Banned from super market

[thedryad]

Hi, one and all!

 

On 4th August 2018 my husband was shopping in your [local] store. He hadbeen a regular and loyal customer for many years.

 

He was approached by a security guard who we were actually quite friendly with when he was about to pay for 4 items, and handed a “letter”. Security guard then simply stated “you're excluded from this store, it's all explained in the letter”.

 

It was NOT explained in the letter and no explanation was given. All that was written was an incident number and a date.

 

As I have said, he has been a loyal customer. As a qualified St. JAmbulance member and also Community First Responder, he even savedthe life of a customer whilst shopping in the store, which hereceived an award for in 2016 and it was covered by the local press.

 

 

We were both shocked and disgusted – having no explanation.

 

 

I, myself, continued to occasionally enter the store – to collect myfather's prescription and whilst there buy one or two items.

 

The security for G* witnessed me enter the store on numerous times, asdid many other members of staff.

 

On December 8th2018 I entered the store to purchase three items. It wasn't busy. I purchased the items and left the store.

 

When I was in the carpark I looked behind me as I heard voices and sawthat the same security guard (always the same man) and (personel manager) were following me. I looked at them but they didn't make eyecontact.

 

 

I got into my car where my husband and my little boy were waiting and(security guard) knocked on the window. I wound down the window andhe said “*my name*, this is a notice of exclusion from this store”.I asked why and he just said “It's explained in the letter” andwalked off with *personel*. I called to them but they very quicklyhurried off.

 

 

Now. I have the receipt from the alleged “incident”. I remember that day well.

 

A week before hand I complained to the head office about a product (a bottle of wine being hard to open because the cuff was sealed) and Inamed a member of staff in that store who was very unwilling to help.Who also happens to be my ex husband's friend.

 

 

My husband also has dark skin and I am very unsure as to whether thiswasn't a racial discrimination. We're in Mid Wales.

 

 

By the way – we live in a very small community and everyone knows everyone – the security guard in question even once gave us someseedlings from his garden. But the “letter” didn't even have ournames and address on them – just our “known as” *(for example,if your name is Margaret but you're known as Peggy”).

 

 

 

 

 

 

As my husband is a first responder and regularly gets calls to this establishment, this exact location, is he to say - “No, I can'tattend, I'm not allowed” - and potentially let someone die?

 

Now the incident in question.

 

On that day - we were having a gathering to celebrate a friend's baby being born.

 

We bought some drinks and it amounted to about 8 bottles. We are frugaland don't buy bags so we always use boxes as we were also having abonfire that evening.

We put the box on the self servicecheckout, and a checkout assistant was present, watching.

 

As we put bottles in the box on the self service till, the bottles randown towards the edge and tipped the box so I remember my husbandpropping the box up with another box. This triggered the self serviceto alert a member of staff to come and check the items - You know howit goes - "Unexpected item in bagging area"

 

She checked it. She also had the security guard witness it. Yes, the SAME security guard.

 

I double checked it was all OK.

 

The security guard said "See ya, guys, have a good evening" as we left.

 

About three days later I went into the store todo my shopping with my kids and the same security guard said helloand chatted to me.

 

Where do we stand?

 

I realise that stores have the right to ban anyone without reason - I think there is more to it than this.

 

Anyone remember the Chocolateraisin incident? I sued them and won.

 

 

 

Edited December 9, 2018 by Mr.P
Edit store location.

[thedryad]

Admin - please can you edit out the location of the shop. And replace with "well known store".

[Mr.P]

Replaced with local.

[thedryad]

Thank you. Grammar seems to have been distorted since pasted onto the forum.

[honeybee13]

I tried to reduce the large gaps in between the paragraphs of your OP but I haven't changed any words.

 

HB

[renegadeimp]

They can ban whoever they want from shopping in their stores. For any reason they want. You could complain to the store manager. As for first responder, they wont stop him attending. They are only stopping him attending with a view to purchase.

 

If they stopped a first responder from attending an emergency, it would be in the national media pretty much instantly.

 

Stop going by if's maybes etc. Youre just guessing at a reason. Not actually knowing. Get on the phone or write to the store manager, and politely but firmly ask for a reason.

[thedryad]

Thank you. That's what we're doing It's just a bit upsetting to be honest. Thanks again.

[renegadeimp]

Oh i can totally understand. But just stay calm until you get a response off the store manager Then depending on what they say, you can go from there.

[thedryad]

So would you advise writing directly to the store manager (bearing in mind in this town EVERYONE knows us) or to the CEO?

Do search these forums for the chocolateraisin incident, 2009. I wrote it that way deliberately.

Different hubby then too btw.

[thedryad]

Also, the manager, the girl who checked our basket and authorised it and, and the woman I complained about previously about the wine bottle, are all mother, daughter and brother in law.

So surely this isn't fair either.

[renegadeimp]

Go for the manager. it might just be a misunderstanding that the store manager can easily sort. No sense going to the CEO when you havent spoken to the manager, simply because he was banned from a random store.

 

And again, youre going on about an incident that may not even be part of the reason why the ban was issued. Leave that out for now and just deal with what you know. He was banned and no reason given. You want to know why. You can go into detail after you have the reason.

 

I used to work as part of the senior team at a leading supermarket, and it was insane the number of times we banned people and they went straight to the CEO's team, who promptly told them to contact the store manager as it was a store localised issue.

 

You'll find if he is innocent of anything, and its a misunderstanding, it will be cleared up pretty quickly.

[ericsbrother]

You sometimes get a knee jerk reaction so the smallest of things and it could be that this os one of those.

A member of staff has said somehting regading one of these incidents and without trying to ascertain the whle story the manager has acted in a way that sooths the brow of the complaining member of staff.

 

Now to undo this ban you will have to find out the whys as suggested above and then offer a reason to undo the ban that allows the manager to be able to tell the person who made the complaint a get out so somehting like apologising for hurting their feelings about the seal on the wine bottle

( wasnt intended to belittle them, just a problem with the bottle I couldnt solve and was frustrated that it couldnt be sorted etc even if they were rude and obstructive to you).

 

also do not mention anything about your other activities or it will be seen as trying to rub salt in their already wounded egos by showing a reason for flaunting their ban.

Separate the 2 parts of your life in any interaction with the store.

Edited December 10, 2018 by dx100uk
spacing

[thedryad]

Thank you all for your replies so far.

This is a photo of the "letter" handed to me on the carpark.

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

Oh I can't seem to upload a photo..

[renegadeimp]

click the word upload and follow the instructions

[thedryad]

Here is the letter.

[renegadeimp]

Bog standard letter they send to everyone suspected or caught

[ericsbrother]

the damaging thing for the supermarket chain is the bit about the claim for losses when you haven't actually been accused of any misappropriation of their property.

 

So you take this up with Head Office in writing and although you accept the company can tell anyone they are not allowed on their premises the rest of the letter is an insult and as it has clearly been passed from one dept to others then it is also libel and you demand that it is withdrawn from wherever it has been circulated and a formal apology given.

 

In the meanwhile you request a copy of all information held on you by the company including all CCTV from that store in particular.

Hubby does the same.

[steveod]

They may ban whoever they want that’s correct.

However, you and your husband should both send them subject access request under GDPR and data protection act.

Once you get that back, and there is no valid reason for them banning you, instruct them to remove all your and your husbands personal details from their systems.

 

IMO these type of permanent banning restrictions involve the keeping and processing of personal data that exceeds far than what is necessary in all the circumstances.

I would also determine from your SAR how they got your personal details, when they obtained them and hit them for a claim for unlawful processing as hopefully and probably they have nor provided the required notification under GDPR article 14.

[thedryad]

Hi. They don't have our personal details. Just our shortened nanes, because as I said above we are well known locally and in the store.

[steveod]

Your names are your personal data. There must also be other communications, letters, email perhaps where they have used your personal data. Send them a SAR and let’s see what they have stored about you. Even them using your known as names to have given you the letter is using your personal data and they probably have not used it fairly or transparently.

[renegadeimp]

A day won't reveal anything. It's far easier and quicker just to speak to the store manager.

 

That letter is prob printed off by the security staff and signed by them without any knowledge of management.

 

All they'll say to store management is ... we caught a shoplifters today and banned them.

 

That's it.

[steveod]

And if that’s the case then it’s definitely unlawful processing of personal data. And a claim for damages and distress would easily be obtained.

[renegadeimp]

No it isnt. You need to stop posting about such things. Them keeping a record of someone they banned is not unlawful processing of personal data. If they decided to share it to a third party then yes it would be.

[steveod]

Time you started learning about GDPR.

It’s more powerful than you think if you know the law,

 

Let’s see.

 

1.they need a lawful basis of processing under article 6. The only one is article 6(f). It requires them to have a legitimate reason. They do. It then requires a case-by-case evaluation of their rights against the data subjects rights. Some security guard writing on a form doesn’t meet this requirement. A failure of GDPR.

 

2. Where did the company get the OP or their husbands personal data from? From a third party ie the security guard or store manager. Therefore requirements under GDPR art 14 must be met. They haven’t probably. A failure.

 

3.they can share it perfectly fine with a third party as long as their privacy notice, which they have not provided to the OP anyway, states the recipients they can provide the data to. It’s then up to that 3rd party to provide info required under art 14 to themselves be compliant. As they didn’t provided their privacy notice it’s a GDPR failure.

 

4. They may only process personal data where there is a legitimate and lawful reason. And they may only keep processing for as long as is reasonably justified in all the circumstances. Even the police can only keep people Who have not been convicted personal data for 6 years. A life time ban and keeping the photos and personal data for a lifetime has no chance of being compatible.

[steveod]

PS I have already used similar to the above against 3 private parking companies and they just withdrew their stupid parking charge notices.

Didn’t even need to bother with POPLA.

They just escalated to their “legal”teams who knew they on a losing streak and didn’t even want to try test the GDPR in court.

Possibly same for the OP from the limited info provided but that’s why the SAR is the first thing to do.