Nut jobs. All of them.
But the shop will likely take the heat.
As a business they should know better.

Like most of said, both parties are wrong but forcefully confining someone is more serious.

If my kid was in a store like that and being assaulted like the stepdad claims to 911 I wouldn't hesitate well waiting on the phone for the cops to show I'd go get a tire iron out of my truck and smash that door or window and any one of those employees that tried to stop me from removing my kid from the situation.

The cops told the workers to not let her out tho 4Head

even if your "kid" is a 26 year old woman throwing a temper tantrum? :fullofwin:

I'm not sure I believe the shop owners saying the police told them to keep her inside.

The McDonalds video was better.

titties falling out > no titties falling out

If that was my Wife/daughter/sidechick or whatever that door would have been history.

Berz out.

I would of knocked on the door and paid for her to get out. This isnt rocket science for both parties.

Thank you! People keep repeating this snippet in this thread, but where's the evidence? I don't believe it for a second... police never say to do anything yourself, their stance is always to back off and let them handle it.

Probably, right or wrong I'm taking the side of my kid and I'll deal with the consequences later.

Actually, that's not true.
We have a lot of land. The problem with that is every spring we have the homeless making camps in our various forests.

Anyway, I got tired of kicking these people out and decided to call the cops on one aggressive group of campers. The cop came in and did his sweep, but the campers were gone. He told me that as a land owner, I have the right to remove people from my property. His direct quote was, and I am being 100% honest here

Quote:

"Get your shotgun and your big dog and kick them out"

I laughed a little, as one does during an awkward moment and asked if I could get that in writing. At which time he looked at me like I was an idiot, and left.

So yeah, some cops do tell you to do it yourself.

But I highly doubt this is one of those cases.

The white girl showed some restraint in her tantrum.

She could have copied that Langley lady at that Timmy Ho's by taking a dump in the salon and throwing shit at the staff. :lawl:

I don't get it. Do stores have to let you out after they catch someone stealing? How about house thief?

yeah what about Loss Prevention Officers who detain shoplifters in stores? Is that unlawful confinement?

I'll gladly do donuts on your property - just say when.

The laws around material theft are pretty simple: Take something out of the store without paying, theft

It's not so clear around services rendered. Place does a shitty job? Why should you have to pay if they didn't live up to to the expected service level?

I dunno, I feel like this would have been more of a civil case rather than criminal, shop should have let her go and then pursued her for non-payment through small claims.

yes but does "Theft" give LPOs the legal right to detain someone on store property against their will, which is what I'm asking. Sorry I wasn't clear, I'm genuinely ignorant in the matter.

Link to said McDonalds video now :fullofwin:

They can perform a citizen's arrest, there's a lot of potential liability involved if they do (and do it wrong). Like I said for material theft it's pretty black and white with the offence that's committed so it's safer for them to do.

This case is more of a service related issue, the big debate is if the shop performed their end of the agreed service and if the customer feels that they did not fulfill that service if it actually constitutes theft if she did not pay (She even apparently asked them to fix it and they refused). If it doesn't, and the shop held her against her will then that's unlawful confinement and they could be in a world of hurt.

To think of it another way, if you hire a plumber to do work on your house and he does a shitty job and shit still leaks or it's not to code so you tell him you're not paying until he fixes it. If he then held you against your will until you paid him, would that be right?

if it's $230 instead of $23, does it make a difference?

you can play the 'unsatisified card' and dine & dash for life

if it's not provided to your expectations/standards, it's up to you to afford them a chance to resolve it (and you should)...but unless it's incomplete or a totally different service provided, pay up
and if they're unable to finish/re-do that same day and you get asked to come back? do you pay then? pay half?

how many of us have worked in a SMB/mom & pops get the customers coming in with the 'I PAID so I should get EXACTLY as I want!' and expect you to fan and feed them grapes instead of finding something that's mutually agreeable?

if you don't like the style, not to your expectation, etc...that's fine, you don't have to return...you can leave a less than stellar review if it cannot be resolved to your liking...but at the very minimum you're gonna pay for what's been provided or it's theft in my books

^
There's an awful lot of people who expect meals to be removed from their bills when they are unhappy with the food........ and I know of several hair places that customer refuse to pay if they're super unhappy with their haircut. Online reviews didn't exist 5+ years ago... what did people do then? Hardly an end all for the customer.

Do some people have no conscience and do this purposely at places to get shit for free? Sure..... but it is out there. I expect a business would already know how to deal with such a situation... and this was not how to deal with it.

so u can personally remove ppl off your property like originalhypa says, but if a dude breaks in to your house and dudes injuryed in anyway, u have to pay for that persons injury?

man Canada is just amazing bro

Canada is amazing???

So if I take my girlfriend to a salon to get her nails and say its ugly, I dont have to pay and she gets free nails done? lolol :troll:

i can explain that and the reason for that is simple, they rather pay a dead persons family once instead of a injury persons long term care, since medical and stuff like that could be expensive long term ( imagine paying a young guy thats 18years his medical bill for rest of his life if he never recovers from his injurys......... financial burden is hard for some familys)