Law Vanity, a question about a possible lawsuit.

7/26/2005 | Flipyaforreal

[Skip Ripley]

I used to work as a security supervisor for a drug store chain here in Ohio. We would typically defer criminal prosecution in favor of civil litigation because we were allowed to file for a minimum of $125 in damages. It's been a while (close to 20 years) but IIRC, the rationale did not take the amount of item pilfered into account. It was based on our economic loss (the cost of having me or one of my "goons" on hand, the cost of filing paperwork, etc..).

The problem on your end would appear to be the admission of guilt on your part. They just have to show some justification for the $200 demand and you are sunk.

[CSM]

Glad to see your daughter learned a valuable lesson at a young age. I say you should pay the $200 and move on. If it weren't for theft, the cost of security in these stores would be much less. It looks to me like the store is trying to pass along the cost of security to the security risks instead of their customers........

[Steven W.]

I don't see why they are threatening to sue YOU. You did not steal it, did you?

Liability for actions by a Minor, I'm presuming

[birdsman]

First, I want to state that I'm NOT a lawyer, and I know nothing about FLA law. This being said, the letter you received sounds like extortion to me. I would verify that the "collection agency/law firm" really represents the store that your daughter shoplifted from. This sounds a lot like a scam to me.

[upchuck]

On the surface it sounds like a ripoff scam to me. I AM NOT A LAWYER (thank goodness! :).

They probably send a letter like this to everyone arrested for shoplifting. And a lot of people probably pay the $200 just to be done with it. Nice work if you can get it, eh?

If I were in your shoes, I'd check this with another lawyer. That may cost more than than the requested $200 but at least you'll know the truth.

Oh, and don't forget to have your daughter deeply involved in this. IMHO, she should pay any costs.

[Brilliant]

Sounds like this may be the best defense:

"by clear and convincing evidence that he or she has been injured in any fashion..."

What's the injury?

[Blood of Tyrants]

Looks like the short answer is to pay it and write "Paid in full" on the "For" line.

[alice_in_bubbaland]

There is no cost for prosecution. The Prosecutor's office handles the case. All that the store would have to do is write a Victim Impact Statement. Since the store retrieved the stolen merchandise I don't see the $200 charge. (maybe attorney fees to press the charges, is it a chain store ??)

In our retail store we had a customer write a bad check for a $900 gold necklace, my husband pressed charges & the Prosecutor's Office took him to court. He was found guilty and went to jail. (he stiffed several other stores in town) We never saw the $900 or the necklace again, but he is doing time.

[BikerNYC]

That's why I say there are some double jeopardy issues with this that I find troubling.

There are no double jeopardy problems here. DJ involves criminally prosecuting a person twice for the same offense. A civil suit is not a criminal prosecution (ask OJ).

[Enterprise]

In Kaleefornia, if you are going to be sued, you must receive a formal notification, and it is served by a process server. Other than that, I would demand documentation first. If the offer is a scam, you can try filing a criminal complaint. The U.S. Mail was used so it can be a Federal issue now.

[Brilliant]

That's not the law in Florida, though (or most other places).

[jennyjenny]

IIRC, the money is suppose to help pay for the cost of security the store/mall incurs.

[retrokitten]

Years ago I worked at Spencer Gifts and kids often tried to shoplift. These two little boys (about 10 years old) each took something. Well, one mom found out and told the other mom and all four of them came back into the store to return the merchandise. The moms both paid for the merchandise, but told the kids they WOULD be paying them back and that they couldn't have the merchandise back, either. Then a few days later we actually got a letter of apology from the one kid.

The one mom was just enraged at her son. She wrote a check and I noticed they lived just down the street from me. I mentioned it and the kid tried to act real casual and said, "Oh yeah? What house?" I said, "I'm not telling you, thief." The mom lost it and said, "Oh you see that?? You see what you did?? You stole from your NEIGHBOR!" It was all I could do to not laugh. I would be anything that kid never, ever stole anything ever again.

[Flipyaforreal]

Wow, thank you all for the responses, I wish I could type faster. I thought it was a scam a first as well, since this collection agency/"law firm" (name is Palmer, Reifler and Associates, P.A.) pops up with links to casinovenders.com, etc. The checking with a lawyer is a good idea, I would never substitute that with only asking on the internet, but this is FR and I thought I'd ask here first to make a more informed decision before I take any actions.

The court cost thing occured to me also, but it was a mass docket court showing and the store had no lawyer present. I have no idea how that works, so again, just looking for suggestions.

Thanks for all the great links, I will be searching and reading them!

[lilylangtree]

Call the store manager or even the store HQ legal dept. Talk with them about this. If it's not a scam, maybe everything call be taken care with a phone call.

[LibWhacker]

What I don't get is why people (in this case the parents) who did nothing wrong would be liable for anything. That's not the America I grew up in.

[Who dat?]

They just have to show some justification for the $200 demand and you are sunk.

But isn’t that part of the judgment?

Or is this just part “B” where they send the demand as step one to a civil/small-claims/whatever suit if you don't pay it...

[NonValueAdded]

I disagree ... the minimum $200 "fine" wasn't part of the criminal trial but rather stuffed in the civil statutes. But it's purpose is supposedly for deterrence and not restitution per se. We the people seem to be paying for two trials for everything now since court costs are way too small to cover the real costs of maintaining all the infrastructure to support this. I don't want to start an OJ discussion but he did face two trials and I was surprised that a "not guilty" finding did not result in an automatic dismissal of the civil suit. Again, forgetting that it was OJ, two trials is becoming the norm and only the lawyers are getting rich.

[BikerNYC]

What I don't get is why people (in this case the parents) who did nothing wrong would be liable for anything. That's not the America I grew up in.

It's a good incentive for parents to watch over their kids a little more thoroughly if they realize that it's gonna cost them if the kids do something bad.

[Republican Babe]

I have been in this spot.....advice is: Pay whatever the amount with a contract between you and your daughter that she owes the money AND IT MUST COME FROM HER.....IT MUST COME FROM HER SWEAT. 14 is a better time than 20 to learn that shop lifting is robbery.