3 ms·

Why doesn’t Home Depot do something similar? Generally speaking, it's illegal to detain someone from leaving without probable cause of a crime. (In contrast,

Why doesn’t Home Depot do something similar? Generally speaking, it's illegal to detain someone from leaving without probable cause of a crime. (In contrast, Costco is empowered to do so via their membership agreement.)

DannyBee 9y ago
IAAL :) "Generally speaking, it's illegal to detain someone from leaving without probable cause of a crime. (In contrast, Costco is empowered to do so via their membership agreement.)" This is commonly thought but not quite right, either on facts, or on law. First, people cite a membership agreement. Let's take a look: https://www.costco.com/wcsstore/CostcoUSBCCatalogAssetStore/feature-pages/info/member-benefits-costco-services-7_13.pdf https://www.costco.com/wcsstore/CostcoUSBCCatalogAssetStore/... https://www.costco.com/member-privileges-conditions.html https://www.costco.com/member-privileges-conditions.html Nothing there. Maybe it's elsewhere. Can't easily be found (not good for Costco!) It does say they can adopt rules at any time. But false imprisonment requires voluntary consent, which is knowing. So that would not help them. Besides that, false imprisonment, in most states, is both a felony and a tort :) The answer to the question "are you likely to be able to sue costco successfully for trying to check your receipt when you don't want them to" - no, unless you revoke consent and they don't revoke your membership and kick you off the property :) The answer to the question "can they legally detain you" - also no if you revoke consent (and the first person to say something about the 4th amendment here loses, since we are talking about private actors). Voluntary consent is definitely a valid defense to false imprisonment. However the idea that consent in the membership agreement overrides anything that later happens is, at best, laughable. Imagine the membership agreement says "you unconditionally consent to costco locking you up in the backroom until they get bored". Do you think I don't have a false imprisonment claim, if, when they try to do so, i say "I do not consent to this", and they do it anyway? How is that voluntary consent? Even if i did consent, i clearly and unequivocally revoked it. Maybe i breached a contract. Irrelevant, however. Remember, it's both a tort and a crime. Even if they have an argument about the tort (they don't really), they don't about the crime. There is plenty of precedent on revocation of consent all the way up the Supreme Court (United States v. Drayton, etc). Saying "no" to a receipt checker and walking away almost certainly counts as proper consent revocation. Now Costco certainly has the right to revoke my membership and remove me from their property. But they can't certainly can't detain me though once i've revoked consent. It even may have a reasonable argument that the first time it tries to detain me, it was within the consent (depends on what happens in the above story). The second i revoke my consent by saying no, sorry, it's clearly false imprisonment (in states that don't have a shopkeepers privilege).
- DrScump 9y ago
  Nothing there. In the "General Policies" section in your first link, we find: Costco reserves the right to inspect any container, backpack, briefcase, etc., upon entering or leaving the warehouse. One key claim Costco makes in justifying the inspections is to make sure you got everything you paid for. I have personally experienced at least three cases over the years where the process worked to my benefit. Once (that I can remember), an item was misplaced by the checker into the items of the patron behind me (I had paid for something I wouldn't have gotten out the door with). And at least twice, back when they accepted Discover and would allow up to $50 cash back on a purchase, I didn't realize that I hadn't gotten the money... only to have the receipt-checker proactively ask me if I got the cash. In both cases, a subsequent count of the register confirmed it, and I got the full amount of cash. So, I'm content with Costco's process, but I don't allow proactive checks anywhere else (e.g. Fry's).
  - DannyBee 9y ago
    " Costco reserves the right to inspect any container, backpack, briefcase, etc., upon entering or leaving the warehouse. " Errr, that doesn't give them the right to detain you, so no, that's not it. This is the more general stealing provision, and 1. Not even close to the same as receipt checking. 2. Probably void in a number of states (where receipt checking would not be)
    - DrScump 9y ago
      that doesn't give them the right to detain you Nobody's arguing that they have a power to detain you without probable cause, but they can (and have, many times) cancel a membership for noncompliance. But to say there is "nothing there" in the agreement on the topic is disingenuous. Of course, those who aren't members anyway aren't really risking anything.

DannyBee 9y ago

IAAL :) "Generally speaking, it's illegal to detain someone from leaving without probable cause of a crime. (In contrast, Costco is empowered to do so via their membership agreement.)" This is commonly thought but not quite right, either on facts, or on law. First, people cite a membership agreement. Let's take a look: https://www.costco.com/wcsstore/CostcoUSBCCatalogAssetStore/feature-pages/info/member-benefits-costco-services-7_13.pdf https://www.costco.com/wcsstore/CostcoUSBCCatalogAssetStore/... https://www.costco.com/member-privileges-conditions.html https://www.costco.com/member-privileges-conditions.html Nothing there. Maybe it's elsewhere. Can't easily be found (not good for Costco!) It does say they can adopt rules at any time. But false imprisonment requires voluntary consent, which is knowing. So that would not help them. Besides that, false imprisonment, in most states, is both a felony and a tort :) The answer to the question "are you likely to be able to sue costco successfully for trying to check your receipt when you don't want them to" - no, unless you revoke consent and they don't revoke your membership and kick you off the property :) The answer to the question "can they legally detain you" - also no if you revoke consent (and the first person to say something about the 4th amendment here loses, since we are talking about private actors). Voluntary consent is definitely a valid defense to false imprisonment. However the idea that consent in the membership agreement overrides anything that later happens is, at best, laughable. Imagine the membership agreement says "you unconditionally consent to costco locking you up in the backroom until they get bored". Do you think I don't have a false imprisonment claim, if, when they try to do so, i say "I do not consent to this", and they do it anyway? How is that voluntary consent? Even if i did consent, i clearly and unequivocally revoked it. Maybe i breached a contract. Irrelevant, however. Remember, it's both a tort and a crime. Even if they have an argument about the tort (they don't really), they don't about the crime. There is plenty of precedent on revocation of consent all the way up the Supreme Court (United States v. Drayton, etc). Saying "no" to a receipt checker and walking away almost certainly counts as proper consent revocation. Now Costco certainly has the right to revoke my membership and remove me from their property. But they can't certainly can't detain me though once i've revoked consent. It even may have a reasonable argument that the first time it tries to detain me, it was within the consent (depends on what happens in the above story). The second i revoke my consent by saying no, sorry, it's clearly false imprisonment (in states that don't have a shopkeepers privilege).

DrScump 9y ago
Nothing there. In the "General Policies" section in your first link, we find: Costco reserves the right to inspect any container, backpack, briefcase, etc., upon entering or leaving the warehouse. One key claim Costco makes in justifying the inspections is to make sure you got everything you paid for. I have personally experienced at least three cases over the years where the process worked to my benefit. Once (that I can remember), an item was misplaced by the checker into the items of the patron behind me (I had paid for something I wouldn't have gotten out the door with). And at least twice, back when they accepted Discover and would allow up to $50 cash back on a purchase, I didn't realize that I hadn't gotten the money... only to have the receipt-checker proactively ask me if I got the cash. In both cases, a subsequent count of the register confirmed it, and I got the full amount of cash. So, I'm content with Costco's process, but I don't allow proactive checks anywhere else (e.g. Fry's).
- DannyBee 9y ago
  " Costco reserves the right to inspect any container, backpack, briefcase, etc., upon entering or leaving the warehouse. " Errr, that doesn't give them the right to detain you, so no, that's not it. This is the more general stealing provision, and 1. Not even close to the same as receipt checking. 2. Probably void in a number of states (where receipt checking would not be)
  - DrScump 9y ago
    that doesn't give them the right to detain you Nobody's arguing that they have a power to detain you without probable cause, but they can (and have, many times) cancel a membership for noncompliance. But to say there is "nothing there" in the agreement on the topic is disingenuous. Of course, those who aren't members anyway aren't really risking anything.