A nice victory against the Door Nazi's!
 

Posted from the San Jose Mercury News "Action Line" column, December 13, 2005:

Store scraps bad policy on checking receipts

By Dennis Rockstroh


Q I read with interest your columns about the legality of the common retail practice of stopping customers for package and receipt inspection at the store exit.

My understanding of the practice is as follows:

1) It is legal for the merchant to ask, but not to require, the customer to stop for an inspection.

2) The customer has the right to decline an inspection and to proceed out of the store without further interruption.

3) A merchant may detain a customer only if the merchant has probable cause to believe that the customer has stolen something.

4) Probable cause has a very specific legal definition: a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime.

5) A customer cannot be detained inside of the store, as theft cannot occur until the customer has exited the building.

6) Membership stores, such as Costco, may include mandatory inspections in the membership agreement.

Unless my understanding of your columns is incorrect, my 15-year-old son and his friend were inappropriately detained in late November at the Staples office supply store in Campbell.

When the boys declined the requested package/receipt inspection, the store employee demanded that they turn around and come back to her.

Eventually, although the boys tried to explain that they simply wished to leave the store, the employee intimidated them into returning. She then proceeded to check their merchandise.

Thinking that perhaps my son had encountered a poorly trained Staples employee, I went to the store later and spoke with the manager. She told me that the store requires everyone to stop for an inspection. Although she said that she would look into my concerns about the legality of this practice, she said she would, in the meanwhile, continue requiring inspections.

The manager emphasized that the store loses a lot of inventory to theft and commented that teenage boys are a significant part of the problem.

What do you think?

Melodie Gellman
San Jose

A I think you are right, Melodie.

And so does Staples.

Spokesman Owen Davis told me that there will be some retraining at the store.

Your report back: ``I just received a very polite, apologetic call from a Staples executive assuring me that the entire staff, including the manager, of the Campbell store has been retrained.

``Customers will never again be involuntarily detained at the door unless the store has probable cause to suspect shoplifting.

``Kudos to you for supporting customer rights, and kudos to Staples for their prompt response!''

I never even knew that Morrison was a member of the Nazi party. Hmmm...

Took me 10 seconds to figure out that reference. I'm a tad slow today. :)

So I guess I can just walk by the Fry's guys now.

You always could have.

Leaving Wal-Mart the other night, there was a LINE for the door nazi as she checked everyone's receipts. I walked right past the line, past the door nazi and out.

As I exited the revelation hit the rest of the people in line that they didn't actually have to wait to get their receipts checked, and the line peeled off from the back and followed me out :)

I do it anyways.

If it's a cute girl, I stop though.....

No, if she's cute, make eye contact with her as you walk by, making her chase you. Then when she catches you, tell her that the only way she'll search your bag is if she does a strip search, too. Then give her your business card and run away. If she doesn't search you, you win. If she DOES search you, you REALLY win!

Never seen a cute girl at Fry's.

Well, maybe not working there, but some of the shoppers are nice! It's hard to beat a sweet looking geek girl!

If there's no line at Home Depot, I'll let the morons check. If there's any sort of line, I walk past, usually with the guard saying "wait ! Sir !", with me then ignoring them.

I'm surprised that people put up with this idiotic crap. What's the point, anyways ? It's not like they actually match the receipt up with the goods. And if you have more than a half dozen items, forget it.

So, if you were really daring, you could stick a bunch of things in your bag on the way out and when the guy questions you about it, just say oops and leave them with him and walk out, then dare him to do something about it.

yah I was stuck first on Morrison's cafeteria , then on to Van Morrison and after i looked at the subject line of Door Nazis did Ifinally get to Jim Morrison :p

I like it when they forget to deactivate the security device, and they come running and screaming at you out in to the parking lot.

Happened to me once. They dragged me back inside to deactivate the security device before allowing me to leave.

Note, they didn't actually check to see if I had paid for the item. They just wanted to make sure I didn't activate the security alarm when I left again :rolleyes:

Attempted shop lifting?

I never hesitate to walk past the goons at Fry's if there is a line.

I do love watching the individual's style of checking when I have many items, as I usually buy 15 or 20 items at a time when I am restocking my parts inventory. They look at the length of the reciept and concentrate intently for 10 or 15 seconds and look in two or three bags and then just scribble that pink marker and move me along...

too much to deal with for a minimum wage employee.

The only place around here that checks is Costco. There must be a lot of criminals where you people live.


:D

The thing I don't get is the door checkers at Wal-Mart. They don't actually check anything. They just stand there with a highlighter and slash through the receipt, then hand you back the receipt. At least at Sam's Club, they make a cursory attempt to count.

That's what I was thinking. The only place I've ever seen it was at Sam's and from the OP, it sounds like they can because it's probably in their membership agreement.

I suppose you could still refuse the search, and then they could retaliate by terminating your membership.

So now can we get a victory at the other door for Sam's Club? The entrance?

Sam's advertises itself as trying to save you money. No bags at checkout, etc. Fine. How about not paying someone to stand at the entrance to needlessly glance at my card, and using that saved revenue to lower prices?

You're either a member or you aren't. If you are, then your card is scanned at the checkout register anyway. If you aren't, and are allowed to wander in and shop, then you should pay an extra premium (3%?) at the register. Simple - and Sam's makes a little extra money too. If the non-member then decides it's worth it to become a member, then everyone wins.

But lose the drone at the entrance!

Is that a geek store?

I was at GameStop the other nite buying a game for my nephew for x-mas and I was talking to the cashier. I asked him how he liked his job. He said he does it for the employee discount. I asked him if he also did it for the cute chicks. This was his expression:

:confused:

He said cute chicks don't go in that store. :)

Heh - just replace the person at the door with a whole row of "man traps" that won't allow you through unless you swipe/scan your Sam's Club card. Problem solved. :)

Well, we know at least one did, and then asked the clerk about it. ;)

If the nerd (eh, excuse me, guy) behind the counter didn't at least have the decency to say "present company excepted" after declaring that no cute chicks go into the store, he's completely gallantry disabled, and doesn't deserve ever to have a girlfriend! ;)

i think it's really just a deterrent kind of thing. it may cause some would-be criminals to "think twice" before trying to stuff that extra dvd player into the cart, etc. but, for the most part, i always laugh when i watch someone check the stuff. all they do is glance at the receipt, glance in the cart, then scribble something on the receipt.

ahem... Person Traps. :)

Why doesn't Costco just not give memberships to people who steal?

Wouldn't the act of refusing inspection constitute probable cause?

Nope.


At least not in the criminal context which I assume would be applied in these type of cases as well.

If exercising a right is inherently suspicious, then it's not a right.