Shoplifting, Larceny, Robbery, Theft Shoplifted and caught but paid for items and civil demand at the store

Status
Not open for further replies.
The receipt was kept as proof, for the items I paid for. So therefore there is no way they should press charges right? It just wouldn't make sense. It would cost the store money to press charges right? But something tells me that the LP just pocketed the civil demand money order. Because they never told me where it was going.
 
MDK213 said:
The receipt was kept as proof, for the items I paid for. So therefore there is no way they should press charges right? It just wouldn't make sense. It would cost the store money to press charges right? But something tells me that the LP just pocketed the civil demand money order. Because they never told me where it was going.
Click to expand...

You were very clever about paying the tribute that was demanded.
You bought a money order, right there in the store.
You gave the money order to the person that demanded the ransom, then you asked for and have retained the receipts for the ransom and the junk.
Good on you, mate.
Now, keep those pesky little items of PROOF, and don't ever let temptation overcome your logic and good sense.
After all has been said and done, the hunted may have captured the hunter!
 
You paid for items and have proof thus there is no theft! End story
You paid Civil Demand via Money Order which can be traced so no worry there either. If the LP did pocket money order and somehow cashed it he would be looking at felony charges most likely.
 
Why is it better to pay by money order which is traceable, than cash?
If you didn't sign anything and police was not involved then the only thing for them to make a valid case so as to put you into a national theft database is your fully paid civil demand, right? By paying cash there is no hard proof for them to put you into theft database.

I heard that these theft database, although not completely public, WILL show up in most background checks nowadays. For examples HireRight.
 
Begood said:
Why is it better to pay by money order which is traceable, than cash?
If you didn't sign anything and police was not involved then the only thing for them to make a valid case so as to put you into a national theft database is your fully paid civil demand, right? By paying cash there is no hard proof for them to put you into theft database.

I heard that these theft database, although not completely public, WILL show up in most background checks nowadays. For examples HireRight.
Click to expand...

If you pay in cash, how do you KNOW where that cash ends its journey?
I mean, a dishonest security person could simply put it in his or her pocket.
Th money order can provide proof of payment and it can be traces, even showing who received the payout.

As far as those databases, I hear they're all shut down at the moment.
 
I think they are not shut down. They are still taking inputs from merchants, right?
I heard that due to the pending law suit towards ESTEEM, they (or most of them)
just ceased to provide reports to background check agencies for now.

I think as soon as their legal teams find a way around fair credit reporting issues
brought up in the ESTEEM suit, they will continue to report to background check agencies.

The class action lawsuit seems to come to a settlement by the end of 2014. So its possible they
will start to report again as early as end of 2014. Right?

Please correct me if any of the above is wrong. Thanks!

army judge said:
If you pay in cash, how do you KNOW where that cash ends its journey?
I mean, a dishonest security person could simply put it in his or her pocket.
Th money order can provide proof of payment and it can be traces, even showing who received the payout.

As far as those databases, I hear they're all shut down at the moment.
Click to expand...
 
The Esteem lawsuit sent these databases into self defense mode. They have ceased all reporting until their legal teams can find a way around this issue. Therefore they are NOT currently taking anymore names as they are not sure what they can and cannot report. What happened is simple. The databases are putting "thief" labels on persons who have not been convicted of theft at time. This was violation. I suspect they will begin again soon as they figure out how they will do this. If I had to guess it will be only after a conviction in court or one pleads guilty. I don't see any other way around this. This would mean your name could appear in both a CRB and a retail theft database. I am not a Lawyer so I cannot say if there might be another means to do this without conviction. It might be just about wording on reports who knows
 
Thanks for your input shrinkmaster!

Could you please confirm (or provide source if you don't mind) that these database are NOT currently taking anymore names right now? My friend told me yesterday the store LP took her name, DOB, address and phone number, and put them (along with pictures of the merchandises) into a so-called "national database". It is a regional (multi-states) super market chain. Is it possible the so-called "national database" is a not one of these national theft databases that employment background check agencies use? She is so freak out right now.
Thanks so much!
 
Last edited:
I cannot confirm every single database is on hold right now but its safe to assume so for reason already stated. The stores may still be submitting the data for a couple reasons
A. They are unaware of law suit issues
B. They are doing so, so when they are back up the info is there
C. Its part of the process LP does when stopping shoplifter or just force of habit.

There are numerous databases so I cannot say with any certainty who is or is not still reporting. I can say it would be very unwise at this point for any of them to report anything just collect data (names) for now. Its equally possible the "database" the store LP was referring to was the stores database not a Retail theft database. If its a chain they likely share info with other stores so having a "company" database would help
 
The money order pink slip receipt was given after the transaction either so that leads me to believe that the LP pocketed it the 150$ "Civil demand". And yes papers were signed for the civil demand and for being banned from the store.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top