Schmetterling
I saw something nasty in the woodshed!
The co-op cooked gammon in honey was
£6.99 reduced to 85 p but would not sell as it was one day over sell buy date
I wonder what the legality would have been if you had nicked it?
The co-op cooked gammon in honey was
£6.99 reduced to 85 p but would not sell as it was one day over sell buy date
Pretty straightforward really; he'd have been guilty of theft.I wonder what the legality would have been if you had nicked it?
As spy says, guilty of theft. Even once it's gone in the bins it is still theirs and people skip diving are technically stealing though I'm not aware of anyone being charged/convictedI wonder what the legality would have been if you had nicked it?
Five pounds, but perhaps it would be even more dimly viewed that nicking full priced stuff, given that you'd be depriving other people of cheap food.Pretty obvious it would be theft, but I've often wondered if the store/cops would have a different attitude if you walked out of the shop with a bag full of heavily discounted items with no full price goods.
Would it be said in court you had stolen fifty quids worth of food or five pounds worth?
Of course. The item is still the property of the store, regardless of the fact that they can't sell it.So, does a law exist which specifically forbids the poster from taking the food without paying for it after what I described above?
I agree with Spymaster and BigTom that if one takes goods from a shop or a shop's bins without paying for them then, within the law as it is written, this would be theft; however, (I am playing with a legal philosophical, possibly, paradox here) the food was on display (still on offer) and priced. The poster offered to pay that price. The cashier noticed that the item was now completely out of date and thus refused the sale.
We know that a person can only be punished within the confines of a law (nulla poene sine lege); it would be the defence's onus to proof that the above act cannot be punished.
So, does a law exist which specifically forbids the poster from taking the food without paying for it after what I described above?
I'd have to look up the laws but shops are allowed to refuse sale for any non-discriminatory reason, the item in question is still owned by them until they sell it to someone else and in this case there has been no transaction/sale so it is still legally their possession and therefore theft. Even once they throw it away, they still own it by law, until the refuse collection happens at which point the refuse collectors take ownership.
Hm; interesting. Ok, I can see how the same law could/would still apply then.
... just hoping to find a way out ...
Got through half the box and not enjoying the chore of eating chocolate.
Chocolate is just a nasty claggy substance.This saddens me .....
Chocolate is just a nasty claggy substance.
I'll probably bin the remaining half of the box.
Chocolate is just a nasty claggy substance.
I'll probably bin the remaining half of the box.
I'll stamp on the disgusting stuff before chucking it.
It seems it does happen according to this article Almost 3000 charged with stealing food in London as expert warns ‘hungry people are criminalised’As spy says, guilty of theft. Even once it's gone in the bins it is still theirs and people skip diving are technically stealing though I'm not aware of anyone being charged/convicted
I got bone-in,
It seems it does happen according to this article Almost 3000 charged with stealing food in London as expert warns ‘hungry people are criminalised’