Is it okay for grocers to check receipts before you can leave the store? With grocery prices spiking and self-checkouts becoming popular, grocery stores are now checking receipts at checkouts in Canada.

Implementing a receipt check at various Loblaws-owned supermarkets has shocked Canadians, as reflected in their social media. Stores across the country have blindsided customers with notices hinting at the potential inspection of their receipts as they exit.

With such a direct infringement of privacy, many Canadians and industry watchers question the legality and long-term impact on the brand.

Convenient timing

Loblaw’s general message in explaining these checks is to verify purchases and ensure accurate inventory records. While remaining tight-lipped about where the notices were precisely placed, Loblaws has claimed it is a “common” industry practice.

In response to the social media backlash, Loblaws has launched a Twitter campaign that attributes the price spike to suppliers and manufacturers. The campaign and practice have been met with disapproval and questions from experts on their legality.

Restricted under the criminal code

The question on everyone’s mind is — “Are these checks legally enforceable?”. To answer your question, no, checks by retail security are not legally enforceable. While police can arrest individuals, retail security and loss-prevention personnel are restricted under the same criminal code as customers. 

What does this mean for shoppers? Loss prevention personnel are restricted under the same criminal code as customers, so they can only courteously ask for receipt verification. Customers can accept or decline voluntarily on the other end of the table.

Unwarranted customer detentions pose an extreme risk to retailers as they can be sued for unlawful confinement. From the perspective of store owners, security personnel will need to be sure before trying to detain any customers, as wrongful detainment will lead to a lawsuit.

Why is Costco allowed to check my receipt?

Unlike traditional grocery stores, Costco receipt checks are justified as members’ consent during membership registration.

Over 500,000 people face shoplifting accusations each year in the United States alone. An overlooked group among these faces charges despite a glaring lack of evidence. Anecdotal evidence indicates that racial minorities are disproportionately targeted, with African Americans making up about 33% of all shoplifting arrests despite representing only 13% of the population.

Individuals falsely accused often face repercussions such as unearned stigma even after being found not guilty. A study conducted by Arizona State University revealed that 41% of innocent individuals faced struggles finding employment due to arrest records.

Lacking formal law enforcement training

When considering the root cause of wrongful arrest, it’s evident that it stems from retailers’ overreliance on loss prevention employees who lack formal law enforcement training. Loss prevention security accounted for 25% of all shoplifting arrests alone. 

While the possibility of acquittals makes wrongful arrest appear less harmful, the accusations significantly disrupt the lives of victims. In one heartbreaking case, a single mother in New York City spent two days in jail due to an alleged $30 theft. It later emerged that the store surveillance had misidentified her. While acquitted, the damage was already done, resulting in the victim losing her job.

Another issue is the use of facial recognition technology. Even though the National Institute of Standards and Technology reported in 2021 that these algorithms misidentified ethnic minorities up to 100 times more often than white individuals, they are used widely. The culmination of these factors has led to an increase in false shoplifting charges.

While it’s hopeful to believe in the public system, the truth is that public defenders are overloaded and struggle to provide adequate defence. A 2019 study revealed that public defenders, on average, spend less than 12 minutes on a case.

Repercussions of false accusations

In addition to the unearned stigma faced by individuals acquitted of false accusations, many people are forced to compromise and accept unjust pleas due to fear of further consequences.

A 2020 report found that 90% of defendants pleaded guilty to avoid the possibility of longer sentences. Unjustly, innocent people end up with criminal records to avoid prolonged legal battles. In addition to arrest records, victims suffer monetary implications. While the median shoplifting case involves goods worth only $150, the average cost of defending a misdemeanour charge is $2,500. 

Who are the real victims?

The societal cost is immense. In 2021, a study by the American Civil Liberties Union estimated that wrongful arrests cost taxpayers $75 million annually. This considers only the immediate legal costs, not the long-term impacts on individuals’ lives and communities.

In addition to costing taxpayers, a significant burden is put upon vulnerable demographics such as youth and impoverished communities. Approximately 25% of all shoplifting arrests involve minors. False accusations can potentially derail these young lives before they’ve even started.

According to a 2018 report, shoplifting arrests in low-income neighbourhoods are four times higher than in affluent areas. Are more people stealing to survive, or are stores in these areas more likely to suspect and accuse their patrons?

False shoplifting arrests are a pressing societal concern. They disrupt lives, impose undue financial burdens, and perpetuate racial and economic inequalities. Measures to correct the balance, ensure justice, and prevent further harm to innocent individuals are crucial.

We hope you found value in this article about grocers checking receipts before you can leave the store.