The “Shoplifting Epidemic” in England: The Intersection of Criminality, a Cost-of-Living Crisis, and Community Policing (or the lack of it)
In the words of Dame Sharon Lewis, chair of the John Lewis Partnership, we are in the midst of an “epidemic” of shoplifting in England. It is probably more accurate to describe shoplifting as endemic, as the practice of surreptitiously removing goods from shops during business hours without paying for them has been widely prevalent, albeit steadily increasing, over the last two decades at least, rather than only becoming evident more recently. Recorded shoplifting can be traced back to theft from shops and stalls in Elizabethan England. Stealing from shops was at one time taken more seriously than it is now, being deemed a capital offence for certain forms of theft under the Capital Felony Act 1699. Many shoplifters in Victorian England were transported for life, often to the distant and now far more desirable shores of Australia.
According to the Office for National Statistics, 430,104 shoplifting offences were recorded by police forces in England and Wales during 2023-up 37 per cent from 315, 040 in 2022. The British Retail Consortium’s annual survey observed that 16.7 million shoplifting incidents were recorded in 2023, more than twice the number in the preceding year, and retail businesses were estimated to have lost £1.8 billion in revenues while spending an additional £1.2 billion on enhanced security. At the same time, shop workers were more likely to experience physical assault, verbal (including racial) abuse, sexual harassment, and armed robbery. The items most often stolen include alcohol, meat, clothing, cosmetics, and electrical goods.
The majority of shoplifters fall in one of three categories. The most instantly recognisable shoplifters are so-called “prolific offenders”, often well-known to their local retail community, some of whom resort to theft to either satisfy the overwhelming demands of substance abuse or in response to food poverty, which has increased during the cost-of-living crisis. Then there are the opportunistic thieves who take advantage of lax in-store security resulting from smaller numbers of staff on the shop floor and at the tills, and of lack of supervision at self-check-out counters to purloin merchandise, often conveniently tucked away within legitimately paid-for shopping. It is claimed that their numbers include middle-class members of the public who get their kicks out of opportunistic theft, irrespective of any financial benefit. Finally, there are organised retail crime gangs, whose members often specialise in the theft and resale of high-value goods.
Shoplifting is considered theft under section 1 of the Theft Act 1986. The theft of low-value goods, costing £200 or less, is treated as a summary crime under section 176 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. The latter legislation has been termed a “shoplifters’ charter” by Labour MP Yvette Cooper. The possible sanctions for guilty offenders range from fines, community orders, to prison sentences in the most extreme cases. Assault on shop staff is to be made a separate criminal offence in England and Wales under the proposed Sentencing Bill. Assault or abuse of staff became a specific offence in Scotland in 2021.
“Shoplifting is not a victimless crime” is an often-repeated cliché, which nonetheless serves its purpose. The safety and security of shop workers can be threatened by shoplifters, shop owners may be forced to close their stores and even leave their neighbourhoods to resume trade elsewhere, and larger chain stores may have to increase prices as theft cuts into already narrow profit margins. Businesses, both small and large, local communities, and the wider economy all suffer the consequences of retail crime.
Prevention is always better than cure, especially since the criminal justice system is currently overburdened with all manner of more pressing issues and seems helpless to deter habitual offenders engaging in what some consider “low-level” crime. Large retail outlets may be able to employ private security guards as first responders, but smaller shops have to rely on the over-stretched police force to tackle crimes that are being committed within their premises. Overhead CCTV cameras and strategically placed mirrors can monitor in-store activity, while high-value goods can be provided with electronic security tags. Staff in high-crime stores can also be provided with body cameras for their protection, as is already happening in some bigger retail chains. But whatever the circumstances, staff should never compromise their own safety while trying to prevent crimes on their premises.
Some politicians are demanding “zero-tolerance” for shoplifting and expect that police will attend all such incidents, regardless of how much is actually stolen. This is unlikely to happen in the near future. In the meantime, police will continue to prioritise their attendance for ongoing retail crime at situations where violence is threatened and there is a serious risk to life or likelihood of damage to property.
Whatever the motive for shoplifting, whether need, greed, or the mere compulsion to steal, and irrespective of the modus operandi of the thief, it is important to reduce the opportunities to steal from shops in the first instance. Almost anyone, irrespective of social status and income, can be shown to succumb to temptation when presented with the chance. Police officers and police community support officers need to become visible once again in local neighbourhoods, especially in high-crime locations, and security guards should feel empowered to use “reasonable force” to make citizen’s arrests under the Criminal Law Act 1967 and detain shoplifters before police can attend incidents. It must be remembered that CCTV images of offenders caught in the act can be shared with the police (who can check images against those in the Police National Database), other store managers in the locality, and security guards, without compromising data protection guidelines. People are unlikely to radically change their behaviour overnight. The emphasis has to be on physically deterring theft at the frontline through a variety of means, some of which have been mentioned above. Societal uplift will take a bit longer. Either way, the status quo is unacceptable.
Ashis Banerjee