Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cvengr
“Just because I enter somebody else private property doesn’t mean I consent to their search, interrogation and seizure of my property, person, and time, no matter who says it.”

If showing your receipts bothers you, you have a responsibility to not shop in stores that require you to do so. doing so, like this guy did, shows that his primary motivation was in creating an incident and in suing the store, not in any aversion to showing receipts.

397 posted on 09/04/2007 10:26:18 AM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies ]


To: monday

You may want to study the UCC a little bit.

The merchant has more responsibility than the consumer in such transactions.

BTW, technically the merchant doesn’t have to provide a receipt. The cash tendered in return for the object purchased results in the condition of materiality being satisfied.

The receipt checker is employed by the merchant, not the consumer. Consumer has not entered into an agreement with the merchant or the receipt checker to accept such a search.

Likewise, merely posting a sign in public view doesn’t prove the consumer is cognizant of such a stipulative term in entering the premises, so a sign near the entrance with lots of fine print doesn’t give the merchant carte blanche in searching the public.

I agree with you though, that it would be foolish for anybody to conduct business with merchants who lack these basic management and marketing skills.


405 posted on 09/04/2007 10:45:32 AM PDT by Cvengr (The violence of evil is met with the violence of righteousness, justice, love and grace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson