Jump to content

maxxer

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    113
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

51 Excellent

About maxxer

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. THIS - totally. I still have fingers in pies in tk’s, friends in head office, and friends who have access to figures of losses. You’d be very lucky to get any tk’s or homesense store with less than £100k loss last year. That’s every single store in their estate. I think a few came in at under £100k but that was cancelled out by the massive losses in the London stores. The police generally don’t care about theft offences - lpguy is right, back even 6 years ago they would be tripping over each other to come to a tk’s to collect statement, prisoner and evidence discs, and it would of all been done for them, ready to book the person in, and go straight for interview. There’s got to be some deterrent to theft. Morally people seem to of forgotten that it’s wrong to steal. There’s got to be a stage where we are at now, where there’s some sort of ‘out of police’ punishment for theft and fraud. Give them something to think about, so they don’t do it again.
  2. Is it now somewhat illegal for security (or management for that matter) to talk to a customer ...........?
  3. Just phoned and checked with a current lp employee, tk’s Are indeed still using rlp, not anyone else.
  4. nice too see people giving sensible advice here. You are banned. If you flout your ban, and enter a store, for whatever reason, you are a trespasser. It shows a pattern of dishonesty. You know you are banned, yet you thought your reason was better than listening to the law. If you use your card in a store, yes it will flag it. Does that mean loss prevention will tell the police ……. depends on how much of a prat you were to them when you were stopped. Used to be routine in my area to let the police know if they were under investigation, that they were flouting their ban. facial recognition was rolled out over 2 years ago now to stores. Speak to customer services, post them back, and be done with it. Oh, and decide carefully if you want to deny allegations. Don't forget every tk holding room has audio and video, so anything you said will of been recorded. Read some of my other threads, but we have to have at least 2 fraudulent returns, there will be footage of the purchase, and the return, being different. How exactly do you account for the price ticket having been removed from one item, and it magically adhering itself to the wrong item
  5. Not in superdrug they don't. Like tk's, they work in house, directly for head office. The system is set up just to avoid managers over ruling or trying to get security to do other things, like stack shelves etc. so the manager cant overrule any decisions made by security.
  6. John Lewis / Waitrose were the other retailer trialing facial recognition using the neoface platform from nec. I don’t know if they have rolled it out yet to all stores but it’s worth keeping out permanently from their stores if you don’t want a guard to start chucking you out, or if you irritate them enough, an injunction.
  7. Superdrug don't have their own 'in house' security, so any store detectives should be sia licenced. They used 'stealth security' as their suppliers a couple of years ago, I don't know who has the contract currently, might still be stealth. From memory, Lidl used them as well. Although I totally agree this should be complained about, I don't agree its false imprisonment or a false arrest - the conversation was conducted on the shop floor, you weren't taken hold of, or taken to the office, and the immortal words weren't uttered. OP - Is there absolutely anything that the security could of interpreted as criminal about your conduct in the store. The packaging you opened (I'm assuming from a shelf, or was it your prescription), it wasn't sealed was it (thinking criminal damage) ?. Just don't want you potentially opening a an of worms if there's anything you could of possibly done wrong in store. And no, pharmacists wont usually tell anyone who you are - they have confidentiality clauses and could get struck off.
  8. Who said its law ? In the context of the above case, giving a false name address etc, adds weight to the prosecutions case. Why would an honest person give false details in an honest refund. Also, in the above case, usually makes the police 'dig harder' to find out who this person is. Why would they lie, why would the give an old address, or incorrect name, if they are honest as the day was born. Any more you want to hijack this thread with random questions ? And there's your problem. I'm going to be honest, Unless you have recently moved, and recently got married, this simply looks bad. You do know if you use a card, the printed card name now comes up on screen, don't you. Some retailers also print it on the card receipt. (a lot don't). The cashier almost immediately knows you aren't giving the right name when they ask you, as its on the screen in front of them. Being totally honest, If you have been giving false details for a while, I think this issue wont go away.
  9. Did you use your real name, address and post code details when asked for the refunds. ?
  10. It’s pretty simple. There’s only so many times you can make a ‘mistake’ refund before it looks like it’s a pattern. You haven’t said how many times you’ve returned stuff that isn’t what you purchased. If you can give us all some idea, we can make an educated guess as to what the future holds. If you were a serial returner, and everything was wrong, then yes, expect a door knock. You also didn’t answer about the using real name and address or not. The more you defrauded tk’s, the more they are going to be interested in pushing this with the police. Some forces aren’t really interested, and if you never go back in a store, don’t persue it. Others are more interested and will do things like address checks and will apply to the bank for your details if you’ve used a card in store. As I’ve said, only you know if you are a one time mistake maker, or if there is more to this than you are telling us. You aren’t going to prison. Not on a first time offence, and unless you’ve purchased a new house off the back of any fraud, then you are safe.
  11. The reason you won’t of been able to find the other items I bet is because they are now neatly labelled, evidence bagged, and sat in the loss prevention evidence cabinet. Probably with a statement sat in a folder next to them. Returning one item that is incorrect starts the ‘process’ of investigation. As tk’s likes to say that their customers may have made an honest mistake with labels. 2 or more items means they will dig, and simply look at the cctv from your purchases and your refunds, and see if items match up. It’s not a difficult process, and if you paid by card, then all those purchases on that card going back months can be tracked. The evidential test requires that tk’s have 2 or more physical garments or items returned and that they are both ‘wrong’ to show a pattern. You only know how much you’ve returned. And how much of it is wrong. We used to go into such detail as checking if the Kimble (plastic thread that attaches the ticket to the garment) was the correct one or if it was changed (showed intent - why would someone buy their own Kimble gun ...) Same as refund info given during the refund - did oh always give your correct details and address / post code ? If it’s more than the 2 items that have been spotted and retained, the likelihood is that the statement is written already, and they are waiting for you to go back in, where the security team will arrest you for fraud, and call in the police. It was Tk policy, and still is as far as I’m aware, to call police on every occasion of fraud.
  12. Don't forget that tin foil hat. There is absolutely no link between rlp and tk maxx staff. The only 'link' is that tk maxx head office see rlp as giving them some money back for the wrongs that people do against them. If only they did it in house, and for the cost of what it's cost them, then rlp wouldn't exist, and the cost recoup would get through the courts. Anyway, back to the op's issues. First - the original ban was a lifetime one. The 'customer' shouldn't even be in any store. Second - it takes at least 2 separate transactions fora fraud case, for the exact reason to exclude any 'mistakes' made by a customer returning the wrong item. There is a loss to the store. They can't sell the item again as they can't be sure its real, genuine brand, as it wasn't the item purchased. There will be clear cctv footage of the item purchased, and the item returned. And the fact they are different. The loss prevention will of also confirmed that the items are either a brand that tk's don't sell (i.e. Tesco or primark etc), and that they can't re sell it. Despite the police not being able to be contacted at the time, rest assured that the procedure is that the case file is presented to them - so they can expect a door knock and an arrest for fraud. For the police it's an easy job, tk's do all the paperwork and statements for them, evidence production etc, so it's a simple 'go and arrest them, interview and charge' (ok a little bit of paperwork, but nowhere near as much as a normal job) If you want to help your friend, I would suggest they call the store to get details as to who the officer in the case is from the security team, and see if they can contact them to present themselves at the police station at a time of their choosing, rather than wait for a door knock.
  13. There are so many factual inaccuracies with this, its unbelievable. The systems used aren't RFID. there are only 2 retailers trialling RFID at the moment. None sell printer ink. There are 2 different types of systems, one uses AM tags, patented by sensormatic, and RF, which has several manufacturers. So any RF tag will set off any other retailers RF system, and any AM tag will set off any sensormatic system. ASDA, NEXT, and TK MAXX use AM systems, so walking into each other will set them off. It wont set off Sainsburys, Currys, Arcadia group stores as they use RF. Vice versa.
  14. Tesco will rightly refuse to release a copy, as it will potentially be used in a criminal investigation, so theres no point in asking. Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with the DPA before advising people. The police want an easy ride, so will show you the cctv as part of the interview. You are also entitled to a solicitor free of charge, and they will show them it as part of the 'disclosure' process - your solicitor will then advise you.
  15. Are you reading the pace codes of practice again. Which don't apply to non police arrests ...... The lp staff in tk's are enhanced dbs checked for the sole reason they could have unsupervised contact with minors, which is a lot above what sia guards get (only a standard dbs). Although as we've both pointed out, it shouldn't happen. Nobody should be asking them for anything but their name and a contact number so parents or police are called. Searchingnthem certainly is out of bounds and I don't know anyone that would!.
×
×
  • Create New...