Types of Loss Prevention
Investigations
[
Shoplifting
Shoplifting is one of the most common
property crimes in the United States today. Anyone can be a
shoplifter, an important fact for loss prevention investigators
to understand. Those who focus on stereotypes such as race and
age generally have a difficult time detecting shoplifting.
Statistically, shoplifting occurs at approximately the same rate
each day of the week and December is the only month where it
appears convenience stores suffer appreciably increased losses.
The twelve to seventeen-year-old age group is statistically the
most active shoplifting group in relationship to its size,
followed by the eighteen to twenty-nine age group.
According to the 2004 17th Annual
Retail Theft survey conducted by Jack L. Hayes International,
689,340 were shoplifters were apprehended by 27 of the major
U.S. retailers. This figure was a 4.86% increase from total of
657,414 shoplifters apprehended in 2003. In 2004, $70,039,564
dollars were recovered from shoplifting apprehensions compared
to $68,927,833 in 2003. In 2004, the average dollar value for a
shoplifting apprehension was $101.60 dollars.
Most amateur shoplifters tend to spend
too much time selecting merchandise and looking for
investigators, thus making them much more likely to be detected.
Professional shoplifters on the other hand tend to already know
what merchandise they wish to steal and move quickly to get it.
A common technique used by professional shoplifters is called a
"grab and run", in which the shoplifter quickly enters the
store, grabs an item, and runs out of the store. Due to the
quickness of this technique, professional shoplifters are
difficult to catch.
Loss Prevention departments are run
very differently from retailer to retailer. Centralized Loss
Prevention departments are generally more common with discount
retailers. Retailers like
Target
use a centralized command system in which there are floor
people, a department manager, and a district manager.
Decentralized Loss Prevention Departments are more common in
clothing retailers. Retailers like
Dillard's,
for instance, have decentralized loss prevention departments in
which there are usually only store investigators and sometimes
off-duty police officers to assist in the arrest of shoplifters.
Attitudes towards shoplifting have
shifted greatly in the last two decades. Retailers now want
their investigators to focus more on prevention of theft rather
than apprehension of shoplifting suspects. This is a result of
numerous false arrest charges over the last two decades that
have cost retailers millions of dollars in lawsuits. A false
arrest is generally known in the Loss Prevention world as a "bad
stop". A bad stop generally occurs when an investigator arrests
a suspect who turns out not to have any merchandise.
To combat bad stops retailers have
introduced a series of steps designed to help establish probable
cause. The number of steps vary from company to company but are
usually in some semblance of the following:
- 1. The investigator must see the
suspect enter an area or department with no merchandise in
their possession.
- 2. The investigator must see the
suspect select the store's merchandise.
- 3. The investigator must see the
suspect conceal the store's merchandise.
- 4. The investigator must maintain
constant surveillance of the suspect and be certain the
store merchandise is not discarded.
- 5. The suspect must pass all
reasonable points of sale with the merchandise before
conducting an apprehension.
Shoplifting incidents rarely go
according to the five steps listed above. Investigators must use
their best judgment when establishing probable cause. Most
retailers today have established certification programs that a
Loss Prevention employee must pass before they can make arrests.
Usually these programs consist of a buddy system, which pairs a
new investigator with an experienced investigator. These
programs usually last for several months.
One method of bypassing steps is
commonly employed is establishing the selection of merchandise.
This is usually done by noting what a suspect had when first
observed. If seen later with several items they did not have
before, it may be reasonable to assume that the merchandise
belongs to the retailer. Many feel strongly that good judgment
is key to making successful apprehensions. At times not all
conditions can or will be feasibly met to make an apprehension.
However it is still possible to prevent the loss.
Some investigators have been known to
attempt forms of consent searches in an attempt to obtain
probable cause without legally detaining a person. It may be
explained to the customer "we need to check your receipt to be
certain you were not double charged." or some other reason.
However such techniques, while not false arrest may still result
in the firing of an Loss Prevention Investigator if it is a
violation of company policy. Others feel all steps must be met
before any action is taken. This second approach is used to
protect the company from law suits resulting from "bad stops"
which insult innocent shoppers. The exact definition of a "bad
stop" varies from business to business, it is generally
understood as false arrest.
The strict adherence to the rules of
apprehension have also come about as some criminals try to
defraud the loss prevention industry by "egging on" or
pretending to steal as a way to get LP officers' attention while
others in the store really are stealing or simply to get
themselves arrested falsely for use in suing the company. Some
companies like
Sears
have taken a "hands off" policy to detaining shoplifters due to
past law suits.
Embezzlement
Employee embezzlement is the theft or
taking of property or funds entrusted to an employee by an
employer. The most common type of retail embezzlement is cash
theft. Other types of employee embezzlement include ringing up
fake gift cards, passing merchandise, discount fraud, and of
course theft of merchandise. Embezzlement investigations are
widely known in the Loss Prevention industry as internal
investigations.
According to the 2004 17th Annual
Retail Theft survey 63,289 employees were apprehended for
dishonest activity. This figure is an increase of 4.01% or
60,850 employees in 2003. Retailers recovered $42,468,681
dollars from incidents stemming from employee dishonesty in
2004, an increase from the 2003 figure of $40,025,937. The
average case value for an apprehended dishonest employee in 2004
was $671.03. This figure is notable, since it is almost seven
times more than the case value for the average shoplifter
apprehension.
Employee embezzlement is usually
handled by experienced investigators who generally have five or
more years experience in the loss prevention industry. Cash
theft is generally investigated using cash office audits that
appear on exception reports and
CCTV
cameras. Fake gift cards are usually investigated through the
use of an electronic journal in which the gift cards are logged.
The passing of merchandise is usually
discovered through the use of an exception reports in which a
particular employee is shown to have a unusual amount of voids
or no-sales. Generally merchandise is rung up by an employee and
subsequently voided out. The merchandise is then passed to a
person at the counter who usually is a friend or family member
of the employee.
Other forms of employee theft that are
discovered via the use of exceptions reports are discount and
commission fraud. Discount fraud is usually discovered again by
the use of exception reports. Discount fraud is the fraudulent
use of an employee's discount to reduce to the price of
merchandise for someone who is not eligible for it. Generally
this done by an employee passing their discount card to a friend
so they can receive the employee discount. Commission fraud is
usually accomplished by ringing large return purchases back to
another employee or to an employee who has recently left the
retail establishment.
Merchandise theft is often investigated
though the use of CCTV cameras, investigator observations, and
rumors floating around the store. Usually the items stolen by
employees tend to be small items with high dollar value or
edible. A particular high area of employee theft that is
investigated using CCTV is often the stock rooms of a store. As
a result Loss Prevention often tours the stock rooms looking for
"stashes" or out of place merchandise as well as price tags or
other areas of opportunity. Typically a covert CCTV camera is
placed in the areas of high opportunity for theft.
A recent trend with larger retailers is
to actively pursue prosecution against employees who are
embezzling. Generally this is because employee embezzlement
cases usually carry a far higher case value than shoplifters and
in most jurisdictions embezzlement is codified as a felony
offense. At times this can lead to lengthly investigations that
can last for months. Even still particularly in small dollar
cases many retailers still subscribe to the theory that they
will never recover their losses and release an employee
suspected of embezzlement outright.
Credit Card Theft
Typically stolen credit cards find
their way into retail stores as much as or more than online
retail websites. This is usually for several reasons: the first
is because retailers generally have relaxed their procedures for
checking credit cards, so time spent at the cash register can be
hastened. Second is the anonymity that a credit card thief
enjoys by purchasing merchandise first-hand and not having to
leave an address for merchandise to be mailed to as would be
required by an online retailer.
Credit card theft is generally
investigated by loss prevention personnel who receive a tip from
a local police investigator who is investigating a stolen card.
Typically the use of a stolen card can be easily found using the
store's electronic journal log. Using the electronic journal
log, loss prevention investigators can locate the register where
the stolen credit card was used. Sometimes CCTV video of the
transaction exists and can be used by the police to establish a
suspect or close a case when they already know who the suspect
is. Today, most retailers are not liable for the use of stolen
cards issued by banks and credit card companies. However,
retailers today are frequently establishing their own credit
institutions and issue their own in-store only credit cards.
In-store credit fraud is likely to become an increasing problem
for loss prevention investigators in the next decade.
Some of the inherent problems with
in-store credit lay in proper associate training. Temporary
cards are regularly given out to customers who forget to bring
in their own card. Mail fraud may also be used to intercept
cards and when they are used it often goes unseen for days if
the ringing associate fails to check ID or if the true card
holder never calls in a complaint. In the opinion of several
experts, many retailers make adding a new name to an existing
account far to easy.
Cheque Fraud
Cheque fraud is generally accomplished
in one of two ways. The first is writing a cheque that is
manufactured to look like a real document, which in fact has no
real value or no real bank account to back it up. Typically this
is done by suspects who are experienced in the crime of forgery.
The second method is cheque kiting, in which the suspect writes
a check for a high dollar purchase and withdraws the funds from
their account before the cheque clears. Cheque kiting is usually
done when suspects establish a fraudulent account under a false
name at a banking institution.
Retailers reserve the right to reject
cheques for whatever reason. Most low-level store employees have
no experience in detecting forgery and cheque kiting, and thus
these stores are very prone to be the target of such fraud.
Typically when cheques are rejected by store management, the
suspect raises issue with the manager in question in hopes that
they will pass the cheque. Commonly those who create fraudulent
cheques hire minorities to make purchases at a retailer. When a
cheque is rejected a common scare tactic to get the retailer to
accept the check is to claim racial bias.
Sometimes an experienced investigator
can detect obvious forgery by examining the cheque document or
by calling the bank to verify that the account actually exists.
When a false cheque is passed sometimes investigators can
salvage it by taking it to the bank before the suspect has the
opportunity to withdraw the funds. Typically cheque fraud is
done by a large group of non-local individuals who travel from
state to state. Typically purchases are made in the late
afternoon right as banks are closing. Typically when an account
actually exists, fraudulent or not, the suspects are usually
able to withdraw the funds before the retail store can detect
the fraud.
Attempts to Professionalize Loss
Prevention
A large number of retailers have
established centralized command structures in an attempt to
control Loss Prevention much like other departments are in the
retail industry. Typically the centralized command structure
consists of the typical floor or low level investigator who is
paid as a hourly employee. Next is the Loss Prevention Manager
who is in charge of the Loss Prevention department at the store
level. Generally the Loss Prevention Manager has been in the
industry for significant period of time and is paid a salary.
The District Loss Prevention Manager is the next level; this
person is in charge of overseeing the operations of several
stores within a geographic area. Generally the District Manager
has college degree in combination with significant amount of
loss prevention experience. Some retails such as the 99 Cent
Only Store have hourly district investigators that have the
authority to terminate or prosecute any store employee or
manager with probable cause.
Several notable problems have plagued
the loss prevention industry over the years. Loss Prevention
departments have been accused of such things as favorism towards
investigators and in some cases even employee who may be
dishonest. Some investigators have been known to make up
apprehensions or merchandise recoveries to advance themselves
within the field. The most prevalent problem is known as "LP
black listing" in which, a particular investigator would be
barred from employment due to tight nit nature of the loss
prevention industry. Recent attempts at professionalism within
the industry have gone a long way to eliminate these issues.
Some retailers have gone as far to
change the name of their loss prevention departments to "Assets
Protection." Assets Protection departments usually include more
aspects of the private security industry by using more visible
means of deterrence, such as uniformed door guards. Some
companies believe that the term "Loss Prevention" has stigma
attached to it and that Assets Protection sounds more
politically correct in modern retail. There has been a recent
trend the Loss Prevention industry to move back to less
restrictive means of reducing external loss due to the recent
increase in shoplifting activity.
Problems with Investigators
For the most part, Loss Prevention
Investigators tend to develop one of the three types of
personalities towards their work. The personality traits that
develop are similar to those of police officers.
The Type A Investigator: Typically this
type of investigator has a strong anti-crime personality and
experiences early success upon entry into Loss Prevention.
However, as apprehensions and merchandise recoveries become less
frequent, this personality starts to take risks that others
wouldn't. Many of the problems associated with this type of
investigator are customer complaints, bad stops, conflict with
employees, and sometimes fights with shoplifters.
The Lazy Investigator: This
investigator usually comes into the industry with no experience
and assumes that the job is one that will be easy. However, when
the investigator quickly discovers how difficult loss prevention
investigations can be they become frustrated and adopt a lazy,
dismissive attitude. This type of investigator will often miss
even the most obvious of theft.
The Analytical Investigator: This is
the least common type of investigators, most investigators fall
into the category of either the Type A or Lazy Investigator.
Usually the analytical investigator has some educational
background and typically gets their career off to a slow start
much like the Lazy investigator. However, as the analytical
investigator gains experience they usually become very good at
what they do. Typically the analytical investigator makes sound
rational decisions based on the situation they find themselves
in. Typically the as the analytical investigator proceeds into
their career they frequently find their work unchallenging and
sometimes unrewarding. In addition, most analytical
investigators feel that they are underpaid for the work that
they do.
A common frustration among loss
prevention professionals is the perception of being seen as
glorified form of security. Both industries typically do use the
same or similar equipment. Loss prevention professionals see
themselves as being proactive, while the security industry is
often as reactive in nature. The line between security and loss
prevention has become increasingly blurry with recent advent of
uniform door guards and preventive measures to control safety,
shoplifting, and embezzlement.
Another of the larger problems facing
loss prevention today is the wage associated with entry-level
investigators. Typically investigators find themselves in
dangerous situations that retailers do not provide sufficient
training to deal with. Most investigators today are paid under
ten dollars per hour. Sometimes investigators decide that the
potential danger associated with the position is not worth it
for near minimal wage and thus quit or refuse to make arrests.
Bag Checks and False Arrest
One of the issues raised more and more
often these day is the issue of the legality of bag checks by
retailers. The reason for bag checks is simple, its cheap and it
works. Most retailers use Electronic Article Surveillance (EAS)
to determine when a bag check should be conducted. Typically EAS
sensors are placed on high dollar items to deter shoplifting
suspects, however items containing large amounts of metal have
been known to set off EAS alarm towers.
Legally retailers can only search a
customer's bag without probable cause if a person consents to
it. Usually an investigator requests the door personnel to
search a bag because a sensor set off an alarm tower, or because
of what they or other employees have seen in the store. If store
personnel uses force to stop and detain a customer to look in
their bag that it may become a false arrest. In some instances,
refusal by a customer to consent to bag search will result the
customer being trespassed or losing their membership from a
store.
[
Felonies, Misdemeanors, and Local Laws
Laws pertaining to shoplifting vary
from state to state. Generally most state laws include an
exclusion of limited liability for retailers to conduct searches
of persons they believe to be shoplifting. Simply put retailers
are allowed by law to detain and question shoplifting suspects
for a reasonable amount of time for the purpose of recovery of
merchandise. However, these laws generally do not apply to false
arrest and excessive force incidents.
Laws vary from state to state
pertaining to when a shoplifter can be stopped and apprehended.
For example, in Arizona concealment of merchandise is considered
a crime and a shoplifter can be stopped as soon as concealment
is established. In states like California however, concealment
is not a crime and a suspect must exit the store before an
arrest can be made.
Some state laws can lead to unusual and
severe charges being brought against a shoplifter. In Arizona
for example a shoplifter can actually be charged with felony
third degree burglary. In California a person can be charged
with attempted robbery if they use physical force while
attempting to shoplift. In some jurisdictions a person convicted
of shoplifting multiple times may face a felony sentence
following conviction.
Most retailers follow a generalized
corporate guideline which serves as a blanket policy for the
arrest of shoplifters nationally, although some smaller
retailers still decide their own policies on a store to store
basis. Generally these policies state that a shoplifter can only
be stopped and arrested after they leave the store. Some
retailers like Macy's and Wal-Mart have been known to use local
laws pertaining to shoplifting to their advantage.
Generally in most states shoplifting is
only considered a felony when merchandise in excess of $250 is
stolen. Some states however, classify shoplifting as felony
offense regardless of price. In some states like Wisconsin the
dollar amount for shoplifting to be considered a felony is
$2,500. Most felony shoplifting suspects however, are only
charged with misdemeanors by police to process them through the
criminal justice system more efficiently. Many misdemeanor
shoplifters are released by loss prevention investigators after
the recovery of merchandise. Generally these shoplifting
suspects are not charged with any crime and are trespassed by
store management.
One common example of False Arrest is
the detainment of an individual based only on speculation of
concealment and not an eyewitness to the act. False Arrests can
be costly to companies and often result in lawsuits or large
monetary settlements. Settlements being preferred by companies
wishing to avoid the negative publicity of court cases. Some
jurisdictions render partial immunity to merchants and their
employees from being liable for a false arrest as long as they
have probable cause to detain.
Equipment, Tactics, and Technology
[
CCTV camera systems
- CCTV is an abbreviation for
Closed Circuit Television.
CCTV camera systems are common to almost all loss prevention
departments. The obvious benefits of CCTV camera is that the
investigator can gain a better view of a suspect, record
incidents, and not reveal themselves to shoplifting
suspects. Some retailers use two-man teams in which one
person uses the CCTV camera system to detect shoplifters and
a floor man follows the suspect and apprehends them.
- CCTV camera systems have been
drastically modernized in the last decade. Most systems now
record digitally as opposed to using video tapes which were
more common in the past. Instead of storing video on a tape
many systems now include a computer server that contain
video for months at a time. One draw back of many of these
digital recorders is their inability to move and view more
than one fixed area of the store. However new digital
cameras overlooking registers have greatly increased the
number of internal cash thefts being resolved.
- In relationship to its
effectiveness, the CCTV has to be considered one of the
greatest tools ever used in not just Loss Prevention but the
security industry in general. Firms which offer leases on
such systems have brought the costs down to a point where
the franchise owner can consider it economically
justifiable. A quality CCTV system including a videotape
recorder and monitors (at least one of which is visible to
the public) is a proven deterrent with many related
benefits. Some related benefits of the CCTV system include
protection from employee theft. A well advertised visible
system also acts as a holdup deterrent and when thefts do
occur, prosecution is simplified.
[
Covert CCTV Cameras
- Covert CCTV cameras are fairly
recent innovation within the loss prevention industry.
Usually the cameras are small and compact and can be easily
moved from area to area. Covert cameras can be easily made
to look like fixtures or in some cases boxes inside a
stockroom. Most covert cameras are undetectable by the
average employee.
Electronic Article Surveillance (EAS)
-
EAS
is a deterrence system used by retailers to deter
shoplifting. EAS involves the use of electronic security
towers and electronic security tags. The tags are placed on
high dollar items throughout the store and are disabled at
cashier registers by scanning them over a magnetized strip.
If the tag is not disabled it will activate the alarm tower,
which is generally located at the entrance to a retail
store. EAS is effective in deterring amateur shoplifting,
but most professionals can easily bypass the system.
[
-
Serial numbers
are now being commonly placed on high dollar store
merchandise. If loss prevention departments record the
serial numbers they can subsequently track stolen
merchandise if it were to be recovered by the police.
Recording serial numbers is usually only done by larger
retailers due to the fact that they have district
investigators who investigate organized shoplifting over a
certain geographic area.
Electronic Journals
- Almost every large retail
institution has some form of an Electronic Journal. An
Electronic Journal records all the transactions that occur
in a retail store. Information such as credit card numbers,
gift card numbers, refunds, and merchandise voids is all
gathered at the point-of-sale. These electronic journals can
then be used to view and print facsimile of receipts and in
some cases checks.
Cash Office Audits
- A cash office audit is usually
conducted by a common retail employee who counts up the cash
from transactions at the retailer's registers. A shortage
occurs when the dollar amount added from the register does
not match the total the cash audit says it should have.
Shortages are used to begin and close cash embezzlement
cases that are investigated by loss prevention departments.
Generally cash office audits include information pertaining
to which employees used a particular register during the
day. This information is used by loss prevention
investigators to narrow the field of employees in their
investigation into the shortage.
Two-way radio sets
- Almost all loss prevention
departments have some form of
two-way radio
communication. This technology is used by investigators
mainly to help two-man teams follow a shoplifting suspect in
conjunction with the CCTV camera system or to summon
assistance when apprehending a shoplifter.
Point of Sale
- POS or
Point of Sale
is a form of electronic journal that allows the loss
prevention investigator to see a transaction as it is
occurring live. Typically this system is either displayed on
a computer screen or on a monitor that is linked to the CCTV
camera system. This system has proven valuable in assisting
investigators in closing employee embezzlement cases
pertaining to merchandise passing, merchandise voiding, and
discount fraud.
[
Exception Reports
- Exception reports are compiled on
an annual basis into a report. Usually the reports are
received monthly or bi-weekly. The reports include
information on cash audit over's and shorts, no-sales,
flagged returns, employees ringing themselves up, fake
employee numbers used to avoid commission docking, and
merchandise voids. Exception reports have dramatically
reduced the amount of time an investigator needs to spend to
detect a possible sign of employee embezzlement.
Ink Tags
- Ink tags have been around for
several decades and are most commonly used by clothing
retailers. The ink tags require special equipment to remove
the tags from the clothing. When the tags are forcibly
removed, one or two glass vials containing permanent ink
will break, causing it to spill over the clothing,
effectively destroying it. Ink tags fall into the loss
prevention category called benefit denial. As the name
suggests an ink tag denies the shoplifter any benefit for
his or her efforts. Despite this, shoplifters have found
ways around them, such as duct-taping the holes through
which the ink comes out and then removing the tag with
pliers, resulting in little-to-no damage of the merchandise.
Dual Designator EAS Stickers
- Dual Designator EAS stickers are
usually placed on small items such as shaving razors and
cold medicines. These items are notable in that they are
popular items to sell at swap meets. Dual Designator EAS
stickers are printed on a thin piece of paper and are
difficult to remove. Usually the sticker includes a
retailers company logo and serves as an indication to would
be buyers that the merchandise has been stolen.
Dummy Domes
- Dummy domes have become prevalent
in all forms of retail loss prevention. Dummy domes do not
contain cameras, although they are identical to appearance
of domes that do contain cameras. Dummy domes can be
strategically place to herd shoplifters into a particular
location or be used as a deterrent to shoplifting.
Ceiling Mirrors
- Ceiling mirrors were once a staple
of the loss prevention industry. Now ceiling mirrors for the
most part have be relegated to convenience stores. Ceiling
mirrors allow loss prevention investigators to watch
activity in a high theft area without being seen. Some loss
prevention departments have been known to use mirrors to
increase the range of their camera systems.
Refund Checks
- Refund checks are aimed at
possible fraudulent and high risk refunds. The customer is
told they will receive a check in the mail instead of
receiving cash or store credit during the actual return.
This tactic is typically employed instances where a customer
does not have a receipt or there is prior knowledge that the
return may be questionable. Generally a loss prevention
manager or operations manager will have to approve the
release of a refund check. This tactic works well because
generally fraudulent refunders will not call the store to
complain when they do not receive their check in the mail.
Bottom of Basket
- Bottom of Basket Loss (BOB),
occurs when an item is placed on the lower tray of a
shopping cart and the cashier forgets to check the lower
tray for items resulting in the item not being paid for.
What makes this form of shrink unique is that it often
happens both intentionally and unintentionally on behalf of
the customer. All estimates for the dollar amount lost in
this manor are over $2 billion US per year in North America
alone, or $7 per lane per day. There are a few products on
the market to help prevent this loss. The most common are
mirrors mounted across the checkout lane, some stores have
employed camera systems pointed at the lower tray with
monitors for each cashier. Neither of these systems work
effectively because the problem is the inattentive cashier
and not so much visibility. A newer type of system has been
released which actively monitors the checkout lane and
alerts when an item is detected on the lower tray of the
shopping cart. One such system is named HIDE Alert which
uses IR sensors to detect the shape of a shopping cart, then
scans the lower tray for items.
Consent Searches
- Consent searches are a tactic that
is widely used in law enforcement and is still present in
Loss Prevention today. By asking a customer to consent to a
search of their belongings such as shopping bags and
receipts any illegal search or seizure requirements can be
circumvented. Consent searches in some instances can be used
to build on previously existing facts to establish the
probable cause necessary to detain a shoplifter. The extreme
end of establishing probable cause through a consent search
has been all eliminated except with a few smaller companies
who still utilize it.
- In modern Loss Prevention consent
searches are a tactic that is most expansively used today by
warehouse retailers such as Cosco and Sam's Club. In using
this tactic warehouse retailers have made consent searches
of their customer's purchases a part of the membership
agreement. Although a customer may refuse to consent to a
search of their purchase from a legal standpoint, the
warehouse retailer does retain the right as a private
business entity to strip the customer of their membership or
issue a verbal trespass. Warehouse retailers have been able
to utilize consent searches to lower their prices on goods
and reduce external shrinkage at the same time.
Viewing Towers
- Although the necessity of viewing
towers has been eliminated to large extent by CCTV camera
systems they still exist today. A tower is usually a
centrally located observation platform generally found in a
location raised above the sales floor. An investigator can
spend time in the tower with searching for shoplifters or
investigating employees much in the same manner with CCTV.
Integrity Shops
- A common example of an integrity
shop is marking a large denomination bill such as a $100
dollar and placing it in a cashier's drawer. The goal is to
see if the bill disappears from the drawer or doesn't make
it to its appropriate location such as a cash office. The
information gained from an integrity shop can be used to
initiate investigations or conduct interviews that could
possibly reveal dishonest activity of outright theft.
(see
Copyrights
for details).
