You forgot the
"erect a tent in the camping section, when asked what you are doing tell people if they bring their own sausages they can come to the barbeque"
The tomato juice one I heard was to the female sanitary products aisle
Number 11
"Attach stickers to certain items of food, including novelty inflatible items, when you are at the checkout demand the cashier gives you money as you just won supermarket sweep!"
12. Attach "Item May Contan Nuts" stickers to bags of nuts.
Oddly enough, you already find this on bags of peanutsOriginally Posted by Stringent
thing is faced with the choice of shopping with a, lots of screaming kids, or b, pacified kids with food and drink that gets paid for later... i see no real choice.
remember a kid or baby is not really in control of their own dietry system and do get hungry, grumpy, thirsty at inconvienient times....
Random people walking round eating *&%$ off the shelves and then not paying = theft.
Or you could just go the whole hog and sedate them. I'd recomend the drowsy antihestamines.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
some say that may be illegal? and it certainly did not help the MCanns.
Not read the whole thread BUT:
Technically, if I recall my law lectures: Yes, it is theft. The shop offers to treat by being open and displaying the items. The purchaser (you or me) offers to buy the goods by putting them in the basket, and the supermarket accepts the offer by scanning the goods. Consideration is formed when you pay.
Man, it's about 12 years since I did anything like that. There's a case all about it. It's dull.
Well prepared parent's should bring their own snacks to the store to keep the little ones busy. We do. Having said that, IF people pay at the end, I have no problem with that. Its those who DON'T pay that I have a problem with.
Agreed on the first half. As for rude and annoying ..... personally, I consider it rude, but I can't admit to being annoyed by it. As I said before, I wouldn't do it and wouldn't let my kids do it, but it doesn't actually affect me much if others do it. It strikes me as tacky, but I really am not bothered much one way or the other.
Eating without paying (or at least intending to) is, in my view, theft. A few grapes is probably such a minor thing that it's not going to land you in court, but yes, it fits the technical definition.
As for eating goods that required weighing, well again, technically, I guess it depends on your intention. If you did realise they required weighing, and therefore assumed you could (and intended to) pay, then I guess it's not theft.
Look at it the other way round, too. Supermarkets are required to have scales calibrated to levels defined by weights and measures legislation. But suppose there's a problem with the scale and it's reading inaccurately. For instance, a bottle of oil leaks and contaminates the scale platter, crap (dirt, breadcrumbs, etc) stick to the oil and thus the next customer is not just paying for the grapes they bought, but for the oil and crap stuck to the platter. The supermarket, therefore, are charging you for something you're not getting, and taking your money .... thereby permanently depriving you of it.
Is that theft?
Nope. Because another part of that definition of theft is "dishonestly" depriving someone of their property, and there's nothing (probably) dishonest about that contamination. It might, however, be a trading standards violation.
On the other hand, if the supermarket recalibrated the scale so that it read higher than the weight that is actually on the scale (say, it reads 1.1 Kg when the fruit actually weighed 1.0 Kg), THAT would be, arguably, theft .... and fraud. Oh, and for the purists reading this and looking for loopholes (), supermarkets (or any shops) don't EVER legally recalibrate their own scales.
Eight so far.W00t record starting thread for me. 8 pages.
I agree with you. Also can be said about the petrol pumps. How do we know we are getting £1.04 per litre ... How often do they calibrate their pumps?
yadder yadder ...
well i still have two unanswered questions for a start..Eight [pages] so far.^whatee? and
Last edited by sammyc; 10-03-2008 at 04:14 PM.
i picked a suit from dry cleaning from Johnsons and then walked into Tesco to get a lottery ticket. On the way out the security stopped me cause he thought i was stealing a suit! lol. I had to fish out my dry cleaning bill and show him that the labels inside the clothes that they weren't Tescos brand!
I could've eaten a bag of crisps in the time it took to explain (and given him the empty packet).
Kickstarters Pledged:
Godus Stonehearth Rain World Satellite Reign
Lol, was it embarassing?* Just curious *
Check out my Tech Blogs: Budget Gaming Rigs and The Droid ReviewHomer Simpson: "It takes two to lie Marge. One to lie, and one to listen"
5 - When a clerk asks if they can help you, begin to cry and shout:
"Why can't you people just leave me alone!?"
Seriously, don't joke. I have a client who is prone to doing things like that.
I was more annoyed than anything. He was on the door as I walked in the store and the suits were hanging over my arm. I was in full view of the guy when I got the ticket, then I walked past him on the way out.Lol, was it embarassing?
Yet he stopped me. Blind or what! Imagine how many people have nicked things on his watch.
Kickstarters Pledged:
Godus Stonehearth Rain World Satellite Reign
Well, you could have told him "It's my laundry" and ignored him. Or better yet, explained that it's your laundry, shown him the bill and then walked off. Or, though it's less reasonable on your part, just ignored him and walked off. Even police officers have specific criteria they have to meet before they can arrest someone, and non-officers are MUCH more restrained in their ability to arrest. And as the items weren't stolen, you cannot have committed an arrestable offence, which means that if he arrests you, the arrest is retrospectively unlawful when it turns out the items you "stole" weren't stolen, so no arrestable offence has been committed, so you've been assaulted and unlawfully imprisoned if physically detained.
If he physically restrains you, it's either a citizen's arrest or he's assaulted you. In fact, strictly speaking, he can assault you without even physically touching you, because assault is more about credible fear of physical harm, so even intimidating you into complying (which is not the same, of course, as just asking) would be an assault, and it's an arrest if he tells you your arrested without even touching you. And if he arrests you, and gets it wrong (which it would be if the suit wasn't stolen), sue him AND the store .... and have him charged with assault or some form of battery if he used force, because that reasonable force used to arrest you is assault if the arrest is not valid.
And, of course, if the arrest was invalid, and you used force to resist his illegal arrest, THAT would be legal, provided it was reasonable force.
If he stops you by asking you to stop, and asking you to accompany him, and you do, then you've gone voluntarily. But if you don't go voluntarily, about all he can do is either let you walk away, or physically detail you while waiting for the police. And when they get there and it turns out he's "arrested" you for leaving with your own laundry ....
Store staff have to be VERY careful arresting people. But asking you to stop and accompany them is not an arrest, if you comply willingly.
Quite correct (as i remember from first year Criminal law), do you study law Saracen or just read up on it for general knowlege?Well, you could have told him "It's my laundry" and ignored him. Or better yet, explained that it's your laundry, shown him the bill and then walked off. Or, though it's less reasonable on your part, just ignored him and walked off. Even police officers have specific criteria they have to meet before they can arrest someone, and non-officers are MUCH more restrained in their ability to arrest. And as the items weren't stolen, you cannot have committed an arrestable offence, which means that if he arrests you, the arrest is retrospectively unlawful when it turns out the items you "stole" weren't stolen, so no arrestable offence has been committed, so you've been assaulted and unlawfully imprisoned if physically detained.
If he physically restrains you, it's either a citizen's arrest or he's assaulted you. In fact, strictly speaking, he can assault you without even physically touching you, because assault is more about credible fear of physical harm, so even intimidating you into complying (which is not the same, of course, as just asking) would be an assault, and it's an arrest if he tells you your arrested without even touching you. And if he arrests you, and gets it wrong (which it would be if the suit wasn't stolen), sue him AND the store .... and have him charged with assault or some form of battery if he used force, because that reasonable force used to arrest you is assault if the arrest is not valid.
And, of course, if the arrest was invalid, and you used force to resist his illegal arrest, THAT would be legal, provided it was reasonable force.
If he stops you by asking you to stop, and asking you to accompany him, and you do, then you've gone voluntarily. But if you don't go voluntarily, about all he can do is either let you walk away, or physically detail you while waiting for the police. And when they get there and it turns out he's "arrested" you for leaving with your own laundry ....
Store staff have to be VERY careful arresting people. But asking you to stop and accompany them is not an arrest, if you comply willingly.
Check out my Tech Blogs: Budget Gaming Rigs and The Droid ReviewHomer Simpson: "It takes two to lie Marge. One to lie, and one to listen"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote