Parent faces lawsuit over son’s shoplifting

The phone call from a drugstore telling a Calgary woman that her son was a shoplifter was bad enough.

But what really surprised Cassie was the threatening letter she received from the company’s lawyer.

Her son was recently charged for stealing a $15 pair of earrings from a local Shoppers Drug Mart. She was at work and he was supposed to be in school at the time.

Days later, the woman received a letter from a Toronto lawyer saying the retailer held her personally responsible for the offence because she “as parent or guardian of the young person (failed) to provide reasonable supervision of the young person.”

The letter said she owes $500 by Dec. 24 or else the company could sue her and claim recovery costs of $900.

“I was kind of shocked,” said Cassie, who cannot be named because doing so would identify her son who is facing a charge under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

Curious about her legal obligation, she googled the lawyer’s name and found dozens of complaints about the same form letter.

“I’m shocked that Shoppers Drug Mart is trying to demand payment,” said the mom.

However, Shoppers Drug Mart spokeswoman Lana Gogas said in a statement civil recovery is a common practice among North American retailers.

“Civil recovery is a process that enables retailers to charge shoplifters for the actual costs associated with the crime they have committed,” she said.

“The major benefit of a civil recovery program is that the thief pays for the cost of the crime, not the public, government agencies, legal aid or the retailers.”

The lawyer’s letter claimed that the industry loses billions of dollars to shoplifting and that by pursuing shoplifters, the number of such incidents could decrease.

But critics of the practice say the letters are a cash grab.

British Columbia lawyer Gerry Laarakker has made a hobby of challenging the few Canadian lawyers who send letters like these for recovery of civil damages.

Over the years, Laarakker has represented 160 people who have received threatening letters demanding payment.

“This relies more on intimidation than law,” he said.

Laarakker advises clients not to pay the money and said none have been sued, so far.

“Look at the economics of (suing),” Laarakker said. “He would have to retain a lawyer in Calgary. He’d have to file in small claims (court). How much money have we spent so far? The economics aren’t there.”

But while Laarakker calls the letters “a bit of a hollow threat,” he also notes “these guys recently have started to turn to reporting this to credit agencies and credit bureaus have haunted people.”

University of Calgary law professor Alice Woolley said while nothing in law is certain, it’s difficult to prove a legal claim against a parent for a shoplifting incident by their child.

Even claims of damage against the shoplifters themselves are difficult to prove when the item was quickly recovered.

“The key point is, there is no legal claim here that is likely to succeed,” Woolley said.