Civil Procedure Rules

[PI Guy]

Well assuming that I had seen a crime (lets say theft) and they were trying to leave the scene, then that force which is necessary to detain them.

 

I have in the past applied restraint techniques on peoples arms, wrist etc in order to get them to a specific place ie an office or other assigned area to await the police.

 

BTW here is the section that deals with the use of force

 

Civilian Powers of Arrest

 

Care must be taken when assessing the evidence in a case involving the purported exercising of civilian powers of arrest. Such powers of arrest are dependent upon certain preconditions.

The principle civilian powers of arrest fall under two headings:

• the power vested in both police officers and ordinary citizens to arrest in relation to a breach of the peace (see R v Howell 73 Cr. App R. 31).
  
• the power conferred by Section 24 of PACE :
  • (a) to arrest anyone who is in the act of committing an arrestable offence or anyone whom the arrestor has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be committing an arrestable offence (S.24(4)) and
    
  • (b) where an arrestable offence has been committed, anyone who is guilty of having committed the offence, or anyone the arrestor has reasonable grounds for suspecting to be guilty of having committed it (S.24(5)).

It follows therefore that if violence occurs when someone purports to arrest, relying on Section 24(5), a person he suspects has committed an offence who has, in fact, not done so;

• any force used to affect the arrest may be an assault and unlawful; and
  
• any force used to resist the arrest may be lawful (see R v Self 95 Cr. App R. 42).

However in R v Lee, TLR 24 October 2000, it was held that when a defendant was charged with assault with intent to resist arrest, it was irrelevant whether the defendant honestly believed that the arrest was lawful.

You should bear in mind that members of the public (as well as police officers) may take action, including reasonable force, to prevent a breach of the peace, which would not necessarily involve exercising the formal powers of arrest.

[patdavies]

Reasonable force is permitted in order to detain someone who has committed an indictable offence (it used to be called arrestable offence) and no it wouldn't be assault.

 

 

Yes, detain. Only detain - at the spot where you make a citizen's arrest. You may ask a person to return to the store or go to the manager's office. etc. but you may not force them to do so. There is nothing in your quote about civilian arrest that allows for an arrested person being forcibly removed from the place of arrest.

 

You may only detain someone for a short period of time, until you hand over custody to the Police Officer. You must hand over custody to a Police Officer or the arrest is unlawful. Even a PCSO may only lawfully detain someone for a maximum of 30 minutes.

 

You may not force someone to return to the store or go to a particular place in the store - that is unlawful and you leave yourself open to charges of kidnap. false imprisonment and assault.

 

If you do not call the Police or they refuse to attend and assume custody you are likewise leaving yourself open.

[patdavies]

If i had to use reasonable force to detain then i would be calling the police and their guilt would be 100% proven by my eye witness evidence.

 

That's a pretty arrogant statement. Your S.9 statement would be considered like any other in the case.

[patdavies]

1st Point - And that's what RLP sue for, actual costs of running a Loss Prevention Department, of an investigation, staff time spent on the case ect.

 

 

Strange it's always the same amount then.

 

And I would suggest that only the itemised and verifiable costs that can be proven to relate to the incident could be claimed - not a blanket amount that looks suspiciously like a civil penalty.

[PI Guy]

That's a pretty arrogant statement. Your S.9 statement would be considered like any other in the case.

Its not arrogant, i would be sure because i would have seen it myself.

 

Yes, detain. Only detain - at the spot where you make a citizen's arrest. You may ask a person to return to the store or go to the manager's office. etc. but you may not force them to do so. There is nothing in your quote about civilian arrest that allows for an arrested person being forcibly removed from the place of arrest.

 

You may only detain someone for a short period of time, until you hand over custody to the Police Officer. You must hand over custody to a Police Officer or the arrest is unlawful. Even a PCSO may only lawfully detain someone for a maximum of 30 minutes.

 

You may not force someone to return to the store or go to a particular place in the store - that is unlawful and you leave yourself open to charges of kidnap. false imprisonment and assault.

 

If you do not call the Police or they refuse to attend and assume custody you are likewise leaving yourself open.

 

IMO I think that we will have to agree to disagree on this one but all my considerable experience tells me that i'm right and you're wrong on this. Show me the piece of legislation that says i cannot do it.

[Conniff]

Its not arrogant, i would be sure because i would have seen it myself.

 

Well it would be in this case as you never could have seen an act of theft as there wasn't one.

 

Remember an act of theft is:

Dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the owner of it. Not lifting a label to see what the old price was.

 

Even puting a can of beer in their pocket cannot be classed as theft unless they leave the shop, their basket might be full or they are about to pick up something large that could not be carried with a can of beer in their hand.

[PI Guy]

Well it would be in this case as you never could have seen an act of theft as there wasn't one.

 

Remember an act of theft is:

Dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the owner of it. Not lifting a label to see what the old price was.

 

Even puting a can of beer in their pocket cannot be classed as theft unless they leave the shop, their basket might be full or they are about to pick up something large that could not be carried with a can of beer in their hand.

i was talking generally not about this case in particular. I understand that you allege that you lifted a label not switched it. Since i wasn't there, i have no opinion on that at all and if innocent, I hope that you sue and win. TKmaxx LPA's have a reputation for being poorly trained and are pressured to gain arrests. Good luck with it.

[paulgmb]

A 'favourite' airline in the 1990's passed on information to the police and they raided several baggage handlers homes in the middle of the night. They arrested all the employees concerned but the police were perplexed by the calmness of one particular employee that had been taken in for questioning. He remained quite jovial throughout his ordeal as the police sought to obtain a confesion to make things easier for himself. He continually told them in answer to their questioning that he had never done anything wrong but they said they had footage from hidden cameras which showed him and his colleagues stealing from customers luggage.

Eventually they took him into a room and ran the tape which did indeed show several staff opening bags and cases and indeed stealing items. At the end the police asked the accused if he now wanted to confess?

Not at all came the reply, I was enjoying the movie too much, can we watch it again?

The police were astounded by this time and much head scratching ensued, until the accused said and this time perhaps you can show me this time which of the actors on here is playing my part?

Oh dear, he wasn't there. A dozy manager had given his name to the police by mistake. Needles to say he got a free lift home and an apology and his employer said name your price!

The moral of the story here is that although the camera never lies it the dozy twonk behind it you have to worry about!!

If you are 100% sure your partner is telling you the truth then front them out!

I strongly suspect that RLP have footage of someone else and have attached that to your partners name.

Regards,

Paul.

[GlasweJen]

There is no law (in scotland) that allows store security to use force to detain someone. I know this because I was told by a police officer after being wrongly accused of shoplifting at a local supermarket because my pacemaker set of the shop alarm.

 

Despite allowing the security man to look through my bags and compare them to the reciept, removing my jacket (but refusing to remove my jumper) and allowing him to inspect my MedicAlert card and my European Pacemaker Registration document. The security officer wanted to take me to an office and demanded I show him my scar (think about where the heart is and work out for yourself why I wouldn't show it to him). I told him I would not be going anywhere, that there was no evidence except an over zealous metal detector to suggest I had taken anything unlawfully and if he wanted to move me he had better call the police, He took me by the arm and dragged me to the office, locking me in. Police arrive, call medicalert who confirm that I am indeed a pacemaker patient, check my reciept and send me on my way. The supermarket have now fired said security guard after I threatened to have him in court for assault and kidnap.

[PI Guy]

There is no law (in scotland) that allows store security to use force to detain someone. I know this because I was told by a police officer after being wrongly accused of shoplifting at a local supermarket because my pacemaker set of the shop alarm.

 

Despite allowing the security man to look through my bags and compare them to the reciept, removing my jacket (but refusing to remove my jumper) and allowing him to inspect my MedicAlert card and my European Pacemaker Registration document. The security officer wanted to take me to an office and demanded I show him my scar (think about where the heart is and work out for yourself why I wouldn't show it to him). I told him I would not be going anywhere, that there was no evidence except an over zealous metal detector to suggest I had taken anything unlawfully and if he wanted to move me he had better call the police, He took me by the arm and dragged me to the office, locking me in. Police arrive, call medicalert who confirm that I am indeed a pacemaker patient, check my reciept and send me on my way. The supermarket have now fired said security guard after I threatened to have him in court for assault and kidnap.

An AES alarm is not evidence that someone has stolen something and so he had no right to detain you. He certainly has no right of search (a right exclusively for police) Did you sue for for false arrest?

[GlasweJen]

No, it was only a few days ago, still in the process of talking with the police etc (who can confirm i was in a locked office) before filling in the forms.

[PI Guy]

I would consult a solicitor who knows scottish law and sue for false arrest don't wait for the police. They will certainly settle expect to get about £3000 to £7000 settlement.

[mcjohnson]

The law is quite clear that a person can not be forced to move from the location at which the citizens arrest took place. Of course, most stores will try and coerce you to move as having someone suspected of an offence stood in your doorway until the police arrive could be pretty disruptive. Any attempt to make the individual move against their will could, and should, result in assault / false imprisonment / kidnap crinimal charges.

Any LPA can only claim for their material losses, they can not pass on their operating costs to the individual and this should be borne by the organisation. The operating costs bear no relation to the losses that the organisation have incurred, and can not be billed under this pretence. Essentially what your saying is "we're billing you £150 to be able to bill you £150!!!". Thus, if I stole a pair of shoes worth £30, all you can bill me for is £30.

So I fall on Pat's side of the fence for this one.

[nitecard]

Very interesting what you say mcjohnson.

 

RLP are claiming the following:

 

value of goods or cash stolen -

£0.00

Staff & management time investigating/dealing with your wrongful actions -

£82.50

Admin cost resulting from your wrongful actions -

£24.75

Apportioned security & surveillance costs resulting from your wrongful actions -

£30.25

 

I am thinking of invoicing them for my time in dealing with their unwarranted claims!

[PI Guy]

The law is quite clear that a person can not be forced to move from the location at which the citizens arrest took place.

please link to the "LAW" that you refer to.

[emsgeorge]

WHY, oh WHY do people has some sort of misconception that theft isnt comitted until you LEAVE the store. As soon as there has been an oppertunity to pay, and the person fails to do so, then the offence is complete. Please dont put into the minds of peoples heads that if they shoplift, and then get to within 1 metre of the doors, spot security and drop the suff, that they cant be touched - it only makes securitys job harder, and more embarrasing for the shoplifter !!.

 

With regard to RLP - is everyone sure that they cant charge what they are ?? - some posters on here seem to of conveniently forgotten my reply that stated that UNLIKE the private parking companies, that RLP HAVE TAKEN CASES TO COURT, ARGUED THE TOSS, AND HAVE WON - Tesco V KULAR for a start - where the court agreed that the costs were wholly reasonable.

 

Im one of the people who thinks the PPC's are barking up the wrtong tree - but RLP seem to have sorted out the legal side of things, and are quite happy to take you to court to justify the costs.

 

Anyone actually taken them to court - would be interesting to see their defence papers, and see what cases they site ?

[Bookworm]

Yes, but cases like Tesco v Kular are County Court proceedings = no legal precedent has been set. Therefore, each and every case would be judged on its own merit. While it may be the case that a judge will award their recovery costs to the company in cases of proven theft, I would think that:

a) that won't necessarily be the case where the offence hasn't been proven on the balance of probabilities.

b) that it doesn't give RLP blanket permission to charge what they want, when they want, to whoever they want. As I said elsewhere, imagine the racket that would ensue! Check every second person's bag on "suspicion", then charge them hundreds for the privilege!

[MARTIN3030]

I wrote to TKM head office following the series of alleged incidents here,to ask them to explain their policies for these kinds of incidents and also if there are plans to improve their labelling systems.

To date they have not replied but I will let you know the response.I think they should be given the chance to give their side of the arguements,and fully substantiate their actions in the procedures they employ to deal with incidents we have been reading of.

[nitecard]

We are losing sight of my original post - my partner did nothing more than peel back a sticker to reveal the previous price.

 

Kular was found guilty in a criminal court and then sucessfully sued for civil damages.

 

My partner is being accused by RLP of a criminal act for which she has NOT been charged.

[Bookworm]

I don't think we are losing sight at all, that is exactly the point I was making.

[MARTIN3030]

Theres been lots of input to your thread from all sides nitecard.The general consensus is that RLP dont have a case from what you have said.Bookies post (61)....clearly answers the question.

If they do take it to court then its up to RLP to substantiate their demands are reasonable.

[Conniff]

While it may be the case that a judge will award their recovery costs to the company in cases of proven theft, ......

 

That is the be all and end all words to this whole subject. No one can just send a bill through the post without proof and if they had this then they should also send that proof with the bill.

But they never will have proof unless a court has convicted them as a theft is not a theft until convicted, until then it is only 'alleged'.

[GlasweJen]

EMSG, I can't say I agree with you, in the case you site Tesco is pursuing and not RLP for one thing and where RLP would be allowed to recover what is reasonable in the case of the OP TXMaxx have already got the price of the shoes plus the shoes back, there was no trespass as the OPs partner actually purchased other goods at the store and so had a valid reason to be there and RLP have sent her a fine for an unitemised amount.

[emsgeorge]

And RLP should be able to justify its costs, the costs of TK Maxx, and the costs of the investigation - by providing some evidence.

 

When an alledged offender gets reported to RLP, a telephone call is made to them to report the case, followed up by a simple 2 page document, which details the offenders 'details'. On the second page, is a small box (about the size of a compliments slip) to write the detils of the incident in.

 

If RLP need further information, then they usually write to the store concerned (in this case TKM), and ask for either a full statement, cctv and supporting evidence etc.

 

If they dont return these documents, from what i have seen, then the case is dropped.

 

One of my original points though, is that peeling back, peeling off, pulling back etc etc a price label is technically Criminal Damage - there is a cost involved with having a member of staff to re price the item. You caused damage to an item that wasn't yours, incurring someone else a cost.

 

And yes, before anyone points it out - it is petty, but its an offence, to which they might decide to take action on..........

 

Whether TK / RLP go down this line is another thing!.

[Bookworm]

it is petty, but its an offence

Says who? Last I checked, this can only be decided by a court of law. :-?

 

Until they have been condemned, it is an alleged offence, and I don't believe that RLP or anyone can impose their costs on an alleged offender.

 

IF RLP think they have a case, and IF RLP decide to take it to court, and IF the courts agree that the person committed an offence, then yes, they can go and recover their costs. Before that, no, I don't think so, and I think any attempt to do so should be met with a firm "sod off, see you in court".