I know someone (not me) who got caught pocketing a small item in a Target store and paying for other items, but not the pocketed one. Someone at the store took this person’s name and other data. The item was returned, and this person was released with a stern talking-to.
Four months later this person gets a letter from Michael Ira Asen, P.C., Attorney at Law claiming to represent Target. The letter cites state code that says that a merchant is entitled to collect a civil penalty from a shoplifter, regardless of whether the merchandise was actually removed from the store and regardless of whether criminal charges were brought.
The letter includes a “demand that you pay $69.96 in satisfaction of this civil claim.” There is no basis in the letter for that figure.
This person is asking me for advice. I have done some searching and this seems to be just a hair above being a scam. The information regarding the date of the event and the person’s name and address is accurate and it appears that Target did provide the information to this attorney. Walmart seems to use the same guy. Some attorneys are on record on discussion sites that they advise their clients to ignore such letters.
The attorney seems to be operating as a boiler room, with a toll free number available 8 AM - 11 PM and a websiteto submit payments. Although it says this is not a debt collection action, it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.
My hypothesis is that Target sells lists of such people to this guy and he collects whatever can through intimidation. Either that or he collects on contingency.
Any lawyers out there hear of this guy or similar schemes? I am not asking for legal advice in the sense of asking you to be an attorney for this specific case, but I am looking for professional opinions of this type of operation in general.
Not sure why you think it’s a near-scam. States enact civil penalties against shoplifters to help recoup the stores’ considerable expense of cameras, full-time security guards, time spent processing, etc. Somebody has to handle the civil penalty collections. The stores opt to turn it over to Michael Ira Asen, who seemingly makes quite a good living doing so.
In my state, the penalty is up to $650 over the cost of the merchandise, even if it never leaves the store, and is still in the orignal packaging, undamaged. $200 to $300 above is typically what I’ve seen. Your friend got off easy. (As far as the $69.96 figure, the merchandise probably cost $19.96 and they tacked on $50. Hardly seems worth Michael Ira Asen’s time.) Your friend is lucky Target didn’t charge him/her with theft. Target is well-known for being tough on shoplifters. Every inch of the stores except for the changing rooms and bathrooms is monitored by camera. The New Yorker even ran a piece about it some years back.
Btw, contrary to what many people believe, a person doesn’t have to actually leave the store with the merchandise in order to have it considered shoplifting, at least in my area. Deliberate concealment is considered enough to call it theft.
As to what will happen if your friend opts not to pay, I have no idea. I’ve heard mixed things. I’ve heard of successfully negotiating the figure down when it’s really high. Why doesn’t this person just pay the $69.96? If they had gotten caught attempting to break and enter, would a stern talking-to be sufficient?
it seems quite real and the risks if the store decides to be a hard ass about it far outweigh just paying a piddly $ 70 fine. Pay the fine it could have been so much worse for your friend. His not having a record is a gift beyond price.
It’s kind of a mixed bag if the store hasn’t opted to pursue a criminal charge.
Paying is an admission of guilt, so the store could then still file a criminal charge with even stronger evidence.
On the other hand not paying may make them decide it’s worth reporting it to the police because they can then pursue the money through court ordered restitution instead.
Rarely is the value enough for a store to want to sue in civil court for damages, nor do they want to devote employee time as witnesses to a criminal charge. So they just tend to let lawyers take it on contingency to harass or sue shoplifters for payment.
Ignoring the demand letters is unlikely to cause further problems because while it’s worth it to the lawyers to send demand letters, it isn’t worth it to take people to court, since the company can’t be bothered to be involved themselves criminal charges are unlikely.
Paying it will get them to stop sending nasty letters and is unlikely to cause further problems
IF the friend decides to pay, they ought to obtain a solid release from all potential related charges/actions. I’d ask to see the release before paying.
If they ignore it, I’m having a hard time imagining a law firm doing anything more than sending a letter for a $70 claim. Unless it is a slam dunk and successful prosecution allows recoupment of fees and costs.
(Sorry for the imprecise language, but not my area of practice.)
what evidence does the firm or Target have that your friend shoplifted anything? How does Target know that someone else didn’t use your friends information when filling in the forms? was there a signature? video evidence that’s been preserved?
Really? I mean, I understand the inference that an innocent person could refuse to pay on principle, but I can’t see how paying would be an admission of guilt. You might believe yourself to be innocent but decide to pay to make the problem go away - essentially the same as settling out of court, where no legal finding is made. Any lawyers care to comment?
I do not know the specific evidence but this person verbally conceded the shoplifting and presented identification. I do not know if there was a signed admission at that time, or whether there is video evidence.
Not to speak for the OP, but the part that seems “near-scammy” to me is that the shoplifter was “released with a stern talking-to,” which makes it sound like the case was closed, but then months later is informed via letter that they have to pay a penalty that was never mentioned when they were originally caught. (Although we only have the story second-hand; we don’t know for sure what the shoplifter was told at the time.)
If I get pulled over by a cop for speeding or driving with an expired license plate, and he lets me off with a warning, can I expect to get notice of a fine in the mail months or years later?
A private company can not release you of criminal charges. That’s between you and the state. They also can’t threaten criminal charges ‘pay or we report you to the police’ is extortion.
Like I said, not my bailiwick. I would have imagined that one could say in return for x, they will either withdraw an existing complaint or agree not to file one. But I readily acknowledge that I may be mistaken.
This is my thinking as well. There was no statement that civil penalties were going to be assessed. This was the case of a young person making a stupid mistake and I think that’s the way that store security saw it (they face enormous losses from professional shoplifters and I think those are the people they are most worried about).
Yes and no. For the state to bring criminal charges they would have to get Target to agree to participate in the case, wouldn’t they? If the harmed party doesn’t want to participate, the state doesn’t have much of a case and it doesn’t seem likely they would subpoena Target for evidence. The letter says that they are “counsel to Target” and so it seems they would indeed have the ability to agree not to pursue criminal charges (none have yet been brought). The letter does say that this civil action is separate from any criminal actions that could still be taken. To clarify matters I will post full text.
For anyone who is interested, there was a second letter a couple of weeks later, then a third a couple of weeks after that…and then nothing. So I guess they’re just playing the odds and trying to scare people into paying. They do seem to have a legal right to collect but this is a civil penalty and I doubt they will go to court over it.
For them to actually file suit would require them to have Virginia counsel on hand, and to prove the damages which is limited to two times the items value. They can get attorney’s fees for $150.00 which to me would make this a non-starter. Unless they have staff in Virginia pursuing other matters in this Courthouse, I don’t think it’s economically viable.
That said, I’ve been in General District Court when collections matters are being pursued, and the amount of stuff they have is astounding. One attorney usually has about 20 matters on the docket, and the judge just works through all of them.
It might be worth your friend’s time to pull one of their free annual credit histories. That should show if the merchant sold this “bill” to a collection agency. Better to know/deal with it now, rather than find it hiding out there, when they try to get a new mortgage.
