of the staff, how can we have any discussion about this without making guesses about what actually happened? That post of mine is now almost twelve hours old, and the OP has not been back to say if I was right or wrong!
It was a best guess based on the original post, and this is just a discussion on a forum - we're not actually in the situation ourselves.
Has it occurred to you that this might have been because of the attitude of the OP, about which we have been told very little?
If someone tries to leave a store without putting everything through the till - which we still don't know is what happened here, but it's a reasonable deduction from the original post - then the staff have every reason to challenge the shopper, and their subsequent demeanour is probably very dependent on the response they get. They have to deal with some extrememly awkward and unpleasant individuals, many of who have every intention of defrauding their business. We don't know much at all about the attuitude of the shopper in this instance, yet you automatically take their side.
The attitude of "the shopper" is irrelevant. There was no theft so there should be an apology from the store.
If the OP put something in their bag without it being scanned (even if it was part of a "2 for 1" deal), then they should be the one doing the apologising.
Not necessarily.
If you buy a lot of the same item, such as bottled water, the assistant tells you to leave it in the trolley and will type in the number of bottles.
For bogofs they sometimes swipe one item twice while shoving the second item through quickly, so it is not true that every item must be scanned.
Not necessarily.
If you buy a lot of the same item, such as bottled water, the assistant tells you to leave it in the trolley and will type in the number of bottles.
For bogofs they sometimes swipe one item twice while shoving the second item through quickly, so it is not true that every item must be scanned.
That does count as been scanned though as the correct number of items has gone though the till
In the absence of information from the OP about exactly what aroused the suspicion of the staff, how can we have any discussion about this without making guesses about what actually happened? That post of mine is now almost twelve hours old, and the OP has not been back to say if I was right or wrong!
It was a best guess based on the original post, and this is just a discussion on a forum - we're not actually in the situation ourselves.
It wasn't merely a 'best guess' it was 'a wager' which I understand to mean that you're as certain as you feel you need to be! I'm not, is all.
That does count as been scanned though as the correct number of items has gone though the till
Yes, but the actual item has not been through. Each one is not fingerprinted, therefore it is a reasonable assumption that the till takes account of the additional item, in the same way that it adjusts the bill with linked offers.
When all is said and done, the correct "procedure" may not have been followed but it is impossible to steal something which is free.
Has it occurred to you that this might have been because of the attitude of the OP, about which we have been told very little?
If someone tries to leave a store without putting everything through the till - which we still don't know is what happened here, but it's a reasonable deduction from the original post - then the staff have every reason to challenge the shopper, and their subsequent demeanour is probably very dependent on the response they get. They have to deal with some extrememly awkward and unpleasant individuals, many of who have every intention of defrauding their business. We don't know much at all about the attuitude of the shopper in this instance, yet you automatically take their side.
the receipt was checked everything was accounted for
Acker email them and tell them about the incident....he had no right to treat you like that....an apology costs nothing:mad:
the receipt was checked everything was accounted for
Acker email them and tell them about the incident....he had no right to treat you like that....an apology costs nothing:mad:
Well according to the OP the security guard mentioned something about technically shoplifting, which suggest that the second pack was not scanned, so was not accounted for, but seeing as it would have been free the guard didn't hassle with it & let him leave
.If, as i suspect, it was self scanned, then the machine would have said" unidentified item in bagging area" over & over, which would have been ignored by OP and that would have probably been why why the guard thought something needed investigating.
That, imo, would be 100% the OPs fault and he/she should have apologised for causing the situation.
Of course i'm just guessing, as we all are.
My understanding is that at that time of night you sometimes don't have a choice as the manned tills are all closed - however this is more speculation as it's a long time since I was in a store that late.
A little more information really would be helpful but it's clear that the staff had a suspicion, and we don't know how the OP reacted when challenged. All we've been told is how they felt afterwards.
Honestly, shoplifing is a serious matter and security staff have to challenge people if they think they might be doing it. If the person is innocent there is no need for acrimony on either side, and this is probably the key point here. If the OP reacted badly that is naturally going to make them more suspicious and so the whole incident escalates to a point where neither side is going to walk away with a particularly favourable opinion of the other..
There are always manned checkouts open, because loose fruit and veg can't always be weighed at self service checkouts.
REgardless of why suspicion fell on the OP, when his receipt was found to tally with the items, the security guard should have apologised in a pleasant manner, for detaining OP in the first place. It;s not the guard's job to make value judgements about customers or their attitude.
There are always manned checkouts open, because loose fruit and veg can't always be weighed at self service checkouts.
REgardless of why suspicion fell on the OP, when his receipt was found to tally with the items, the security guard should have apologised in a pleasant manner, for detaining OP in the first place. It;s not the guard's job to make value judgements about customers or their attitude.
Lots of them are not manned. There is a "fruit and vegetable" button. You press it, choose the item from the list and the scanning bit weighs it.
There are no instructions at the tills for either this or bogof protocol.
Well according to the OP the security guard mentioned something about technically shoplifting, which suggest that the second pack was not scanned, so was not accounted for, but seeing as it would have been free the guard didn't hassle with it & let him leave
.If, as i suspect, it was self scanned, then the machine would have said" unidentified item in bagging area" over & over, which would have been ignored by OP and that would have probably been why why the guard thought something needed investigating.
That, imo, would be 100% the OPs fault and he/she should have apologised for causing the situation.
Of course i'm just guessing, as we all are.
Well im glad everyones enjoyed themselves in here and yes I DID only scan one pack of my bloody hot cross buns ( the last things I will EVER buy from Tesco ) as it was " two for one " . Why on earth are some folks saying I should be apologising ?.......for what ? I guess you can file it under " you had to be there " but I had to stand there in front of other customers while the guy went through my bags checking stuff off against my receipt and even though it was patently obvious what had happened and that I WASNT a thief at all , all that people could see was me being apprehended and my shopping searched ..Maybe its just me but I think that anybody hearing the " technically shoplifting " comments might think id got some kind of grey area low level scam going on.. If I ever decide to take up thieving, ill find something a bit more lucrative than some hot cross buns from bloody tesco.
Long story short and bottom line, the guy had a hard on cos he thought hed caught a shoplifter...there was absolutely no need for him to use the word " shoplifting " ..".technical "or otherwise but I could see that his disappointment was immense. it wasnt a point of information it was a need to use the word to justify the way I was being treated in front of others.
I will say this though, I would like to say im sorry .....for even stepping through their grasping, workfare embracing, countryside destroying door .......I honestly feel ashamed .and if the local late shop hadnt sold me a loaf that had flecks of green mould in it earlier in the evening id have been nowhere near tesco in the first place. A dream shopping experience all round last night was. Now pile in and bury me . Honest if hed called me a " daft bugger " about it all which is the absolute worst I could be accused of I wouldnt have had any complaints whatsoever .....and yes there WAS an attitude problem going on and it wasnt me .
If you didn't scan every item, you were removing goods from the store without their consent. So you were indeed technically shoplifting. It doesn't make any difference that the second pack was free. You still have to let the store know (in this case a machine rather than an assistant) that you are taking advantage of that offer.
I haven't got a great deal more time for Tesco than you these days, but one reason why their prices are so high is undoubtedly because retailers such as them lose a significant sum through shoplifing, which is precisely why it is understandable that they will take more than a passing interest in anyone they see putting goods in their bag without scanning them.
If you didn't scan every item, you were removing goods from the store without their consent. So you were indeed technically shoplifting. It doesn't make any difference that the second pack was free. You still have to let the store know (in this case a machine rather than an assistant) that you are taking advantage of that offer.
I haven't got a great deal more time for Tesco than you these days, but one reason why their prices are so high is undoubtedly because retailers such as them lose a significant sum through shoplifing, which is precisely why it is understandable that they will take more than a passing interest in anyone they see putting goods in their bag without scanning them.
The buns were not tesco's any more. Acker had paid for them. They were his.
Well im glad everyones enjoyed themselves in here and yes I DID only scan one pack of my bloody hot cross buns ( the last things I will EVER buy from Tesco ) as it was " two for one " . Why on earth are some folks saying I should be apologising ?.......for what ? I guess you can file it under " you had to be there " but I had to stand there in front of other customers while the guy went through my bags checking stuff off against my receipt and even though it was patently obvious what had happened and that I WASNT a thief at all , all that people could see was me being apprehended and my shopping searched ..Maybe its just me but I think that anybody hearing the " technically shoplifting " comments might think id got some kind of grey area low level scam going on.. If I ever decide to take up thieving, ill find something a bit more lucrative than some hot cross buns from bloody tesco.
Long story short and bottom line, the guy had a hard on cos he thought hed caught a shoplifter...there was absolutely no need for him to use the word " shoplifting " ..".technical "or otherwise but I could see that his disappointment was immense. it wasnt a point of information it was a need to use the word to justify the way I was being treated in front of others.
I will say this though, I would like to say im sorry .....for even stepping through their grasping, workfare embracing, countryside destroying door .......I honestly feel ashamed .and if the local late shop hadnt sold me a loaf that had flecks of green mould in it earlier in the evening id have been nowhere near tesco in the first place. A dream shopping experience all round last night was. Now pile in and bury me . Honest if hed called me a " daft bugger " about it all which is the absolute worst I could be accused of I wouldnt have had any complaints whatsoever .....and yes there WAS an attitude problem going on and it wasnt me .
I think you have to bear in mind that shoplifting is a problem for retailers.
Whilst it is clear that you weren't intending to defraud Tesco, the fact is that to mitigate shoplifting, stores employ people who will monitor self-checkout tills on occasion, and if a member of their staff noticed that you had put something into the bagging area without you having scanned it, they will naturally think it is an act of shoplifting. They cannot be expected to know that the item is part of a BOGOF offfer - it would just look like shorting.
So, to check your items against your bill was not unfounded. To not apologise is perhaps a PR issue. But as someone else has said, it is common sense to scan everything as obviously it will effect stock-taking if you don't.
Nobody was really at fault, and mutual understanding is required in this situation.
I think you have to bear in mind that shoplifting is a problem for retailers.
Whilst it is clear that you weren't intending to defraud Tesco, the fact is that to mitigate shoplifting, stores employ people who will monitor self-checkout tills on occasion, and if a member of their staff noticed that you had put something into the bagging area without you having scanned it, they will naturally think it is an act of shoplifting. They cannot be expected to know that the item is part of a BOGOF offfer - it would just look like shorting.
So, to check your items against your bill was not unfounded. To not apologise is perhaps a PR issue. But as someone else has said, it is common sense to scan everything as obviously it will effect stock-taking if you don't.
Nobody was really at fault, and mutual understanding is required in this situation.
Of course the security guard is at fault. He said it was "technically" shoplifting" which indicates that this was after he knew that there had been no theft.
He should not have used that word at all. It was uncalled for.
All that was needed was for him to check and say "you need to scan everything mate" and i suggest that if he is incapable of that he is unsuitable for the job.
Of course the security guard is at fault. He said it was "technically" shoplifting" which indicates that this was after he knew that there had been no theft.
He should not have used that word at all. It was uncalled for.
All that was needed was for him to check and say "you need to scan everything mate" and i suggest that if he is incapable of that he is unsuitable for the job.
From what the OP admits though, there had been a theft. They had taken an item without informing it's prior owner.
Who realistically puts one instance of a 2-for-1 on the checkout belt but keeps the other in their waistcoat pocket? No-one. But this is equivalent, IMO.
From what the OP admits though, there had been a theft. They had taken an item without informing it's prior owner.
Who realistically puts one instance of a 2-for-1 on the checkout belt but keeps the other in their waistcoat pocket? No-one. But this is equivalent, IMO.
Honest this is just semantics. Thieving is when you thieve something .
From what the OP admits though, there had been a theft. They had taken an item without informing it's prior owner.
Who realistically puts one instance of a 2-for-1 on the checkout belt but keeps the other in their waistcoat pocket? No-one. But this is equivalent, IMO.
I disagree. "not following the correct procedure in a supermarket" is not a crime. (especially when they dont tell you what the procedure is)
To shoplift there has to be an intent to steal and it was shown that there was none.
The buns were already paid for so there was no crime.
The security guard was correct to check, but wrong to not apologise and replace the shopping.
I disagree. "not following the correct procedure in a supermarket" is not a crime. (especially when they dont tell you what the procedure is)
To shoplift there has to be an intent to steal and it was shown that there was none.
The buns were already paid for so there was no crime.
The security guard was correct to check, but wrong to not apologise and replace the shopping.
Pretty much what Honey says . Anyway I have complained to tesco and i.ll wait and see what they say . Im getting out of here now before it turns into a bun fight.
Comments
Not really......seemed to me you're entirely on 'the side' of the security guard.
Considering acker had a load of items in his trolley, that suggests to me he didn't use the self scanner & went through a manned checkout.
A little more information really would be helpful but it's clear that the staff had a suspicion, and we don't know how the OP reacted when challenged. All we've been told is how they felt afterwards.
Honestly, shoplifing is a serious matter and security staff have to challenge people if they think they might be doing it. If the person is innocent there is no need for acrimony on either side, and this is probably the key point here. If the OP reacted badly that is naturally going to make them more suspicious and so the whole incident escalates to a point where neither side is going to walk away with a particularly favourable opinion of the other..
I dont think there was any need for the OP to apologise, if as suspected this was self service I can see why someone would just assume they scan one item and not the free one especially if they are not aware that the bar code takes account of this and the security guard could have explained this to ensure that the OP was aware that in future BOGOF items both need to be scanned. Sounds like the security guard wasnt very helpful at all and didnt bother to explain the position to the OP. Crap customer service whatever way you look at it.
Maybe a tad hasty to 'wager' on the basis of very little information. I hope if the same thing ever happens to you, you won't mind if those you tell assume that you're gulty:)
I can see both sides here.
You must have done something to warrant the attention of the security guard? Did you scan both packs of buns, even though 1 was free? They don't know you haven't got a criminal bone in your body, nor do they know you have health issues. Did you cooperate fully with the guard or did you get argumentative?
On the other side, if the store didn't apologise, then it sounds like they are bad at their job and didn't handle the situation well.
In the absence of information from the OP about exactly what aroused the suspicion of the staff, how can we have any discussion about this without making guesses about what actually happened? That post of mine is now almost twelve hours old, and the OP has not been back to say if I was right or wrong!
It was a best guess based on the original post, and this is just a discussion on a forum - we're not actually in the situation ourselves.
Not necessarily.
If you buy a lot of the same item, such as bottled water, the assistant tells you to leave it in the trolley and will type in the number of bottles.
For bogofs they sometimes swipe one item twice while shoving the second item through quickly, so it is not true that every item must be scanned.
That does count as been scanned though as the correct number of items has gone though the till
It wasn't merely a 'best guess' it was 'a wager' which I understand to mean that you're as certain as you feel you need to be! I'm not, is all.
Yes, but the actual item has not been through. Each one is not fingerprinted, therefore it is a reasonable assumption that the till takes account of the additional item, in the same way that it adjusts the bill with linked offers.
When all is said and done, the correct "procedure" may not have been followed but it is impossible to steal something which is free.
the receipt was checked everything was accounted for
Acker email them and tell them about the incident....he had no right to treat you like that....an apology costs nothing:mad:
Well according to the OP the security guard mentioned something about technically shoplifting, which suggest that the second pack was not scanned, so was not accounted for, but seeing as it would have been free the guard didn't hassle with it & let him leave
.If, as i suspect, it was self scanned, then the machine would have said" unidentified item in bagging area" over & over, which would have been ignored by OP and that would have probably been why why the guard thought something needed investigating.
That, imo, would be 100% the OPs fault and he/she should have apologised for causing the situation.
Of course i'm just guessing, as we all are.
There are always manned checkouts open, because loose fruit and veg can't always be weighed at self service checkouts.
REgardless of why suspicion fell on the OP, when his receipt was found to tally with the items, the security guard should have apologised in a pleasant manner, for detaining OP in the first place. It;s not the guard's job to make value judgements about customers or their attitude.
No in my local Tescos there is a is a sign saying after midnight only self service checkouts are available
There are no instructions at the tills for either this or bogof protocol.
Well im glad everyones enjoyed themselves in here and yes I DID only scan one pack of my bloody hot cross buns ( the last things I will EVER buy from Tesco ) as it was " two for one " . Why on earth are some folks saying I should be apologising ?.......for what ? I guess you can file it under " you had to be there " but I had to stand there in front of other customers while the guy went through my bags checking stuff off against my receipt and even though it was patently obvious what had happened and that I WASNT a thief at all , all that people could see was me being apprehended and my shopping searched ..Maybe its just me but I think that anybody hearing the " technically shoplifting " comments might think id got some kind of grey area low level scam going on.. If I ever decide to take up thieving, ill find something a bit more lucrative than some hot cross buns from bloody tesco.
Long story short and bottom line, the guy had a hard on cos he thought hed caught a shoplifter...there was absolutely no need for him to use the word " shoplifting " ..".technical "or otherwise but I could see that his disappointment was immense. it wasnt a point of information it was a need to use the word to justify the way I was being treated in front of others.
I will say this though, I would like to say im sorry .....for even stepping through their grasping, workfare embracing, countryside destroying door .......I honestly feel ashamed .and if the local late shop hadnt sold me a loaf that had flecks of green mould in it earlier in the evening id have been nowhere near tesco in the first place. A dream shopping experience all round last night was. Now pile in and bury me . Honest if hed called me a " daft bugger " about it all which is the absolute worst I could be accused of I wouldnt have had any complaints whatsoever .....and yes there WAS an attitude problem going on and it wasnt me .
I haven't got a great deal more time for Tesco than you these days, but one reason why their prices are so high is undoubtedly because retailers such as them lose a significant sum through shoplifing, which is precisely why it is understandable that they will take more than a passing interest in anyone they see putting goods in their bag without scanning them.
I think you have to bear in mind that shoplifting is a problem for retailers.
Whilst it is clear that you weren't intending to defraud Tesco, the fact is that to mitigate shoplifting, stores employ people who will monitor self-checkout tills on occasion, and if a member of their staff noticed that you had put something into the bagging area without you having scanned it, they will naturally think it is an act of shoplifting. They cannot be expected to know that the item is part of a BOGOF offfer - it would just look like shorting.
So, to check your items against your bill was not unfounded. To not apologise is perhaps a PR issue. But as someone else has said, it is common sense to scan everything as obviously it will effect stock-taking if you don't.
Nobody was really at fault, and mutual understanding is required in this situation.
Of course the security guard is at fault. He said it was "technically" shoplifting" which indicates that this was after he knew that there had been no theft.
He should not have used that word at all. It was uncalled for.
All that was needed was for him to check and say "you need to scan everything mate" and i suggest that if he is incapable of that he is unsuitable for the job.
From what the OP admits though, there had been a theft. They had taken an item without informing it's prior owner.
Who realistically puts one instance of a 2-for-1 on the checkout belt but keeps the other in their waistcoat pocket? No-one. But this is equivalent, IMO.
Honest this is just semantics. Thieving is when you thieve something .
eta ....im not being arsey.
I disagree. "not following the correct procedure in a supermarket" is not a crime. (especially when they dont tell you what the procedure is)
To shoplift there has to be an intent to steal and it was shown that there was none.
The buns were already paid for so there was no crime.
The security guard was correct to check, but wrong to not apologise and replace the shopping.
Pretty much what Honey says . Anyway I have complained to tesco and i.ll wait and see what they say . Im getting out of here now before it turns into a bun fight.