Shoplifters - Paying Civil Demand
In a recent Wall Street Journal article titled, “Pay Up - Big Retail Chains Dun Mere Suspects in Theft“, Ann Zimmerman wrote about retailers and collection firms billing shoplifters for Civil Recovery fees. Read WSJ article.
Dating back about twenty-five years Nevada became the first state to pass legislation where retailers could “demand” a civil payment from shoplifters for merchandise stolen from their stores. The intent of the law was to help retailers recoup theft losses and pay for security personnel and equipment. Currently all 50 states have such laws and the demand amounts vary from state to state, as well as the methods used to collect.
The system was working well, but has now escalated to a point where retailers are using collection companies and attorneys specifically set up to collect the civil penalties. I agree with Ms. Zimmerman that there have been some abuses of the practice, as she points out in her article, but overall the retail industry has benefited from the civil recovery process. The rest of the article appears to be very slanted.
In my own case, as a former Director of Loss Prevention Services for a major retailer, I never used an outside collection agency. The money was used to help pay for security staff and equipment, and from the letters I’ve received from people, the entire process had taught them a valuable lesson. In fact, a study I conducted from a sample of 3,000 shoplifters found not one person, who paid a Civil Recovery, was re-apprehended for shoplifting. I believe the Civil Demand process is helping to accomplish was the courts are failing to do - punish the shoplifter. The court system is fast turning a criminal offense into a civil matter by giving first time and repeat shoplifters a slap on the wrist. I guess being a thief does not carry the stigma that it once used to.
–Curtis Baillie, Principal Consultant - Security Consulting Strategies LLC
As a loss prevention detective for a major food retailer in the metropolitan Wash. D.C. area, in the late 1970’s, I was the first in my company to explore getting reimbursed for expenses related to the loss of product and costs associated with the prosecution of shoplifters. A lot of prosecuting attorneys refuffed my request to have shoplifters pay these costs and told me to pursue it civilly, but I was finally able to convince a few to include repayment of any product loss and prosecution costs (for my time at police station and in court) as condition of their criminal sentence. Normally, they would suspend part of any jail time or a fine they would impose so long as restitution was made to my company within a certain amount of time. My supervisors were astounded and incredulous the first time a check arrived at our corporate headquarters from one of these shoplifters and I had a lot of explaining to do. They had no avenue set up to receive these funds and it took them a while to figure out how to handle it. My point is that retailers don’t need to spend funds (for lawyers & collection agencies) to pursue restitution civilly. They should develop a relationship with their local prosecuting attorneys and judges and have this done as a condition of their criminal sentence. It is a legal and expeditious way to help offset the enormous costs associated with shoplifting that companies incur.
Good for you. I agree. That’s how we did it before the Civil Recovery laws were inacted. I would add that I pursued Civil recovery on dishonest employee cases.
-Curtis Baillie
Regardless of whether you choose to collect these recoveries in-house or outsourced be very careful NOT to budget for the income. That line item on your budget will be used to pressure you and your staff to make more apprehensions if you are behind budget and that can cause significant liability issues.
Mr. Rogers - Point well taken.