Shoppers Drug Mart threatens parent with lawsuit after son accused of stealing $15

[Darth Penguin]

It is intimidation, but you can bet her kid will never steal again...
It isn't supposed to cover legal costs, its based on the higher cost of security for a store etc, she pays $500 without prejudice or she goes to court and they issue a judgement against her and the kid which stays on record?

Plus we don't know how many other times this young man stole something. Sure , it may have been the first and only time but on the other hand, he could have been a frequent user of the "five finger discount".

If he was a frequent thief, then suing his mother for one offense makes financial sense if only to offset the loss of other items.

[Miss Molly]

Plus we don't know how many other times this young man stole something. Sure , it may have been the first and only time but on the other hand, he could have been a frequent user of the "five finger discount".

If he was a frequent thief, then suing his mother for one offense makes financial sense if only to offset the loss of other items.

If she does pay for this I hope she makes him repay every penny to her plus interest!

[coley3]

Interesting debate. No right or wrong answer here.The world and system are not perfect. Many stores make their own decisions on what will happen if you steal. Perhaps they shoud post the repercussions on the front door. That way if you were caught you would know what you were in for.LOL. But I suppose if you couldn't read or read english it wouldn't work
Anyway it is done. He stole. And Shopper's policy is to pay up.If the kid doesn't have money then the parent must pay. However the parent could make the child pay them over time by doing chores or getting a paper route etc. Then everyone willhave learned avaluable lesson.

[ticul]

I agree with all of you. I always said dont still just ask, dont lie the truth is always better. As for the kid YES HE SHOULD PAY FOR ALL OF THIS if not he will never learn. He is hold enought to go to a store alone, he is hold enought to pay. The parents have to fin a way for him to repay everything, and than he mightld have done something about it. learn and maybe not, but at least the parent would have try........................

[rachel1496]

Do we cover the cost of cameras and security items when we pay for items in the store ?

Absolutely, we do. Retail theft is a huge issue. Security measures are part of a store's overhead and they do come into consideration when the markup on an item is being priced. A good loss prevention officer isn't cheap. A security system (cameras, alarms, etc; ) is expensive. By recovering the costs from the people who choose to steal they're avoiding having to spread that loss out to the rest of their law abiding customers. What I can't get over is the mother's shock that she is expected to pay. Her son is a minor, who did she think would have to pay for it?

[leavitts77]

I always thought that part of the price of goods were in the cameras as well as other security features. So i guess the $900 is kinda far fetched as we all pay a protion .

Absolutely, we do. Retail theft is a huge issue. Security measures are part of a store's overhead and they do come into consideration when the markup on an item is being priced. A good loss prevention officer isn't cheap. A security system (cameras, alarms, etc; ) is expensive. By recovering the costs from the people who choose to steal they're avoiding having to spread that loss out to the rest of their law abiding customers. What I can't get over is the mother's shock that she is expected to pay. Her son is a minor, who did she think would have to pay for it?

[sarah_cio]

Women are sexually assaulted in store parking lots and public spaces. Does that mean they have the right to sue stores for this because it was on their property so thus they are responsible? Walmart is notorious for women being assaulted in their parking lots, late at night with improper lighting and no parking lot security cameras.

[pawkeys]

Yes.

[Amanda83]

Interesting. I have a different point of view. Everyone seems to be forgetting that the person who stole the earrings did something illegal and unethical. The consequences of that action costs more than $15.00. Retailers have to pay for security cameras and personnel to keep their merchandise from being stolen. It is costly but it also ensures that the retail price stays reasonable. If they were losing a lot of merchandise they would have to raise prices to make ends meet. Now, for the boy. I am surprised that no one has said that he should be paying for this. The consequence of stealing ended up being a $500.00 bill. So, the boy should be earning and working to pay off that bill. Why should it be costing SDM and, in turn, us consumers, for that boy's action. That will be a consequence that might make him think about the unethical thing he did. As for the legal side, it is for a judge to decide. it is likely he will get a warning, or some community service.

I couldn't agree with you more! I thought the exact same thing when I first read this post. I couldn't believe that people were in shock that a business was standing up for itself. The kid did wrong and now they need to pay the price. I do know there exceptions of course like with anything, but everyone seems to think "they" should be the exception. Take ownership man up and accept your consequence.

[FallenPixels]

I always thought that part of the price of goods were in the cameras as well as other security features. So i guess the $900 is kinda far fetched as we all pay a protion .

Their reasoning is that they get the money back from this and not pass it on to the customers, in low risk stores, they do not have a loss prevention officer for example so there are definitely added costs to stores with high theft levels

[shaaland]

Something ironic here. I live in Chilliwack BC and I have witnessed several people stealing while I was shopping in SDM. Each occassion I brought it to staffs attention. Twice the "shop-lifters' were stopped. Other times theives have come in, gone down several different aisles, placed their knapsack on the floor loaded up and carried on to the next aisle. Even my 11 & 12 year old daughters were revolted by this behaviour. Upon bringing that particular situation up to a staff member she said they weigh out the ones who they believe will not put up a fight and then try to stop them. They will not try and stop anyone who they think will overpower them. So, for each one they catch how many are actually getting away with the "grab and run sale"??? Just something to think about. However I believe this lawyer is an ambulance chaser and shame on him !!

Merry Christmas all S/Cer's

[Darth Penguin]

But I suppose if you couldn't read or read english it wouldn't work.

I'm in Quebec, I don't read French that well...but I still know better than to steal

[vesper]

Theft and security to prevent theft add to the cost of things we buy.
courts barely slap kids on the wrist for stealing.
many parents get angry with the store and or police for detaining child.

I don't blame stores for this. If she chooses not to pay, it means she can have her day in court and defend herself and possibly win.

But more importantly, she should set the child right and thank SDM for at least doing something other than just taking stolen items back, so child can learn lesson now.

That is my 2cents