I go through the check-out at Wal-Mart, pay for my purchases,
and as I’m heading out the door to the parking lot, a Wal-Mart “Greeter” intercepts me and says “Sir, I’d like to see your receipt for your purchases.”
(before I leave the store)
Am I legally obliged to show and have her go through my purchases or can I say “no thanks” and keep walking?
Thanks
Gus
PS–> I always show and am respectful when they ask because I understand they are trying to help curb shoplifting, but I wonder what would happen if they had to deal with an uncooperative person?
No you are not legally required to stop and fork over your receipt. Yes you can say “No thanks.” and keep walking. Though if they truly believe you stole something they are allowed to get security, who does have the authority to hold you there while they inspect your goods. I believe.
The greeters are not security personnel, so they have no true authority over you but have the ability to call the people with authority. So walk passed them at your own risk.
EDIT: And while I don’t have any citations handy, I have seen others here provide citations that back my claims here. So I’m just tiding you over until someone more official gets here.
The answer will vary all over the world, but typically no. Nor does security have any additional rights. They are just ordinary people in a uniform. Nor do they typically have a right to inspect bags, even when there is a sign saying you accept that as a condition of entry. (This one probably depends greatly upon local case law, and may vary quite considerably.) Here in Oz, the one thing they can do is simply say, “Thank you sir, I’m sorry you won’t cooperate with my request. You are henceforth banned from this shop.” And that is enforcable. But again, the world is a big place.
I’ve only been asked one time for my receipt at Walmart and that is when I bought a TV set. Though the box clearly had a “paid” sticker on it, the greeter asked to see my receipt then let me through.
I usually buy food and pick up my meds at Walmart, so I rarely have any large items and I’ve never been asked nor has anyone prompted me to show my receipt.
I see them do it for larger items.
My guess it’s less for the shoplifiting by consumers but rather a way to see if the clerks are ringing up large (thus costly) items under different codes for friends and such. You know the old replace the UPC code for an item of $10.00 and stick it on a $300.00 item and walk out the store. With a bit of colusion via the cashier it works great, unless somene checks the receipt and sees your box with a $300.00 TV set is rung up as at $10.00 iron, due to a UPC switch or the cashier keying in another amount
Club stores in the US, such as Costco, that are not open to the public without membership, can and do include receipt inspection as part of the membership agreement.
Depending on my mood, I have been known to tell them “Sure–I just stole $300 worth of food, Fuck-head”. They then look scared and back off. I find it stupid and insulting to have some pathetic soul working for minimum wage to confront me on whether or not I’ve paid for my items. The items are obviously packaged and I have a receipt in my hand. I’ve never stolen anything, but wouldn’t a thief attempt to conceal the stolen items? Or are thieves so blatant they would attempt to stash the stolen items amongst the paid for items?:smack:
The fastest way to make the twits at the non-membership stores leave you alone is to ask if you are being detained. Which is essentially what they are attempting do. Store management has instructed them to leave customers who pull this line alone since it could easily evolve into a false imprisonment, absent reasonable suspicion (or is the threshold PC??).
This is based on my understanding of California law, IANAL and YMMV by jurisdiction.
This is a pretty silly thing to do IMO, when you say this you have essentially given them free probable cause to detain you until the police arrive to sort the matter out since you are freely admitting to a crime.
And you certainly aren’t making yourself look like the upstanding citizen you’d like the police to think you are when they do eventually arrive.
I don’t get it – why is everyone so offended to be asked to show a receipt? I’m glad they’re trying to find shoplifters, it keeps prices down. I’d be concerned if they didn’t bother.
Actually, yes, they are. The basic scheme is to come in the store with a store bag in your pocket, fill it up, and walk out the front door.
FWIW, I sometimes “steal” stuff from my local grocery store without even intending to : I routinely put heavy objects (like packs of beer/soda) in my back pack rather than my hand cart (it’s a small store, they don’t have trolleys), and dig them back out when I reach the checkout line. Sometimes I clean forget about it, and only realize my mistake when I’m home. Still, with all the cameras, and the big burly guys in suits too small for them, nobody ever caught on the fact that I came in with an empty back pack and come out with a full one.
So, the point is : sometimes you can be darn obvious about your thieving, and nobody’ll get any wiser.
The question is not: Am I legally required to show my receipt when leaving Wal-Mart? It is rather: Can Wal-Mart legally detain me for failing to show a receipt upon request?
At common law, there existed the shopkeeper’s privilege. This authorized a store proprietor (or it’s agents, whether called “Security Personnel” or “Greeters”) to detain and investigate (but not to search) a person on or recently on the premises of the establishment when that person is reasonably suspected of shoplifting merchandise. Ordinarily, a private party cannot detain a person against that person’s will lest they become liable for false imprisonment.
Subsequently, this principle has been codified into statutory law. In Illinois, it is at 720 ILCS 5/16A-5 and -6. This sections allow any merchant with reasonable grounds to suspect a person of retail theft to detain and investigate in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable length of time as well to summon a peace officer to take custody of the suspected thief (although this is not required, the merchant may also merely turn the person loose). It further absolves the store of liability that would otherwise be incurred for detentions conducted in pursuance of the statute.
A front-door dragnet plainly does not entail the particularized suspicion contemplated by the common law exception or the statute. So, the question is whether refusing to submit to a receipt check gives a merchant reasonable grounds to detain a customer. In the Fourth Amendment context, this question is settled: refusing to give consent to a search cannot alone give rise to probable cause. Although Wal-Mart is a private entity, and not an organ of the government, and the civil liberty interests are accordingly much diminished, I think the statute would be upended if it were held that refusing a shopkeeper’s request to submit to inspection afforded reasonable grounds for a detention.
However, if there were notice, such as a sign at the entrance saying “Customers subject to receipt check upon exiting store,” then the analysis would be different. Consent would be given impliedly by entering the store.
Finally, stores are a bit abashed about relying on these rights for various reasons. First, it occasions terrible publicity (particularly if they accidentally target a Consumerist-reading GenXer yuppie instead of the usual poor people that store dicks hassle). Second, if the detention/investigation exceeds the limits of reasonable manner or duration, tort liability ensues. But, don’t mistake this for saying it never happens, here is one case where an Illinois alderman (Berwyn, so probably gross) ran afoul of a Wal-Mart receipt check: News article. We’ll see whether Ald. Phelan wins.
This practice apparently arouses strong emotions in some people; we’ve had at least one long and heated thread about it before.
I think the answer from that thread is that you can refuse to show your receipt, and they can’t detain you without probable cause, but they could conceivably ban you from shopping there in the future if you refuse to cooperate with their anti-theft procedures.
I’ve never understood people who fuss at the receipt check. One of my facebook friends posted an absolute diatribe about how her rights were being trampled on, and how she’d never been so insulted in her life, she was going to call Sam Walton, blah blah blah.
Newsflash: The checker doesn’t know you. The checker doesn’t care about you. The checker isn’t making a judgment about you. And no, the checker can’t just “tell” that you’re not a thief.
Just show your receipt and you’ll be on your way. Sheesh. The things people will get their panties in a twist about is amazing.
First of all, it takes time. The main reason I don’t like showing a receipt is that I value my time–and I’m not that interested in helping the store out when it meaningfully inconveniences me. So I usually skip when there is one person on the door, and a line of 4/5 people waiting for the receipt checker.
Beyond that, I’m rarely offended when they ask. They have the right to ask. I understand how it might offend some people, but I’m not one of them.
On the other hand, I do take offense when a receipt checker gets pushy, or demands I show my receipt. Here’s my thinking:
If I show a checker my receipt, I am doing the store a favor–I don’t have to, and it helps them out, while not doing a whole lot for me. As I said above, if it’s not a lot of bother for me, I’ll usually be happy to do so (as I would with anyone else who asks me to do something that doesn’t bother me much, and helps them out substantially).
On the other hand, if anyone, not just a receipt checker, is obnoxious when asking me to do them a favor, I’m not likely to help them out–whether they’re asking me for a big thing or a little thing. Receipt checkers don’t annoy me because they’re receipt checkers—they annoy me when they’re rude or obnoxious when are asking me to do something I don’t have to do, and see little benefit from----an approach that doesn’t make me minded to help them out.
Oh, for God’s sake, you’re going to bust the chops of some minimum wage flunky? If you have a complaint, take it to management. Don’t give the Wal-Mart floor clerks a hard time.
That’s the thrust of it in one sentence with the caveat that Kimmy_Gibbler mentioned: The mere refusal to submit to a random security check does or should not, itself, give rise to probable cause to detain.
I’m not going to bust their chops if they’re rude. I’m going to say “no, thank you” entirely politely, or in more extreme cases, just ignore them. There’s no reason to be rude. Being polite is also why I generally comply with a request to show my receipt when it doesn’t take up much of my time.
However, being polite, or “not busting their chops” doesn’t equate to “complying with a request to do something I don’t have to when it is made in a rude or obnoxious manner, or when doing so will take up an unreasonable amount of my time.”
I don’t like it because the checker isn’t actually doing anything. I acidently had an item I didn’t pay for in the cart, checker didn’t notice. I brought it back. I had an item left at the register, checker didn’t catch it, and when I went back they would not give it to me as I “could” have left the original item outside.
Now I just walk on by with no acknowedgement they even asked a question.
Do you understand that the reason for the check is to try and curb theft?
Do you understand that if more theft occurred, prices would likely rise, because the store has to recoup the loss somehow? (Even if they are insured, the insurance rates will rise).
While I’m generally happy to bash CEOs for taking huge salaries instead of lowering prices, the normal trade like Walmart isn’t this place: the profit margins are about 1 to 2,5 %. So even small things like theft can really hit.
Therefore, you are doing yourselves and all other honest shoppers a favour, too, yes or no?
As for taking too much time … please. You spend half an hour or more walking through the store getting your stuff, 5 to 20 minutes in line at the cashier, depending on how busy it is, but the 5 min. for the receipt checking is too much? Really, get a grip or plan differently.
