Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to SportTrac.Org
Off Topic Discussion
OT: Standing Up For What's Right - Against Circuit City and the local Police
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Bill V" data-source="post: 731240" data-attributes="member: 54538"><p>I'm not sure if this merits mentioning or not, but I will anyway--one point that may have some bearing is the actual definition of when the "transaction" between the customer and the store starts and ends. If you define the transaction as ending when the customer receives the receipt and the bag of goodies, then the items are the customer's property at that point. (Regardless of whether the store then has the right to inspect the bags before the customer exits the store--that's a whole different discussion.) However, if you define the transaction as ending when the customer exits the store AFTER clearing security, then one may be able to argue that until that full transaction is complete, the bag, its contents, and the receipt remain the property of the store. Refusing to undergo the security check results in the transaction being voided, as it was never completed. And therefore, the "customer" proceeding further out the door from that point would be construed as theft. At that point, all the "probably cause" clauses people have mentioned thus far become effective.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I realize that this isn't likely the case from a legal perspective, and it isn't the case from anyone's practical perspective--but it does go to show just how important the definitions and semantics on situations like this can be...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Bill V, post: 731240, member: 54538"] I'm not sure if this merits mentioning or not, but I will anyway--one point that may have some bearing is the actual definition of when the "transaction" between the customer and the store starts and ends. If you define the transaction as ending when the customer receives the receipt and the bag of goodies, then the items are the customer's property at that point. (Regardless of whether the store then has the right to inspect the bags before the customer exits the store--that's a whole different discussion.) However, if you define the transaction as ending when the customer exits the store AFTER clearing security, then one may be able to argue that until that full transaction is complete, the bag, its contents, and the receipt remain the property of the store. Refusing to undergo the security check results in the transaction being voided, as it was never completed. And therefore, the "customer" proceeding further out the door from that point would be construed as theft. At that point, all the "probably cause" clauses people have mentioned thus far become effective. I realize that this isn't likely the case from a legal perspective, and it isn't the case from anyone's practical perspective--but it does go to show just how important the definitions and semantics on situations like this can be... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Welcome to SportTrac.Org
Off Topic Discussion
OT: Standing Up For What's Right - Against Circuit City and the local Police
Top