Badjeebus

Uhm... according to the official complaint he lodged with the PD, he *did* show his receipt. It just wasn't in the correct manner for the guard or something apparently.

OH yeah... and btw, someone has been bothering my sister online and their handle is similar to yours. Give me a record of all your online activities for the past year so I can confirm it's not you.

You have nothing to hide, right?

Badjeebus

Shit - that's a great way to skirt the whole "domestic spying" mess ... Just request that every American citizen agree to a "voluntary" wiretap - refusal being conclusive enough evidence for a warrent anyways; as nobody in their right might would refuse a simple wiretap unless they had something to hide.

I sure hope for the sake of your coworkers that this isn't the same brain you use for your coding.

iamacyborg

> So what's real reason for checking receipts?

The idea is that having visible and audible "security" measures in place will dissuade shoplifters from targeting their store.

neuromonkey

Man is arrested after refusing to show his receipt at Circuit City

A guy named Michael Righi was arrested after shopping at a Circuit City in Brooklyn, Ohio. His crime stemmed from making two separate purchases while in Circuit City and upon leaving, refused to allow the Circuit City loss prevention employee to search his bags or look at his two receipts. When he left the store and got into his father's car, the Circuit City employee followed him and would not allow the car to leave.

Righi asked the Circuit City loss prevention employee if he was being accused of shoplifting. He was told that he was not, but that he would not allow him to leave the parking lot until Righi produced the receipts and allowed him to search his bags.

Righi refused and since the Circuit City employee was physically blocking him from leaving, Righi called the police.

When the police arrived, they told Righi that Circuit City had the "right" to inspect receipts and bags of customers leaving their store. They don't have this right. The police then demanded to see Righi's drivers license. He refused. He was not driving a motor vehicle. The officer had no right to ask him for his license to drive a motor vehicle. The police reacted to this refusal by placing him under arrest.

After taking Righi into the police station, they realized they had no business demanding that a person who was not driving a motor vehicle to produce a license to drive a motor vehicle. It would be like stopping a car and asking the driver to produce a fishing license. Not having anything to actually charge Righi with, the police found something vague enough to satisfy a reason for the arrest.

ORD:525.07: Obstructing Official Business (M-2)
(a) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official's official capacity shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official's lawful duties.

Righi was able to pay the bail ($300) and he was released. His trial will be September 20. He will undoubtedly beat the charge, but he shouldn't have to. Righi did the right thing in not showing the Circuit City employee his receipts and not allowing him to search his bags. Righi did the right thing in refusing to show the police officer his drivers license.

That doesn't mean I would have done the same thing. I wish I could say that I would, but I know how I would have responded. I made a vow to myself a long time ago to never be placed under arrest in the United States. Other countries don't count.

Its important to point out that at no time did anyone from Circuit City accuse Michael Righi of shoplifting. If they had, they could have legally demanded to see his receipts and to search his bags. They had no reason to suspect him of shoplifting.

The reason stores do this type of thing is because they don't trust their own employees. They lose more money every year to their own employees stealing then they do to shoplifters. Employees have their friends come in and purchase things and they covertly place items in their bags without scanning them into the register. If stores like Circuit City want to stop employee theft, they should hire better employees. They shouldn't coerce their customers into producing a receipt or consenting to having their property searched.

Its degrading and annoying.

Nissan

This extract sums it up:-

"Even though Australia has signed all five international treaties that make up the International Bill of Human Rights, none of these treaties are legally binding in Australia. Nor is there is a Bill of Rights in the Australian Constitution. This means that the fundamental rights and freedoms of everyone living in Australia are not protected by the law".

Ouch!! I can almost hear you say! " no wonder that mob down there so docilely present their receipts at the check out!"

....and why we do not have the enshrined right to bear arms as you do under the Second Amendment!

However, all is not lost, as we do have the protection of Common Law ( which as the name suggests came to us from our British heritage)

This principle may be summarised as " the body of law based on judicial systems and custom as distinct from statute law and is bound up in a set of precedents.

The key word in the context of our discussion is " custom"

Thus it has been established under Common Law that a person may not be unreasonbly detained ( and certainly not unreasonably seized).

Citizens arrests fall under this category as does wrongful arrest. Any one making a citizen's arrest would need to be sure of their grounds if they were to avoid subsequent litigation!

By coincidence, I was at a different Hardware Chain store the other day when there was quite a kerfuffle going on just outside the store, which illustrates my point here!

A customer was quite volubly expressing his dis-satisfaction at a turn of events which saw store management detain him, then hand him over to police for questioning. I asked the attendant what was going on and was informed that a store detective had observed the customer stuff an item up his shirt then walk out of the store!

I appreciate that this incident is quite different to the one germane to this argument, but it illustrates an example of when a receipt would need to be produced to establish one's innocence or otherwise!

As another example I was shopping recently at a Woolworths grocery store, when an announcement came over the store central speaker system to the effect that in future all parcelled items not purchased at the store ( ie brought into the store)would be searched. I noticed a similar sign at each checkout!

The store has let the customers know it will be enforcing it's common law rights!

This somewhat lengthy discourse may well raise as many questions as it provides answers. There are always grey areas in situations like this! After all who defines " unreasonable"

To the detainer their action is reasonable. To the detainee it is most certainly unreasonble!

I'm a mere layman and do not profess to have anything but a passing knowledge of our law. If I'm challenged at a checkout I go weak at the knees and cough up my receipt every time!

Nissan

spamtasticus

Buran

thisisjacked

What is it that annoys you so much?

Is it because his actions make you realize that you're too cowardly to do the same? So you have to brand him as a jackass?

dequeued

DeeHaney

The reply by the CEO [tinyurl.com] makes me feel way better about shopping at Home Depot, where I've had a few similar experiences to the ones you recount.

Viajero

You're an idiot. Let's blame the customer.

ohgoodness

I should also have mentioned that the same lady who quickly "eyes" your receipt and purchases at the exit is also a 'meet and greet' lady.

That is, she smiles at you as you enter the store and wishes you a happy day as you head for the aisles.

When you exit you have already "met" her and there is no sense of 'obligation', rather an understanding that she is doing her job, that she is doing it courteously and with a smile and there is no sense of intrusion of the customer's rights, whatever they may be!

Nissan

zippyglue

zippyglue

goller321

Also, it has been found time and again that refusal to allow a search CANNOT be grounds for suspicion of wrong doing. No if, and, or buts! If a cop pulls me over and tells me to open my truck, and I say no, they have no right to open it, unless there are other factors introduced, like say blood leaking out of the truck...

Get a life bone head... or maybe you're just a troll...

goller321

If I have nothing to hide, then why would I accept the default assumption that I've done something criminal?

dantsea

First off I think the "shrink is not my problem" comments are just selfish. If the company incurs shrink they compensate for it by RAISING prices, while lowering wages of the employees who are just trying to make a living, everyone looses. So you pay either way (I prefer in time) Which is my next point, the reason most of the shrink is internal in retail is because its harder to detect. By checking receipts on sco transactions and when the merchandise protection systems go off it acts as a deterent to shoplifters. Thus reducing externally caused shrink, keeping prices down and employees happy and more willing to help.

Bottom line give the poor employee that is probably making 10-25k a break and stop for a few seconds so they can check your receipt and not feel ignored/disrespected. As someone who is working retail and can't wait to get out of it I can say that things like this when people abuse employees is probably the root cause of all poor customer service.

nak1986

dantsea

goller321

skoochie

PancakeBreakfast

whitjm5

I don't understand how this is being horribly intrusive on your rights!

It's not a violation of your rights or privacy if they ask to see your receipt. It is, however, a violation of etiquette and common courtesy. Absent a criminal investigation, I'm under no obligation to to justify or prove ownership for MY property to anyone, no matter how trivial or inconsequential such request may be.

Simply put, it's rude. And the appropriate answer to a rude personal request is to ignore it, or to respond with a simple and polite "No you may not."

The reason so many people discuss the receipt check issue with talk of privacy and rights is because over the past few years, the practice has become so widespread and so commonplace that many people, including door "guards" and LP employees, are starting to think that they actually have a RIGHT to see your receipt. The more people continue to meekly submit to this "minor" inconvenience, the more those seven dollar an hour blueshirts think that they actually have the authority to force you to produce it. This has led to a growing number of incidents of people being accosted, detained, verbally abused, forcibly restrained, and even assaulted by under trained or overzealous store employees.

And those are a violation of your rights.

And until people start standing up and saying NO, the worse it will get.

TinyBug

And who is going to take this letter seriously when he starts out saying, "I PROBABLY won't come back to your store, I MIGHT go a few miles out instead, I don't want to be detained in the future from you guys". WTF?

nursethalia

digitalshay

amccoll

moviemoron

sleepycoder

I don't see enough information here to come to a conclusion. Information on the event is sparse and seemingly contradicting.

Did he have the receipt or did his father? Did he show it or not? Was he physically detained or briefly questioned?

I am also wondering if requiring to show a receipt is unlawful. We have rights, but so does Home Depot. As much as some of us would like to think they don't, they still have a right to protect their business. Personally, I don't see how it is any different than the rights we waive, upon entering the store, when they use security cameras or ask for ID when we write a check. If anyone has some information I would like to see it.

I don't know if he was unlawfully detained because I don't know the details of the detainment. If it is legal to require a receipt check, and a customer refuses, I see that as probable cause and see no reason why an officer who happen to be there can't question the customer.

But receipt checks are everywhere, and if they are in fact illegal, shouldn't we be organizing to have this law enforced across the board, and not using it as a chance to complain about broken saws or CPVC elbow stock?

kgarr

For all of you sheep who don't seem to value your rights:

There are very simple, straightforward steps for establishing a solid base for probable cause. Failure to do so opens the store up to liability for false arrest (if a citizen's arrest is performed), unlawful detainment/imprisonment, kidnapping (unlikely that this would stick), etc.

1. A store employee must see the shoplifter approach the merchandise.
2. A store employee must see the shoplifter select/pick up the merchandise.
3. A store employee must see the shoplifter conceal, carry away or convert the merchandise.
4. A store employee must maintain continuous observation of the shoplifter.
5. A store employee must see the shoplifter fail to pay for the merchandise.
6. A store employee must wait for the shoplifter to leave the store before confronting them.

It really is that simple. If those six steps are not followed, the suspect cannot be detained without risking liability. And if the suspect has not stolen any merchandise, *and* decides to press charges, the risk is realized. Please note that, while several states make exceptions to this (some allow for detainment of 10-15 minutes, I believe), most states DO NOT allow stores to detain individuals unless they have ACTUALLY broken a law. "I'm just checking your receipt" is not legitimate cause to detain. They MUST allow you to leave, or they are detaining you illegally, against your will. Time to call the cops.

Now, I see your point. "Why do you care so much," you might ask. Well, for a lot of reasons. First, I dislike the precedent. I don't like the idea that just because I didn't wear a tie that day or maybe I've got dirt on my jeans from a project, that someone will treat me differently. Second, I'm not being paid by whatever company decides to stop me to improve their security. I've got places to go and things to do. And quite frankly, by the time they've decided to stop me I've probably already been waiting in line for a while to check out, and a while longer because something wasn't marked correctly. As Buran so eloquently put it: "Feel free to surrender your rights. But don't you DARE bitch when someone else stands up for theirs." You can be a sheep all you want. But us whiny bastards who make a stink are the only reason you HAVE rights like this, civil protections, and statutes preventing you from being taken advantage of.

For those of you who keep complaining about this sort of behavior by stores:

With the exception of specific cases (like this one, in which he was detained by the police), the appropriate reaction is very simple: as you approach the door and the security/store employee asks for your receipt, you simply say "No, thank you," and keep walking. That's it. Stop freaking out about how "horrible" these companies are for even asking. Yes, you have the right to say no. And similarly, they have the right to ask in the first place. Most people are sheep. They just go along with it without questioning why they are waiting in a second line after checkout to just get out of the store. If they would stop being sheep and refuse as well, eventually stores would stop asking because they would realize it doesn't work. Until then, they will keep asking. And you can keep saying no. 'Nuff said.

It is rare (though not unheard of) for store personnel to follow you out complaining about it. I've had it happen at Best Buy once, and I just said "Look, you have the right to ask me for my receipt, and I have the right to say 'No, thank you.' Go ask that police officer if you have any further questions." (Yes, apparently Best Buys in the SF Bay Area have police hanging out in the stores, augmenting security.) He walked inside and spoke excitedly to the police officer, who gave him a bored look and shook his head. That was the end of it. Yes, if someone actually DETAINS you, make a stink. It's unlawful detainment, and it's grounds for a civil lawsuit, if not criminal charges. You're not a thief, and you've broken no law. Call 9-1-1 (if you don't have anywhere to be) and make your point. But don't expect them to allow you to come back if you do. You may not agree with the politics, but it *is* their store. Otherwise, JUST KEEP WALKING. Store policy doesn't mean ANYTHING. They can claim it's store policy to strip-search you and chop off your hands if you steal something. Does that mean they actually can? Of course not! The only stores that have ANY legal right to search your bags, check your receipt, etc. are membership-based stores such as Sam's Club and Costco. You've signed a contract with them that allows them to do so. Setting aside the fact that some rights can't actually be signed away, you've agreed to allow them to check your receipt, search your bag, or whatever else they put in the contract. If you refuse, they could (potentially) sue you for breach of contract. I doubt they would; they'd just warn you not to do it again, or perhaps cancel your membership. (Probably resulting in a refund of membership fees.) But other than those specific circumstances, NO store has a right to detain or search you, or your property (including your documents, such as your receipt), unless your state has granted them specific rights to do so.

Now, this particular case is of course the exception to the rule, altogether. If that store told the officer you shoplifted, the officer was well within his rights to detain you. Of course, you could always have asked him the standard questions: "Am I under arrest? Am I being detained? Am I free to go?" If the answer is yes to the first, ask for what charge. If yes to the second, ask under what grounds. If no to both of the first, the officer MUST say yes to the third, or one of the first two answers weren't correct. Either you're under arrest/being detained, or you're free to go. If you're free to go, GO. If the store did NOT tell the officer that you shoplifted, you are not being accused of a crime. Unless you're under arrest for a crime or being detained as a suspect of a crime, you cannot be detained by the police. (Legally, anyway.) "We think he might have, but aren't willing to say he did" is NOT (so far as I am aware, though the current political climate may have changed this) enough for an officer to legally detain you. Either the store commits to this action and says you did, or the officer has to let you go.

If the store DID accuse you of shoplifting, the burden of proof is on them. That's where the six steps come in. Now, assuming that you didn't actually walk out the door with something that you didn't pay for (intentionally or not), they have NOTHING to support their claims, and they are liable. Sue their pants off. They'll likely settle (particularly if they're a large chain) because they know they have no legal backing for their claims. Document, document, document, and get yourself a lawyer. They know the law. You don't. Guessing wildly at the right way to handle things may end up losing your case. Do it right, or give it up.

That's really all there is to it.

- Ezra -

Ezra Ekman

chris.zeman

This guy simply has a beef with Home Depot. I would too if I had received the type of service he claims to have received over an extended period of time, but I wouldn't shop at that store anymore. I'd be willing to bet that the "grab" was nothing more than the guard getting his attention, but I can't say for sure since I wasn't there. My opinion...this guy was just looking for a battle, pure and simple.

chris.zeman

aszure

a bedroom/bathroom is an individual's private propery, and we have laws governing illegal search/seizure.

The store/receipt/purchase checking policies though do not fall under illegal search/seizure until you have left the premises. Until you have left the store's property though, you are still under the realm of their rules.

mpancha

aszure

Also...read what the bill of rights actually is...its to prevent the govt from putting restraints and restrictions on the people.

I worked in retail for 6 years, and most of the theft is internal, however, internal theft takes many more man hours to investigate and pursue. They have to try to curtail the theft somehow.

For all the complainers...here's a very simple suggestion....

Keep your receipt in your hand until you get in your car. Think you can handle that?

aszure

hmm... 'lets agree to disagree' is actual a pillar of society remaining peaceful. People will have differing views on things, and most times, each view is partially right, and partially wrong, but overall unimportant enough to where it is best to 'agree to disagree' to keep the peace.

Its one of those things that makes sense when you get married, and do your best to stay married instead of taking the easy way out with divorce.

mpancha

It would be one thing if all that ever happened was they detained you. I would be pissed too.

However, there is a whole list of times you complained to someone about something. Most people might return something occasionally, but you are on a mission to have everything done your way

You are a whiny bitch. Deal with it. A whiny bitch.

BugMeNot2

.... that said... I commend your course of action to resolve your situation. Again, i don't agree with the problem you are making the complaint about, I feel you are equally to blame for the issue that started all this... the receipt, but, you are going about handling your complaint in a very level headed way. Your letter is clear, outlines all of your complaints, gives good examples, overall it is very well composed.

mpancha

jack82

Dagonis

jack82

Yet, so many on this thread act as if it were a common event. I would be startled and offended. I would probably raise a holy stink while I was digging out the receipt. I would probably be banned from ever shopping there again which would be meaningless, because I don't tend to go back to stores that make me raise holy stinks.

And I would write letters to the manager and corporate office. And waste at least as much time on the issue as our Home Depot customer. I have better things to do. So don't make me show my stinkin' receipt!

erratapage

Possibly - but I see it as a starting point. Rather than grab someone and detain them, start gently by asking them for a receipt.

The real crux of the issue is: Who is authority going to side with: The guy or the merchant/police.

I think we both know that answer....

xoxor

Word!

Mr. Gunn

I am not a sheep, and will not follow their rules. If they don't like it, that's fine, ban me from their establishment.

BTW: I've never been banned from anywhere.

Dajiu

That is the stupidest statement in the world, "Let's agree to disagree"

Let's get sick for our health.

Let's fight for peace.

Let's pray for atheism.

Let's agree to disagree.

Let's add to subtract.

Let's be stupid for intelligence.

Dooley

Can I set up a camera in your bed room and bath room? If you have nothing to hide, why not?

G-Dog

TIP: small hardware stores are much better at helping you and having the usuals in stock.

forever_knight

So so all the *sheep* ... just say no so that the rest of us stop being bothered.

Outside of Costco, I ignore the *sheep* lines and walk right out of the store, but I do hold up my receipt as I exit. If they say something as I walk away, I simply reply "no thanks" :-)

david.c

However, if you've shopped there once, you know they check receipts at the door. If you don't like that policy, don't go there.

I have a better idea. I'll shop wherever I want to. If they have a policy I don't like, I'll ignore it. If they don't like the fact that I won't follow their policy, they may refuse to do business with me or ask me to leave. Because absent probable cause for a shoplifting detention, that is the only legal authority they have over me.

TinyBug

As far as I know they got someone at a monitor in back, turning on the 'alarm' when someone 'suspicious' goes through.

I have to wonder what kind of legal action this person can take against the police? Seems like wrongful arrest to me.

Can I go up to a stranger and ask to see a receipt for the last thing they bought and then call the police if they don't? What CRIME was committed when he didn't show the receipt.

I just keep walking and so far no one has hassled me.

FilthyHarry

I wasn't talking about a Home Depot, but rather giving examples of other stores (like Best Buy and Wal-Mart especially) where the person at the door waved me passed before I could whip out the receipt. And the person had the pen in hand to check.

Gadgetgirl

True story: I once went in to buy a gallon of mixed paint. The only person available was an unsupervised 20-something year old man who was clearly autistic and had a "New Employee" badge on his vest. It took an hour and a half to get the paint, during which I made four attempts to engage a manager or other sales person to assist the poor guy (who clearly had no idea what he was doing). The punchline, of course, is that the paint I received was not the right color so I had to get ANOTHER gallon made. (This time I forced the issue; I went behind the counter and sat in front of the register until the paint was mixed.)

I've since done my shopping at Lowes (much better, but not perfect) and my local Ace Hardware, the latter of which contains the most helpful and attentive salespeople I've ever met in any business.

sgodun

No such contract exists by default when you enter a non-membership big box store.

humphrmi

The poster states that his father had the receipt and had already left.

Would you suggest stores pin the receipts to our shirts so we don't forget on our way out that they assume all of their customers are guilty of theft until they walk out the door?

Rey

of course, the store will claim this is not to stop shoplifting but to make sure everything you purchased made it into your bag! How sweet of them.

Thumbs up for the man standing up for his rights. And shame on those saying we should forfeit our rights for a little convenience.

ProjectGSX

ltlbbynthn

edwu

That's why they call them *rights*. It is *NOT* okay.

--Michael

gte910h

mthrndr

If the government does not have that right then how can one state that private entities do? If not for the scale of the entity (Home Depot) this could be compared to a private citizen strip searching house guests as they leave to ensure that nothing was being stolen from the house. It is ridiculous.

The bottom line is that just because people think it is stupid does not mean that there is no right to do something. I think many of the comments made criticizing the OP are pretty stupid but I would be just as worked up if you weren't allowed your right (albeit to be stupid) to speak your mind.

The 4th Amendment is a pretty important right and if Home Depot found something illegal in one of their illegal searches it would not be thrown out of court as it was not an illegal search by the government but rather information discovered and passed along by a private entity. I would personally rather not be searched by proxy for the government.

Hobart007

bdsakx

However, if you've shopped there once, you know they check receipts at the door. If you don't like that policy, don't go there.

On the rare occasion I have to go to Home Depot (namely because the True Value I used to go to, closed shortly after Lowe's opened up), I know they are going to check the receipt. It isn't like they are going through your pockets or frisking you, or making you go through metal detectors on the way out.
Keep in mind Home Depot also has self checkout, so I am sure corporate feels some need to make sure people aren't just bagging and walking out with product.

suburbancowboy

@humphrmi: He likely ticketed a dozen that day, and likely only you got out of it. He still made a profit for city. That's what counts.

digitalgimpus

Viva La Volvo

sleepydumbdude

BUT, if there is a line, NO F*CKING WAY am I waiting on for this. Ain't happening.

Kurt's Krap

mantari

@Nissan: Maybe that's even scarier. If your rights are violated with a smile, it's okay? (Then again, I'm not sure if Australia has a fourth-amendment equivalent.)

@edrebber: It would sure be a hell of a lawsuit. I've nearly been in it a few times, but so far every time my husband or I give the legal warning ("You have no legal right to detain me, but since you're putting your hands on me, I have a legal right to defend myself. However, since I'm [insert dangerousness here], I have to warn you that my defending myself may result in bodily harm to you. This is your warning; you have five seconds to remove your hand before I defend myself. One. Two.") ...the employee always leaves off. Perhaps we keep running into the ones that are smart enough to realize they're not getting paid enough to get beaten!

Mary Marsala with Fries

::raises beer::

And to all the sheep who want Mike and the rest of us to just shut up and put up with unreasonable searches...

::raises muzzle::

Mary Marsala with Fries

janetcarol

Jaysyn

pibbsman0

moore850

Jordan Lund

This is a major chain store throughout the country ( Australia) and is accepted practice.

Customers take it for granted and think nothing of it. The attendant is always polite and smiling, thanks you for co-operation and wishes you a happy day.
It is hard to tke offence under these circumstances!

Nissan

It bothers me every time they ask me to show them the receipt, yet I go along with it.

Should I ask them if they're accusing me of shoplifting?
Perhaps offer to return the items I've legitimately purchased?

I'm just at a loss, really. I'd like to "never" shop there again, but unfortunately it doesn't really seem like they care whether or not I shop there.

codexile

edrebber

Using the same logic, you can imagine a conversation like this:
Cop: bkpatt, let me search your laptop. I think you collect kiddie porn.
bkpatt: No, I don't collect kiddie porn, and I'm busy right now.
Cop: Aha! So you do have something to hide. Now that I've established reasonable cause, I will search your computer, bkpatt, you kiddie porn collecting douchebag!

spinachdip

Government rules don't apply on private property? This is the best news I've hear all week! I was worried my illegal cockfighting operation would get shut down, but since it's on MY establishment, government rules don't apply, right? And you know what? Just for the hell of it, I'm going to instruct my employees to NOT wash their hands after using the restrooom! Don't tread on me, Big Brother!

spinachdip

The ONLY important issue at hand is that they did not have the right to detain him, but violated his rights by doing so anyway.

Ignore the receipt, it's not important. Wanton violation of personal rights with no probable cause, and the fact that this violation is considered acceptable practice, is the matter at hand.

WraithSama

Hey dude, if you read the rant: his father had the receipt and was out of the immediate area.

kylerg

You'd probably tell Rosa Parks to get a life and sit in the back of the bus, too, because what's the big deal?

(NO I am not equating this guy's complaints with the civil rights movement.)

lihtox

Well, that is obviously a completely different situation. You have to show proof of purchase to recieve the goods. Now if you sold me the goods & gave them to me at the same time.... and then demanded to see my reciept afterwards as I was leaving, then you could just go pound sand. Once I bought it, have the product & reciept in hand, there is nothing you can do.

forgottenpassword

mikelotus

mikelotus

mikelotus

Guess what at my store, no receipt = no products. I operate like a lumber yard. You pay upfront, you retrieve out back. No receipt and you just forfeited your goodies until you grow up and show the receipt. And yes I get away with it, I am protecting the goods until the rightful owner appears.

StevieD

Sorry, but refusing to be searched doesn't count as probable cause for a search. If you didn't sleep through government class, maybe you should've, as it doesn't seem to have done you much good.

Moreover, once you've paid for the item, you own it. If they can't trust their cashiers, that's not your problem or mine, and it's certainly not justification to search me, this guy, or any other customer.

Amy Alkon

Tansis

I'm with the two other Ben F. quoters, and I'm disgusted by the people who argue for compliance. People died to win these freedoms we have. Have a little respect.

Amy Alkon

kenblakely

Making fun of the "douchebags" you're so intent on sneering down at is rather ridiculous when you consider this topic has come up DOZENS of times before, the same smarmy point you're trying to make has been made TENS of dozens of times, and that people who really do know this stuff have stepped up and explained the situation.

You were wanting to know about jokes at the expense of society? You're looking in the wrong place.

And calling people "douchebags" just because you disagree with them is totally uncalled for. I suggest that if you want to be taken seriously, you be more respectful.

Buran

and I quote

"Unless I missed something, Home Depot is not the government. YOUR ignorance is not adding to this discussion."

I guess YOUR ignorance is not adding to the discussion.

That being said, I agree with the complaint. Cops now think they own and can do anything they want when they want(and they can and will) just another thing to add to the list right here.

Mr.Ninethree

I've done a number of different things...

Just said "no thank you" and kept going.

Reached into my pocket and handed over a wad of crumpled receipts from the various places I'd shopped at.

Placed a nicely wrapped after dinner mint in the outstretched hand.

Handed the very heavy parcel I was carrying to the door troll so I could slowly search for the receipt.

But usually I just keep hobbling along as if I can't hear them wailing and gnashing behind me - especially if there is a line of people waiting patiently for the trolls to do their thing.

Tomas

Tijil

No.... an customer does NOT have to follow your rules (even if its your store) if they dont want to. They legally cannot be arrested for not doing so (unless your rules are the same as the law ... like theft) you can ONLY ban them from your property & have them arrested for tresspassing if they come back.

I can walk into your store, & not show a reciept & there is absolutely nothing you can do other than ban me from ever coming in again.

forgottenpassword

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Since none of you bothered to stay awake through PoliSci 101, let me highlight the key areas for you:

", but upon probable cause" (That would be the douchebag refusing to show his receipt, if not arising suspicion before-hand.)

"supported by Oath or affirmation" (That would be HD presenting the concern of needing to see the receipt for the merchandise leaving the store.)

"and particularly describing the place to be searched" (Done, it was on HD property, thus the search was to take place at the encounter."

"and the persons or things to be seized." (that would be douchebag Matt, and his HD receipt.)

This search did not even make it past UNREASONABLE. A store requiring a receipt to exit with merchandise is most certainly not unreasonable, as set by both precedent, protection of private property, and by acceptable norms. No court in the land would conclude that receipt checking is UNREASONABLE SEARCH.

Matt and this thread are one big giant joke at the expense of society.

bkpatt

factotum

WTF is illegal? There was police on-site, so they either had been concerned about this guy's behavior while he was shopping and called them in advance, had a concern about another shopper and were checking everyone temporarily, or this guy was just unlucky that he blew off the store security guard by keeping on walking past after flashing him a receipt and the cop outside saw it. HD has EVERY right to require a receipt to exit the store, they EFFING OWN THE STORE! They can set whatever policies they want for the shopping experience, beginning to end. Whatever MORON tried to infer that the "shopping" ends after you pay is an idiot. You are on private property, HD can require you to show a receipt to exit just the same as they can require you to wear shoes to enter. Wearing shoes is not a law last time I checked, but that doesn't stop stores from having THAT policy. It also wouldn't stop them from having the police remove you if you refused to comply with that policy. Police have a duty to "keep the peace," and disturbing the peace IS breaking the law.

As for "probable cause" - this douchebag CREATED probable cause the second he refused to show a receipt. How much more guilty can you make yourself look? You are leaving a store, with merchandise, and REFUSING to prove you have paid for it. Well, gee, I believe that leaves one of two assumptions. You are either A) a thief, or B) a moron who wants to LOOK like a thief.

Oh, and want to know the absolutely ironic ending to this story?

He showed the receipt and left.

WTG Matt, you are officially a MORON.

bkpatt

This is actually a common practice.

ALso... One thing a lot of you are not taking into consideration.... Is that a security guard can just SAY(lie) that he saw you shoplift something if he is really pressed to stop & detain you. Security guards arent really the most honest bunch & wont hesitate to lie to cover their ass. Especially when the police later get involved. You hardly need any training at all (in fact... all you need is a clean police record) to become an unarmed security guard. Beleive me... I worked for wells fargo long ago...the only "training" we got was basically watching a 2 hour video on what you are supposed to do (which mainly focused on how to be observant & remember things you saw.... there was absolutely NOTHING on what rights you do or do not have to detain someone). I worked as a nightwatchman basically watching over the property & refused to work with the public in loss prevention types of jobs.

forgottenpassword

ginnylavender

I occasionally throw out receipts when leaving the store--I'd hate to imagine the confrontation when the idiots who pass for police in my town asked me for proof of purchase.

friedduck

I hope the guy wins!

Note: One thing I want to know is.... was the cop moonlighting as store security? I wonder how this works? Being a cop, can they act as a cop while working as a security guard? I would see this aas a police dept liability. Security guards & cops have VASTLY different abilities. A security guard can only make a "citizen's arrest" (just like any average citizen can), while a cop has MUCH more powers under the law.

forgottenpassword

Then again, the "big ocean" and "little fish" theory doesn't work around here, either. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. And their markets are not so big that they can afford to piss off many customers off here.

Roundonbothends

shmianco

"@blitzcat: The Bill of Rights protects us from the government. Unless I missed something, Home Depot is not the government. Your ignorance is not adding to this discussion"

He wasn't detained by home depot, he was detained by a policeman, an agent of the government. Your ignorance is not adding to this discussion.

scottyxlr8r

And I say this in every frickin' recipt thread - we're not talking about the right to not show a receipt, but the right not to be detained without reasonable cause. That's a pretty fucking important right, if you ask me.

spinachdip

This standard applies to any retail establishment, you shop in my stores you get to follow MY rules. Government rules don't apply. They really don't. A private establishment can have any rule that they want even if their rules are tighter or more restrictive that the government rules.

What to wear Heeley's? Go for it, just not in my store. Want to carry a huge purse suitable for shoplifting? Go for it, just not in my store. Want to brag about my competition? There are forums and public sidewalks outside, but not in my store. Want to wear puke green shirt with zebra stripped pants? Great, just not in my store. Want to shop and purchase goods? Then be willing to show your receipt prior to exiting the store.

Don't like my rules? Then vote with your wallet and go to another store. But on my property you follow my rules.

By the way just be thankful that Metro PD did not decide to use you for target practice.

StevieD

Yes, it is a PITA to show a receipt upon exiting a store (Home Depot isn't the only one my friend) but is it *really* worth being detained for not doing so? In my experience, a good 90% of the time the guy/gal at the door barely gives the receipt a passing glance before waving you pass. Believe me, I understand about principles, but you have to pick your battles. Flash the receipt and *then* EECB!

Also, there are times when driving the extra few miles to a store that isn't as crappy as the HD you described is worth it. It shouldn't have taken you a situation like being held at a store to make you choose another place to make purchases.

Gadgetgirl

kewlfocus

Where would America be today if Rosa Parks did not break away from the norm and fight for what she believed in?

Who knows, maybe Matt will be in the history books some day for standing up for his rights and helping to prevent illegal detention in the name of "store policy". While this one act may not get Home Depot to change their policy it may make them think before they begin instituting their next shoplifting check...X-ray scanning, or body cavity searches.

Rachacha