I witnessed an event at my local Costco last night that certainly had my analytical wheels turning.
As most of you that shop there know, Costco stops you as you are exiting and checks your receipt (though frankly, it never looks to me like they are checking anything).
I have always been a bit annoyed about this, particularly when there is a long line of carts waiting to leave the store (as there was last night), but have always considered it a minor annoyance and simply complied. The lawyer in me though has always wondered what Costco would do if someone didn't stop for the inspection and tried to leave the store. Well, now I know.
Much to my delight, last night I witnessed a fellow bolt right past the person who was doing the inspection. He indicated that he "was not interested in a search" and just kept walking toward the door. Let me be clear - there is no doubt this guy was an asshole, of that there is no doubt. That's not what this post is about.
What surprised me, is that he was actually physically grabbed by the Costco inspector, who promptly screamed, resulting in two other Costco employees coming to her aid. All three physically held the man so he could not leave the store. There is no indication the guy stole anything - he clearly had a receipt in his hand, He was just an ass trying to make a point.
I really think Costco needs to get some legal advice because I think they are guilty, in this instance, of the torts of unlawful confinement and assault, and possibly even criminal activity.
The Costco position, which they indicated to this guy last night, was that he agreed to be searched under the terms of his Costco membership. I haven't looked at whether this is correct, but I suspect it is, and will assume for the purposes of this discussion that it is correct.
However, even if it is correct, my view as a lawyer is that Costco's legal recourse is to terminate the guy's membership - not unlawfully detain and assault him. At least this is the case under Canadian law. If a person consents to be searched, they have the right to withdraw that consent at any time. If they do withdraw that consent, then the person conducting the search must stop immediately. Costco may have a contractual claim against this individual for breaching his membership agreement, the consequence of which should be the termination of his Costco membership, but for Costco to hold and detain the fellow in my view was clearly tortious, and possibly even criminal. In Canada a citizen only has the right to detain someone if they are witnessing an indictable offence in progress. Beyond that, the only recourse available to a private citizen is to alert the police and let them deal with it.
I don't know how the whole thing ended up. When I left the man was phoning 911 to report a crime.
Crazy stuff. The guy was an ass, but even an ass can make a point now and again (yes, even cigrmaster).
In any event, I just thought this was interesting and I thought I would toss it out there for some Friday afternoon water cooler discourse.
As most of you that shop there know, Costco stops you as you are exiting and checks your receipt (though frankly, it never looks to me like they are checking anything).
I have always been a bit annoyed about this, particularly when there is a long line of carts waiting to leave the store (as there was last night), but have always considered it a minor annoyance and simply complied. The lawyer in me though has always wondered what Costco would do if someone didn't stop for the inspection and tried to leave the store. Well, now I know.
Much to my delight, last night I witnessed a fellow bolt right past the person who was doing the inspection. He indicated that he "was not interested in a search" and just kept walking toward the door. Let me be clear - there is no doubt this guy was an asshole, of that there is no doubt. That's not what this post is about.
What surprised me, is that he was actually physically grabbed by the Costco inspector, who promptly screamed, resulting in two other Costco employees coming to her aid. All three physically held the man so he could not leave the store. There is no indication the guy stole anything - he clearly had a receipt in his hand, He was just an ass trying to make a point.
I really think Costco needs to get some legal advice because I think they are guilty, in this instance, of the torts of unlawful confinement and assault, and possibly even criminal activity.
The Costco position, which they indicated to this guy last night, was that he agreed to be searched under the terms of his Costco membership. I haven't looked at whether this is correct, but I suspect it is, and will assume for the purposes of this discussion that it is correct.
However, even if it is correct, my view as a lawyer is that Costco's legal recourse is to terminate the guy's membership - not unlawfully detain and assault him. At least this is the case under Canadian law. If a person consents to be searched, they have the right to withdraw that consent at any time. If they do withdraw that consent, then the person conducting the search must stop immediately. Costco may have a contractual claim against this individual for breaching his membership agreement, the consequence of which should be the termination of his Costco membership, but for Costco to hold and detain the fellow in my view was clearly tortious, and possibly even criminal. In Canada a citizen only has the right to detain someone if they are witnessing an indictable offence in progress. Beyond that, the only recourse available to a private citizen is to alert the police and let them deal with it.
I don't know how the whole thing ended up. When I left the man was phoning 911 to report a crime.
Crazy stuff. The guy was an ass, but even an ass can make a point now and again (yes, even cigrmaster).
In any event, I just thought this was interesting and I thought I would toss it out there for some Friday afternoon water cooler discourse.
:
