When times are tough, it’s only natural to look for ways to save money. But one woman from South Australia was recently warned that her so-called self-checkout ‘trick’ isn’t just unethical–it’s completely illegal.

A question was submitted to the Sisters In Law column on news.com.au, where a woman named Kayla asked law firm Maurice Blackburn's resident lawyers and real-life sisters Alison and Jillian Barrett a rather thought-provoking question.

Apparently, her friend was putting more expensive items through self-checkouts as something less pricey, like swapping avocados for brown onions.

Kayla wrote: 'She claims that it’s not stealing as you’re still paying for something and that supermarkets work the cost of ‘self-checkout fraud’ into their prices. She also claims that everyone does it!'

The Barretts responded: 'No matter how your friend tries to justify her behaviour, it is against the law. Her fraudulent behaviour is just one of many tricks employed by self-service thieves to avoid proper payment.'

A woman in Australia breaks the law with her ‘self-checkout trick’ in hopes of saving a few dollars. Credit: Shutterstock

These sneaky tactics can push up grocery prices for everyone, the duo stressed, which is why supermarkets are taking active measures to prevent self-checkout thefts by employing undercover security officers.

Things could get pretty uncomfortable for a shoplifter caught in the act.

‘If they believe a theft has occurred, security officers and store staff have the right to search your friend’s bags to check the goods and the prices paid,’ the Barretts warned.

‘An excuse like getting avocados confused with brown onions is likely not going to cut it.’

‘Your friend has the right to refuse a search, but the grocery store can call the police if they suspect she has been dishonest.’

Security may inspect your bags before leaving the store for any suspicious activities. Credit: Shutterstock

Shoplifting, including underpayment of goods, is a type of larceny (theft) under South Australian law.

Minor incidences (involving goods valued at less than $150) are usually dealt with by the police in the form of an on-the-spot infringement notice, provided that the supermarket consents.

’This includes the requirement to pay the full price for the goods stolen (or underpaid), as well as an apology to the store,’ the sisters added.

‘It's tough out there, but breaking the law by not paying for your food isn't really good for anyone.’

There’s no doubt about it–money can be tight these days. But breaking the law to save a few bucks just isn’t worth the risk.

Key Takeaways

• A South Australian woman has allegedly been committing 'self-check-out fraud' at her local supermarket, according to her friend.
• The woman reportedly mislabels expensive items as cheaper ones at the self-checkout, a practice she justifies by asserting that supermarkets work the cost of such fraud into their prices.
• Lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett responded to this inquiry in news.com.au's Sisters In Law column, asserting that such behaviour is not justifiable and contributes to increased grocery prices.
• They warned that undercover security officers are employed by supermarkets to deal with issues such as these, and such behaviour could result in an on-the-spot theft infringement notice, including a requirement to pay the full value of the underpaid goods and an apology to the store.

Do you think the woman’s reason for tricking the supermarket’s self-checkout feature is justified? What would you have done differently if you were in her position? We want to hear your input in the comments below!

 

[Veggiepatch]

Outright theft. She may be paying for the cheaper item but it doesn't help the farmers who grew the more expensive item.

It doesn't affect the farmer one iota. Just the supermarket.

 

[Squizzy1]

When times are tough, it’s only natural to look for ways to save money. But one woman from South Australia was recently warned that her so-called self-checkout ‘trick’ isn’t just unethical–it’s completely illegal.

A question was submitted to the Sisters In Law column on news.com.au, where a woman named Kayla asked law firm Maurice Blackburn's resident lawyers and real-life sisters Alison and Jillian Barrett a rather thought-provoking question.

Apparently, her friend was putting more expensive items through self-checkouts as something less pricey, like swapping avocados for brown onions.

Kayla wrote: 'She claims that it’s not stealing as you’re still paying for something and that supermarkets work the cost of ‘self-checkout fraud’ into their prices. She also claims that everyone does it!'

The Barretts responded: 'No matter how your friend tries to justify her behaviour, it is against the law. Her fraudulent behaviour is just one of many tricks employed by self-service thieves to avoid proper payment.'

View attachment 29609

A woman in Australia breaks the law with her ‘self-checkout trick’ in hopes of saving a few dollars. Credit: Shutterstock

These sneaky tactics can push up grocery prices for everyone, the duo stressed, which is why supermarkets are taking active measures to prevent self-checkout thefts by employing undercover security officers.

Things could get pretty uncomfortable for a shoplifter caught in the act.

‘If they believe a theft has occurred, security officers and store staff have the right to search your friend’s bags to check the goods and the prices paid,’ the Barretts warned.

‘An excuse like getting avocados confused with brown onions is likely not going to cut it.’

‘Your friend has the right to refuse a search, but the grocery store can call the police if they suspect she has been dishonest.’

View attachment 29610

Security may inspect your bags before leaving the store for any suspicious activities. Credit: Shutterstock

Shoplifting, including underpayment of goods, is a type of larceny (theft) under South Australian law.

Minor incidences (involving goods valued at less than $150) are usually dealt with by the police in the form of an on-the-spot infringement notice, provided that the supermarket consents.

’This includes the requirement to pay the full price for the goods stolen (or underpaid), as well as an apology to the store,’ the sisters added.

‘It's tough out there, but breaking the law by not paying for your food isn't really good for anyone.’

There’s no doubt about it–money can be tight these days. But breaking the law to save a few bucks just isn’t worth the risk.

Key Takeaways

• A South Australian woman has allegedly been committing 'self-check-out fraud' at her local supermarket, according to her friend.
• The woman reportedly mislabels expensive items as cheaper ones at the self-checkout, a practice she justifies by asserting that supermarkets work the cost of such fraud into their prices.
• Lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett responded to this inquiry in news.com.au's Sisters In Law column, asserting that such behaviour is not justifiable and contributes to increased grocery prices.
• They warned that undercover security officers are employed by supermarkets to deal with issues such as these, and such behaviour could result in an on-the-spot theft infringement notice, including a requirement to pay the full value of the underpaid goods and an apology to the store.

Do you think the woman’s reason for tricking the supermarket’s self-checkout feature is justified? What would you have done differently if you were in her position? We want to hear your input in the comments below!

Unknowingly putting something through as something else is one thing, deliberately doing it is something else again, namely theft.

 

[Veggiepatch]

No question, it's theft pure and simple and this person should be prosecuted!

Prosecution is the last resort. First step is a warning by shop staff, then progresses to a shop ban then a charge which then goes to court.

Depends on one's criminal history for the exact same offence.

I was with a person who feigned to scan some items at a self serve checkout a few years ago. She was caught, told to pay up for the unpaid items or leave the store empty handed.

 

[Marybell]

What planet is this woman from? Regardless of your excuses and attempting to justify your actions, it's still bloody stealing
As my dear mum would say, if I jumped off a cliff would you follow?

 

[Leenie]

It's stealing and leads to rising prices.

Times might be tough,but that doesn’t give you the right to steal.

 

[Leenie]

Jimmy Whoos? Never heard of the bugger.

Honestly.

Times might be tough,but that doesn’t give you the right to steal .

 

[Robbo3006]

When times are tough, it’s only natural to look for ways to save money. But one woman from South Australia was recently warned that her so-called self-checkout ‘trick’ isn’t just unethical–it’s completely illegal.

A question was submitted to the Sisters In Law column on news.com.au, where a woman named Kayla asked law firm Maurice Blackburn's resident lawyers and real-life sisters Alison and Jillian Barrett a rather thought-provoking question.

Apparently, her friend was putting more expensive items through self-checkouts as something less pricey, like swapping avocados for brown onions.

Kayla wrote: 'She claims that it’s not stealing as you’re still paying for something and that supermarkets work the cost of ‘self-checkout fraud’ into their prices. She also claims that everyone does it!'

The Barretts responded: 'No matter how your friend tries to justify her behaviour, it is against the law. Her fraudulent behaviour is just one of many tricks employed by self-service thieves to avoid proper payment.'

View attachment 29609

A woman in Australia breaks the law with her ‘self-checkout trick’ in hopes of saving a few dollars. Credit: Shutterstock

These sneaky tactics can push up grocery prices for everyone, the duo stressed, which is why supermarkets are taking active measures to prevent self-checkout thefts by employing undercover security officers.

Things could get pretty uncomfortable for a shoplifter caught in the act.

‘If they believe a theft has occurred, security officers and store staff have the right to search your friend’s bags to check the goods and the prices paid,’ the Barretts warned.

‘An excuse like getting avocados confused with brown onions is likely not going to cut it.’

‘Your friend has the right to refuse a search, but the grocery store can call the police if they suspect she has been dishonest.’

View attachment 29610

Security may inspect your bags before leaving the store for any suspicious activities. Credit: Shutterstock

Shoplifting, including underpayment of goods, is a type of larceny (theft) under South Australian law.

Minor incidences (involving goods valued at less than $150) are usually dealt with by the police in the form of an on-the-spot infringement notice, provided that the supermarket consents.

’This includes the requirement to pay the full price for the goods stolen (or underpaid), as well as an apology to the store,’ the sisters added.

‘It's tough out there, but breaking the law by not paying for your food isn't really good for anyone.’

There’s no doubt about it–money can be tight these days. But breaking the law to save a few bucks just isn’t worth the risk.

Key Takeaways

• A South Australian woman has allegedly been committing 'self-check-out fraud' at her local supermarket, according to her friend.
• The woman reportedly mislabels expensive items as cheaper ones at the self-checkout, a practice she justifies by asserting that supermarkets work the cost of such fraud into their prices.
• Lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett responded to this inquiry in news.com.au's Sisters In Law column, asserting that such behaviour is not justifiable and contributes to increased grocery prices.
• They warned that undercover security officers are employed by supermarkets to deal with issues such as these, and such behaviour could result in an on-the-spot theft infringement notice, including a requirement to pay the full value of the underpaid goods and an apology to the store.

Do you think the woman’s reason for tricking the supermarket’s self-checkout feature is justified? What would you have done differently if you were in her position? We want to hear your input in the comments below!

What a load of crap, I've watched trolley loads of goods being wheeled out of supermarkets and the staff didn't do shite about it, except say we got cameras, the police have too many other more important things to do like booking people for traffic crap, it makes money, arresting shoplifters makes more work for them but no revenue.

 

[Veggiepatch]

What a load of crap, I've watched trolley loads of goods being wheeled out of supermarkets and the staff didn't do shite about it, except say we got cameras, the police have too many other more important things to do like booking people for traffic crap, it makes money, arresting shoplifters makes more work for them but no revenue.

Police tend to respond to incidents of little consequence, but when the heat it on, they take their time getting to the scene of the crime, if at all.

 

[tonynbarb]

When times are tough, it’s only natural to look for ways to save money. But one woman from South Australia was recently warned that her so-called self-checkout ‘trick’ isn’t just unethical–it’s completely illegal.

A question was submitted to the Sisters In Law column on news.com.au, where a woman named Kayla asked law firm Maurice Blackburn's resident lawyers and real-life sisters Alison and Jillian Barrett a rather thought-provoking question.

Apparently, her friend was putting more expensive items through self-checkouts as something less pricey, like swapping avocados for brown onions.

Kayla wrote: 'She claims that it’s not stealing as you’re still paying for something and that supermarkets work the cost of ‘self-checkout fraud’ into their prices. She also claims that everyone does it!'

The Barretts responded: 'No matter how your friend tries to justify her behaviour, it is against the law. Her fraudulent behaviour is just one of many tricks employed by self-service thieves to avoid proper payment.'

View attachment 29609

A woman in Australia breaks the law with her ‘self-checkout trick’ in hopes of saving a few dollars. Credit: Shutterstock

These sneaky tactics can push up grocery prices for everyone, the duo stressed, which is why supermarkets are taking active measures to prevent self-checkout thefts by employing undercover security officers.

Things could get pretty uncomfortable for a shoplifter caught in the act.

‘If they believe a theft has occurred, security officers and store staff have the right to search your friend’s bags to check the goods and the prices paid,’ the Barretts warned.

‘An excuse like getting avocados confused with brown onions is likely not going to cut it.’

‘Your friend has the right to refuse a search, but the grocery store can call the police if they suspect she has been dishonest.’

View attachment 29610

Security may inspect your bags before leaving the store for any suspicious activities. Credit: Shutterstock

Shoplifting, including underpayment of goods, is a type of larceny (theft) under South Australian law.

Minor incidences (involving goods valued at less than $150) are usually dealt with by the police in the form of an on-the-spot infringement notice, provided that the supermarket consents.

’This includes the requirement to pay the full price for the goods stolen (or underpaid), as well as an apology to the store,’ the sisters added.

‘It's tough out there, but breaking the law by not paying for your food isn't really good for anyone.’

There’s no doubt about it–money can be tight these days. But breaking the law to save a few bucks just isn’t worth the risk.

Key Takeaways

• A South Australian woman has allegedly been committing 'self-check-out fraud' at her local supermarket, according to her friend.
• The woman reportedly mislabels expensive items as cheaper ones at the self-checkout, a practice she justifies by asserting that supermarkets work the cost of such fraud into their prices.
• Lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett responded to this inquiry in news.com.au's Sisters In Law column, asserting that such behaviour is not justifiable and contributes to increased grocery prices.
• They warned that undercover security officers are employed by supermarkets to deal with issues such as these, and such behaviour could result in an on-the-spot theft infringement notice, including a requirement to pay the full value of the underpaid goods and an apology to the store.

Do you think the woman’s reason for tricking the supermarket’s self-checkout feature is justified? What would you have done differently if you were in her position? We want to hear your input in the comments below!

The supermarkets should put people back on the checkouts and do away with selfserve checkouts, problem solved!!

 

[BillW41]

When times are tough, it’s only natural to look for ways to save money. But one woman from South Australia was recently warned that her so-called self-checkout ‘trick’ isn’t just unethical–it’s completely illegal.

A question was submitted to the Sisters In Law column on news.com.au, where a woman named Kayla asked law firm Maurice Blackburn's resident lawyers and real-life sisters Alison and Jillian Barrett a rather thought-provoking question.

Apparently, her friend was putting more expensive items through self-checkouts as something less pricey, like swapping avocados for brown onions.

Kayla wrote: 'She claims that it’s not stealing as you’re still paying for something and that supermarkets work the cost of ‘self-checkout fraud’ into their prices. She also claims that everyone does it!'

The Barretts responded: 'No matter how your friend tries to justify her behaviour, it is against the law. Her fraudulent behaviour is just one of many tricks employed by self-service thieves to avoid proper payment.'

View attachment 29609

A woman in Australia breaks the law with her ‘self-checkout trick’ in hopes of saving a few dollars. Credit: Shutterstock

These sneaky tactics can push up grocery prices for everyone, the duo stressed, which is why supermarkets are taking active measures to prevent self-checkout thefts by employing undercover security officers.

Things could get pretty uncomfortable for a shoplifter caught in the act.

‘If they believe a theft has occurred, security officers and store staff have the right to search your friend’s bags to check the goods and the prices paid,’ the Barretts warned.

‘An excuse like getting avocados confused with brown onions is likely not going to cut it.’

‘Your friend has the right to refuse a search, but the grocery store can call the police if they suspect she has been dishonest.’

View attachment 29610

Security may inspect your bags before leaving the store for any suspicious activities. Credit: Shutterstock

Shoplifting, including underpayment of goods, is a type of larceny (theft) under South Australian law.

Minor incidences (involving goods valued at less than $150) are usually dealt with by the police in the form of an on-the-spot infringement notice, provided that the supermarket consents.

’This includes the requirement to pay the full price for the goods stolen (or underpaid), as well as an apology to the store,’ the sisters added.

‘It's tough out there, but breaking the law by not paying for your food isn't really good for anyone.’

There’s no doubt about it–money can be tight these days. But breaking the law to save a few bucks just isn’t worth the risk.

Key Takeaways

• A South Australian woman has allegedly been committing 'self-check-out fraud' at her local supermarket, according to her friend.
• The woman reportedly mislabels expensive items as cheaper ones at the self-checkout, a practice she justifies by asserting that supermarkets work the cost of such fraud into their prices.
• Lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett responded to this inquiry in news.com.au's Sisters In Law column, asserting that such behaviour is not justifiable and contributes to increased grocery prices.
• They warned that undercover security officers are employed by supermarkets to deal with issues such as these, and such behaviour could result in an on-the-spot theft infringement notice, including a requirement to pay the full value of the underpaid goods and an apology to the store.

Do you think the woman’s reason for tricking the supermarket’s self-checkout feature is justified? What would you have done differently if you were in her position? We want to hear your input in the comments below!

 

[BillW41]

Obviously it's time that self-serve checkouts were made illegal!

 

[Jo Piper3]

Jimmy Whoos? Never heard of the bugger.

Honestly.

Stealing or not paying the correct price is always wrong.

 

[Veggiepatch]

Stealing or not paying the correct price is always wrong.

The thing is that I have no idea whatsoever about "Jimmy Choos" socks. Is there something special about them?

EDIT: No wonder I've never heard of them. $1195 for a mobile phone case? Has to be a joke surely. And by the way, Jimmy Choo does not have socks in their range according to their Australian website.

 

[Aussie D]

Selfish dishonest thief. People like this are the reason we are all being treated like criminals at self-checkout and our privacy and dignity is being further degraded by more invasive surveillance when we shop. Thanks a lot thieves.

 

[I'm Mal]

When times are tough, it’s only natural to look for ways to save money. But one woman from South Australia was recently warned that her so-called self-checkout ‘trick’ isn’t just unethical–it’s completely illegal.

A question was submitted to the Sisters In Law column on news.com.au, where a woman named Kayla asked law firm Maurice Blackburn's resident lawyers and real-life sisters Alison and Jillian Barrett a rather thought-provoking question.

Apparently, her friend was putting more expensive items through self-checkouts as something less pricey, like swapping avocados for brown onions.

Kayla wrote: 'She claims that it’s not stealing as you’re still paying for something and that supermarkets work the cost of ‘self-checkout fraud’ into their prices. She also claims that everyone does it!'

The Barretts responded: 'No matter how your friend tries to justify her behaviour, it is against the law. Her fraudulent behaviour is just one of many tricks employed by self-service thieves to avoid proper payment.'

View attachment 29609

A woman in Australia breaks the law with her ‘self-checkout trick’ in hopes of saving a few dollars. Credit: Shutterstock

These sneaky tactics can push up grocery prices for everyone, the duo stressed, which is why supermarkets are taking active measures to prevent self-checkout thefts by employing undercover security officers.

Things could get pretty uncomfortable for a shoplifter caught in the act.

‘If they believe a theft has occurred, security officers and store staff have the right to search your friend’s bags to check the goods and the prices paid,’ the Barretts warned.

‘An excuse like getting avocados confused with brown onions is likely not going to cut it.’

‘Your friend has the right to refuse a search, but the grocery store can call the police if they suspect she has been dishonest.’

View attachment 29610

Security may inspect your bags before leaving the store for any suspicious activities. Credit: Shutterstock

Shoplifting, including underpayment of goods, is a type of larceny (theft) under South Australian law.

Minor incidences (involving goods valued at less than $150) are usually dealt with by the police in the form of an on-the-spot infringement notice, provided that the supermarket consents.

’This includes the requirement to pay the full price for the goods stolen (or underpaid), as well as an apology to the store,’ the sisters added.

‘It's tough out there, but breaking the law by not paying for your food isn't really good for anyone.’

There’s no doubt about it–money can be tight these days. But breaking the law to save a few bucks just isn’t worth the risk.

Key Takeaways

• A South Australian woman has allegedly been committing 'self-check-out fraud' at her local supermarket, according to her friend.
• The woman reportedly mislabels expensive items as cheaper ones at the self-checkout, a practice she justifies by asserting that supermarkets work the cost of such fraud into their prices.
• Lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett responded to this inquiry in news.com.au's Sisters In Law column, asserting that such behaviour is not justifiable and contributes to increased grocery prices.
• They warned that undercover security officers are employed by supermarkets to deal with issues such as these, and such behaviour could result in an on-the-spot theft infringement notice, including a requirement to pay the full value of the underpaid goods and an apology to the store.

Do you think the woman’s reason for tricking the supermarket’s self-checkout feature is justified? What would you have done differently if you were in her position? We want to hear your input in the comments below!

I refuse to use self checkout for a few reasons. 1. I am not going to to do the retailer's job for them especially when they make obscene profits. 2. I will not take the risk of a simple mistake becoming an embarrassment and possible prosecution. 3. If retailers that have self checkout need to employ undercover security, where is the benefit for them? It seems a waste to install self checkout booths when they could have just kept checkout operators. 4. If there is no alternative to self checkout, I will take my business elsewhere that still has checkout operators. If anyone thinks I am being unreasonable or pedantic, I don't care.

 

[jenshere]

I can’t believe they didn’t know this was theft. And trying to justify it by saying they are paying something. I hope they get caught.

Of course they knew it was theft
Doing this up's the prices for all of us just because they want to cut a few cents here and there by STEALING Yes stealing is what this is
May they be caught by the supermarket and the Police be bought in to charge them properly for such an illegal act
SHAMEFUL

 

[Greatgwr]

Oh please, what undercover security? Extra staff

Why don't they just scrap the selfserve and put more staff on real checkouts? might cost less.

 

[Trudi]

It's dishonest and it brings the person's moral compass into question. Would that person also cheat their friends and family to get a benefit?

 

[Barbara V]

That's a disgusting thing to do,everyone then pays for her theft

 

[Mikeyboy2012]

When times are tough, it’s only natural to look for ways to save money. But one woman from South Australia was recently warned that her so-called self-checkout ‘trick’ isn’t just unethical–it’s completely illegal.

A question was submitted to the Sisters In Law column on news.com.au, where a woman named Kayla asked law firm Maurice Blackburn's resident lawyers and real-life sisters Alison and Jillian Barrett a rather thought-provoking question.

Apparently, her friend was putting more expensive items through self-checkouts as something less pricey, like swapping avocados for brown onions.

Kayla wrote: 'She claims that it’s not stealing as you’re still paying for something and that supermarkets work the cost of ‘self-checkout fraud’ into their prices. She also claims that everyone does it!'

The Barretts responded: 'No matter how your friend tries to justify her behaviour, it is against the law. Her fraudulent behaviour is just one of many tricks employed by self-service thieves to avoid proper payment.'

View attachment 29609

A woman in Australia breaks the law with her ‘self-checkout trick’ in hopes of saving a few dollars. Credit: Shutterstock

These sneaky tactics can push up grocery prices for everyone, the duo stressed, which is why supermarkets are taking active measures to prevent self-checkout thefts by employing undercover security officers.

Things could get pretty uncomfortable for a shoplifter caught in the act.

‘If they believe a theft has occurred, security officers and store staff have the right to search your friend’s bags to check the goods and the prices paid,’ the Barretts warned.

‘An excuse like getting avocados confused with brown onions is likely not going to cut it.’

‘Your friend has the right to refuse a search, but the grocery store can call the police if they suspect she has been dishonest.’

View attachment 29610

Security may inspect your bags before leaving the store for any suspicious activities. Credit: Shutterstock

Shoplifting, including underpayment of goods, is a type of larceny (theft) under South Australian law.

Minor incidences (involving goods valued at less than $150) are usually dealt with by the police in the form of an on-the-spot infringement notice, provided that the supermarket consents.

’This includes the requirement to pay the full price for the goods stolen (or underpaid), as well as an apology to the store,’ the sisters added.

‘It's tough out there, but breaking the law by not paying for your food isn't really good for anyone.’

There’s no doubt about it–money can be tight these days. But breaking the law to save a few bucks just isn’t worth the risk.

Key Takeaways

• A South Australian woman has allegedly been committing 'self-check-out fraud' at her local supermarket, according to her friend.
• The woman reportedly mislabels expensive items as cheaper ones at the self-checkout, a practice she justifies by asserting that supermarkets work the cost of such fraud into their prices.
• Lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett responded to this inquiry in news.com.au's Sisters In Law column, asserting that such behaviour is not justifiable and contributes to increased grocery prices.
• They warned that undercover security officers are employed by supermarkets to deal with issues such as these, and such behaviour could result in an on-the-spot theft infringement notice, including a requirement to pay the full value of the underpaid goods and an apology to the store.

Do you think the woman’s reason for tricking the supermarket’s self-checkout feature is justified? What would you have done differently if you were in her position? We want to hear your input in the comments below!

A thief is a thief. In the end you have to look in the mirror and ask yourself if you are proud of your life and your actions. Are you setting a good example for your children and grandchildren. Justifying it with some lame excuse doesn't make it right. It just makes it worse...if that's possible.