The question I have is whether or not these letters make it clear that this is an option, or if they're written in such a way that people feel they have no choice but to pay.
Does a demand letter need to make it clear that ignoring the demand is an option?
The Following User Says Thank You to fredr123 For This Useful Post:
HYDE Legal
Barrister and Solicitors
6539A Mississauga,Ontario
L5N 1A6
TEL (905) 821-0767 FAX (905)821-0813
PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL
Dear Mr. Parent
Re: Zellers Inc. and Parent of Child
Recovery of Civil Damages/Our Case Number ZZZZ ? XXXXXX
We have been retailed by Zellers Inc. (the ?Retailer?) with respect to the allegation that on May 6,2011, a young person in your care or custody, (namely The Child) took unlawful possession of merchandise from the Retailer?s premises located at Zellers Inc, Calgary,AB. The retailer has the legal right to claim damages from the said your person and/or you as a result of such action based on theft, damages and conversion. The Retailer?s right of civil recovery and payments made to the Retailer are separate and distinct from any criminal proceedings which may be instituted by the police.
The retailer also takes the position that it has the right to claim damages from you as a parent or guardian of the young person for failing to provide reasonable supervision of the young person. You have a right to be represented by a lawyer with respect to this claim.
The Retailer is prepared to settle its claim for cival damages in return for a payment of $595.00 (the ?Settlement Amount?), received on or before May 31,2011. If this amount is not paid, I may receive specific instruction, whether or not to arrange for a law firm in your jurisdiction to commence legal proceedings before a civil court for all damages, plus interest, legal expenses, and other administrative costs incurred by the Retailer in connection with this matter. These latter amounts may increase if payment is not made by the noted date. This settlement amount is based on the costs associated with the detection, apprehension, recovery of goods and damages associated with shoplifting, hereafter referred to as Recovery Costs.
Should you choose to settle the Retailer?s payment of the Settlement Amount, payment should be made by cheque or money order, made payable to ?CIVIL RECOVERY? on behalf of the Retailer, with your name and the above case number noted thereon. The payment should be sent in the enclosed postage paid envelope or to the following address: P.O. Box 193, Streetsville, Ontario L5M 2B8.
I have been advised that Canadian retailers estimate shoplifting amounts to an annual expense exceeding $11 million dollars daily. Experience indicates that pursuing shoplifters for such losses reduces the number of shoplifting incidents, resulting in savings which can then be passed on to the consumers. The Hudson?s Bay v. White supports the position that shoplifters, in certain cases, are liable for punitive damages.
Any questions in regard to this matter are to be made in writing, and addressed to the undersigned.
Yours truly,
John-Edward C.Hyde, BA,M.A..LL.B,JD.
The Following User Says Thank You to postman56 For This Useful Post:
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
That's the thing it's an offer for settlement.
He certainly doesn't HAVE to pay, but if he doesn't he or his child MAY wind up in court.
Is Zellers really prepared to take a kid/their parent to court over some shoplifting? I don't know. You're well within your rights to tell Zellers to shove it, but they're within thiers to give you the option of paying $600 to ensure they don't sue you, or take your chances that they might.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
The Following User Says Thank You to Bring_Back_Shantz For This Useful Post:
I have no problem with it at all. If parents are unable to properly school their child in right and wrong then they deserve to have the financial penalty attributed to them.
If you truly believe this, I would recommend reading this book
__________________
"Teach a man to reason, and he'll think for a lifetime"
It's an offer for settlement. It is not a fine that is legally binding in any way. If you pay the settlement fee, they waive the right to whatever legal recourse they claim in the fine print.
Maybe it makes more sense for the family to settle this than what it would cost them to hire a lawyer?
Does a demand letter need to make it clear that ignoring the demand is an option?
There was a price tag on the candy bar that was ignored, so they should be able see that there are other options rather than what is written.
I'm wondering if the price is a formula based on the rates of lawyers, managers, paper work, cost of item, etc. or if it is a blanket amount regardless of the item being stolen. It could be just a large amount to be a deterrant, similar to a speeding ticket. It may not be the same ratio, but I'm sure the fine on the speeding ticket is not equal to the damage you did to society.
I prefer this outcome to passing the burden to honest customers with higher prices to cover their losses.
It is a $1 dollar chocolate bar. How much money is passed on to the consumer to prevent the stealing of a $1 dollar chocolate bar? If it is any more than $0 than Zellars is making some dumb business decisions.
It is a $1 dollar chocolate bar. How much money is passed on to the consumer to prevent the stealing of a $1 dollar chocolate bar? If it is any more than $0 than Zellars is making some dumb business decisions.
What if 1,000,000 people took a $1 chocolate bar. Does Zellers just take that loss?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by henriksedin33
Not at all, as I've said, I would rather start with LA over any of the other WC playoff teams. Bunch of underachievers who look good on paper but don't even deserve to be in the playoffs.
I was in a loss prevention meeting once a few years ago where someone asked a local lawyer about those letters. He said "I tell my clients to ignore them."
I dare say they send these letters to scare middle class parents into paying them. If they aren't legally binding (I don't know if they are, or not) but people pay them anyway, Zellers is up money. Kind of like IMPark.
Should people be stealing? No. Heck my blood boils at the thought of people stealing from my store. I had ZERO problem kicking out known shoplifters, and did it numerous times.
However, no need to take advantage of the kids parents either. People tend to think because something comes from a lawyers office it's the word of the Lord, ironic as people tend to also think lawyers will be frying in Hell.
__________________ "Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
It is a $1 dollar chocolate bar. How much money is passed on to the consumer to prevent the stealing of a $1 dollar chocolate bar? If it is any more than $0 than Zellars is making some dumb business decisions.
Read the last part of that letter again, they're dealing with a massive shoplifting problem, they're viewing it as prevention as a whole, not on the individual.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Read the last part of that letter again, they're dealing with a massive shoplifting problem, they're viewing it as prevention as a whole, not on the individual.
I bet they are.
It isn't going to stop dumb kids from doing dumb things, but it sure will help rake in some extra dough for the store. An adult with a history I can see, sure. A bunch of preteens and barely teens? Fining their parents (the kid isn't going to be the one paying, after all) $595 isn't going to scare the kid straight any more than causing a ruckus in the store and with the cops.
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
The Following User Says Thank You to HPLovecraft For This Useful Post:
Does a demand letter need to make it clear that ignoring the demand is an option?
I don't know, does it? I think there's an ethical issue at play there more so than a black and white legal one. I guess my concern would be that if these letters resemble bills moreso than demand letters people might be unaware that they have an option. Of course without seeing one there's really no way to tell.
Edit: Just saw the text of the letter posted, that looks like a pretty clear statement that it's an offer to avoid legal proceedings. I don't have any issue with something like that.
I don't know, does it? I think there's an ethical issue at play there more so than a black and white legal one. I guess my concern would be that if these letters resemble bills moreso than demand letters people might be unaware that they have an option. Of course without seeing one there's really no way to tell.
Edit: Just saw the text of the letter posted, that looks like a pretty clear statement that it's an offer to avoid legal proceedings. I don't have any issue with something like that.
I don't think that it does. When I asked you, I wasn't sure if the letter had been written by a lawyer or someone from the loss recovery department (that was not a lawyer). If it was a lawyer, I agree that there would be an ethical issue at play and the author should not mislead the potential defendant. I do not think the text of the letter posted is misleading.
If the letter was written by a non-lawyer then I don't think the author would/should be held to the same high ethical standards.
The Following User Says Thank You to fredr123 For This Useful Post:
Well, for one thing, this is all relevant to Zellers in that this thread has 2000 views, most of them I presume this afternoon alone.
Now despite all the law-and-order types telling us that six hundred bucks is a perfectly reasonable "fine" to slap on a 10-year-old for stealing a Snickers bar, to most of us this looks more like a giant corporation trying to intimidate people with legal sounding nonsense and less like a poor victim of a crime trying to honestly recoup losses.
In other words, it makes Zellers look bad. So they should care about that.
Anyway, according to the letter:
Experience indicates that pursuing shoplifters for such losses reduces the number of shoplifting incidents, resulting in savings which can then be passed on to the consumers.
This is fantastic news. I wonder, since the implementation of this "fine" program, how much prices have gone down in HBC stores. Anyone know?
Since this is about deterring shoplifting, they definitely have a warning posted about it in stores, right?
And they'd be doing society a huge favour if they would publicize this remarkably effective anti-shoplifting measure. Spread the word!
I've seen no publicity at all about it, which I find odd.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to RougeUnderoos For This Useful Post:
What if 1,000,000 people took a $1 chocolate bar. Does Zellers just take that loss?
No they don't take that loss they change their security practices. Things like 13 year old kids stealing chocolate bars should be relatively easy to stop considering the lack of sophistication the kids have and the ease it is to scare them.
i would imagine that they lose a lot more money from actual thieves stealing things of value and focusing on stopping those people will do a lot more to save them money than trying to extort money from parents of dumb kids who likely won't steal again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
Read the last part of that letter again, they're dealing with a massive shoplifting problem, they're viewing it as prevention as a whole, not on the individual.
As mentioned above if they are dealing with a massive shoplifting problem then going after 13 year old kids for $1 chocolate bars is going about it the wrong way.
It is a $1 dollar chocolate bar. How much money is passed on to the consumer to prevent the stealing of a $1 dollar chocolate bar? If it is any more than $0 than Zellars is making some dumb business decisions.
How about paying to prevent the loss of that chocolate bar, and other items that are shoplifted?
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
