Civil recovery

Last updated

Civil recovery is the method in some legal systems employed to recover the proceeds of crime, instead of, or in addition to, criminal court proceedings. [1]

Contents

Many retailers, or agents acting on their behalf, utilize civil recovery to recover the value of property (including intellectual property) obtained through unlawful conduct (i.e. theft, burglary, larceny, fraud etc.). In these cases, police action is not a prerequisite to the civil demand for damages by the retailer. The civil demand can be, and often is, made and settled before a civil lawsuit is filed against the shoplifter in the appropriate civil court.

Non-conviction based asset recovery powers are available in some jurisdictions where it is not considered feasible to secure a criminal conviction or a criminal conviction has been obtained but no confiscation order made. [2] These powers are often used in more serious cases of money laundering, organised crime or drug trafficking.

Proponents of civil recovery say it is important to recover the costs incurred through loss from the perpetrators. As well as acting as a deterrent, civil recovery is claimed to cover the cost staff time, administration work and security. [3]

United Kingdom

In the legal systems of the constituent countries of the United Kingdom, the principle of 'civil recovery' (also known as civil recovery scheme or civil recovery regime) is established in law under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. [4] Specifically, part 5 of the Act deals with the recovery of the proceeds of crime from unconvicted defendants through proceedings in the civil courts (the High Court, or in Scotland, Court of Session).

According to a report by the Citizen's Advice Bureau, a number of large and well known British companies are known to employ civil recovery proceedings, including, among others, Arcadia Group, BHS, Selfridges & Co, Matalan, Asda and Tesco. [5] :24

Serious and organized crime

Section 2A of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 grants non-conviction asset seizing powers to relevant agencies (until March 2008, when it was replaced in its role by the Serious Organised Crime Agency, this was the Assets Recovery Agency). [2] The Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service says that recovery of funds and items stops them being reinvested into further criminal activity. [6]

The Attorney General's Office advise that these powers should only be used when either a criminal conviction is not feasible, or, if one is, when it is still within the public interest to proceed. Such situations include:

In Scotland alone, more than £80 million was recovered between 2003 and 2013. [6]

Criticisms

The Citizens Advice Bureau has been an outspoken critic of the retail use of civil recovery. They have criticized several of the practices used by retailers and their agents in pursuing civil recovery. In a 2009 report, [5] they cite several cases which they claim illustrated how the procedure is being abused. These include:

Some believe that people are ashamed or intimidated by the threat of court action and escalating costs into paying the demand without challenge. [5] :1

In the case of "A retailer vs Ms B & Ms K", the first civil recovery case to proceed to full trial, Judge Charles Harris QC dismissed the retailers claim, made up almost entirely of £82.50 for "staff/management time investigating and/or dealing with the incident", in its entirety and permission to appeal was refused. The claim was rejected on the principle set out in Aerospace Publishing Limited v Thames Water Utilities Limited [2007], [7] that the claimant had failed to demonstrate that its security staff had been diverted from ordinary duties. [8]

United States

In the United States, civil recovery laws allow store and retailers to prosecute alleged shoplifters in civil court. Every state has a civil recovery law that holds shoplifters liable to pay retailer's any losses as a result of their unlawful actions, and some states amend those laws periodically to increase recovery amounts, in line with inflation. [9] States typically allow a civil recovery demand to be issued to the parents of a minor, holding parents jointly liable for the demand with their minor child.

Many retailers will contract outside, specialized civil recovery firms that, for a fee, may send demands to alleged shoplifters and take further steps to collect unpaid demands. Companies outsource to save time and any expense involved in implementing their own recovery program. [9]

If a civil demand is not paid by the recipient, the issuer of the demand will have the option of filing a lawsuit to collect the demanded sum of money. Some states allow for the recovery of attorney fees if a lawsuit is filed.

California

A civil recovery demands letter, issued in the state of California Civil demand letter.jpg
A civil recovery demands letter, issued in the state of California

California's civil recovery statute is California Penal Code section 490.5(b) and (c). [10] The statute provides that a person who steals merchandise from a merchant or a book from a library may be civilly liable to the merchant or library for between $50 and $500, plus costs, plus the value of the item stolen if it has not been recovered in its original condition.

In California, the parents of a perpetrator may be sued if the crime is committed by an unemancipated minor.

Oregon

In 1985, the Supreme Court of Oregon, in Payless Drug Stores v. Brown held, that Oregon's civil recovery statute is constitutional. [11]

Tennessee

Tennessee law allow the recovery of the greater of $100 or twice the value of the stolen item. [12]

Wisconsin

In Wisconsin, civil recovery is established in statute 943.51. This statute allows for the recovery of up to three times the value of any unrecovered or damaged items plus any legal fees up to the cost of the items and $500 for adults. If the perpetrator is a minor, then the state allows twice the value of the items plus any legal fees up to the cost of the item and $300. [13]

The filing of a prosecution is not required for civil liability, nor does filing of a prosecution preclude a civil action.

See also

Related Research Articles

A statute of limitations, known in civil law systems as a prescriptive period, is a law passed by a legislative body to set the maximum time after an event within which legal proceedings may be initiated. In most jurisdictions, such periods exist for both criminal law and civil law such as contract law and property law, though often under different names and with varying details.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Theft</span> Act of taking anothers property without consent

Theft is the act of taking another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it. The word theft is also used as a synonym or informal shorthand term for some crimes against property, such as larceny, robbery, embezzlement, extortion, blackmail, or receiving stolen property. In some jurisdictions, theft is considered to be synonymous with larceny, while in others, theft is defined more narrowly. A person who engages in theft is known as a thief.

Champerty and maintenance are doctrines in common law jurisdictions that aim to preclude frivolous litigation:

Larceny is a crime involving the unlawful taking or theft of the personal property of another person or business. It was an offence under the common law of England and became an offence in jurisdictions which incorporated the common law of England into their own law, where in many cases it remains in force.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shoplifting</span> Theft of goods from a retail establishment

Shoplifting, shop theft, retail theft, or retail fraud is the theft of goods from a retail establishment during business hours, typically by concealing a store item on one's person, in pockets, under clothes or in a bag, and leaving the store without paying. With clothing, shoplifters may put on items from the store and leave the store wearing the clothes. The terms shoplifting and shoplifter are not usually defined in law. The crime of shoplifting generally falls under the legal classification of larceny. Shoplifting is distinct from burglary, robbery, or armed robbery. In the retail industry, the word shrinkage can be used to refer to merchandise lost by shoplifting, but the word also includes loss by other means, such as waste, uninsured damage to products and theft by store employees.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Assets Recovery Agency</span> Former non-ministerial government department in the United Kingdom

The Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) was a non-ministerial government department in the United Kingdom. It was established under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) to reduce crime by confiscating the proceeds of any crime. It was granted a new power of civil recovery through the High Court, and could also take over the powers of the HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) to levy tax without identifying a source for taxed income.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Assets Bureau</span> Irish law enforcement agency

The Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB) is a law enforcement agency in Ireland. The CAB was established with powers to focus on the illegally acquired assets of criminals involved in serious crime. The aims of the CAB are to identify the criminally acquired assets of persons and to take the appropriate action to deny such people these assets. This action is taken particularly through the application of the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996. The CAB was established as a body corporate with perpetual succession in 1996 and is founded on the multi-agency concept, drawing together law enforcement officers, tax officials, social welfare officials as well as other specialist officers including legal officers, forensic analysts and financial analysts. This multi-agency concept is regarded by some as the model for other European jurisdictions.

The M25 Three were Raphael Rowe, Michael George Davis, and Randolph Egbert Johnson, who were jailed for life at the Old Bailey in March 1990 after being wrongfully convicted of murder and burglary. The name was taken from the location of the crimes, which were committed around the M25, London's orbital motorway, during the early hours of 16 December 1988. The original trial took place between January and February 1990, resulting in all three being convicted of the murder of Peter Hurburgh, causing grievous bodily harm with intent to Timothy Napier and several robberies. Each was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder and given substantial sentences for the other offences. The convictions were overturned in July 2000. All three men have consistently maintained their innocence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Proceeds of Crime Act 2002</span> British statute law on confiscation and money laundering

The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which provides for the confiscation or civil recovery of the proceeds from crime and contains the principal money laundering legislation in the UK.

The New Hampshire Department of Justice (NHDOJ) is a government agency of the U.S. state of New Hampshire. The department is led by the Attorney General of New Hampshire, currently John Formella. NHDOJ headquarters are located at 33 Capitol Street in Concord.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Asset forfeiture</span> Confiscation of assets by the state

Asset forfeiture or asset seizure is a form of confiscation of assets by the authorities. In the United States, it is a type of criminal-justice financial obligation. It typically applies to the alleged proceeds or instruments of crime. This applies, but is not limited, to terrorist activities, drug-related crimes, and other criminal and even civil offenses. Some jurisdictions specifically use the term "confiscation" instead of forfeiture. The alleged purpose of asset forfeiture is to disrupt criminal activity by confiscating assets that potentially could have been beneficial to the individual or organization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Possession of stolen goods</span> Category of crime

Possession of stolen goods is a crime in which an individual has bought, been given, or acquired stolen goods.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">New South Wales Crime Commission</span> Australian law enforcement agency

The New South Wales Crime Commission is a statutory corporation of the Government of New South Wales. It is constituted by the Crime Commission Act 2012, the object of which is to reduce the incidence of organised crime and other serious crime in the state of New South Wales, Australia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Common Informers Act 1951</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Common Informers Act 1951 is an Act of the United Kingdom Parliament that abolishes the principle of, and procedures concerning a common informer.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Serious Crime Act 2007</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Serious Crime Act 2007 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that makes several radical changes to English criminal law. In particular, it creates a new scheme of serious crime prevention orders to frustrate crime in England and Wales and in Northern Ireland, replaces the common law crime of incitement with a statutory offence of encouraging or assisting crime, makes provision as to disclosure and information sharing in order to prevent fraud, and abolishes the Assets Recovery Agency creating a new regime for the recovery of the proceeds of crime.

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb..." The four essential protections included are prohibitions against, for the same offense:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International asset recovery</span> Any effort by governments to repatriate the proceeds of corruption hidden in foreign jurisdictions

International asset recovery is any effort by governments to repatriate the proceeds of corruption hidden in foreign jurisdictions. Such assets may include monies in bank accounts, real estate, vehicles, arts and artifacts, and precious metals. As defined under the United Nations Convention against Corruption, asset recovery refers to recovering the proceeds of corruption, rather than broader terms such as asset confiscation or asset forfeiture which refer to recovering the proceeds or instrumentalities of crime in general.

A restraint order is an order which has the effect of freezing the assets and bank accounts of the persons against whom it is directed, in consequence of a belief by the authorities that some crime has been committed from which a person has benefited financially.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Civil forfeiture in the United States</span> Aspect of U.S. law enforcement

In the United States, civil forfeiture is a process in which law enforcement officers take assets from people who are suspected of involvement with crime or illegal activity without necessarily charging the owners with wrongdoing. While civil procedure, as opposed to criminal procedure, generally involves a dispute between two private citizens, civil forfeiture involves a dispute between law enforcement and property such as a pile of cash or a house or a boat, such that the thing is suspected of being involved in a crime. To get back the seized property, owners must prove it was not involved in criminal activity. Sometimes it can mean a threat to seize property as well as the act of seizure itself. Civil forfeiture is not considered to be an example of a criminal justice financial obligation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2014 California Proposition 47</span> Reduction of some crimes to misdemeanours

Proposition 47, also known by its ballot title Criminal Sentences. Misdemeanor Penalties. Initiative Statute, was a referendum passed by voters in the state of California on November 4, 2014. The measure was also referred to by its supporters as the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act. It recategorized some nonviolent offenses as misdemeanors, rather than felonies, as they had previously been categorized.

References

  1. Lambert, Jackie; Dunstan, Richard (7 December 2010). "Civil recovery schemes: for or against?". The Guardian. Retrieved 6 July 2014.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 "'Asset recovery powers for prosecutors: guidance and background note 2009". Attorney General's Office. 29 November 2012. Retrieved 7 May 2014.
  3. Davis, Rowenna (10 December 2010). "Security firms demand £100-plus 'fines' from alleged shoplifters" . Retrieved 6 May 2014.
  4. Sections 289 - 316, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Dunstan, Richard (2 Dec 2009). "Unreasonable Demands?" (PDF). Citizens Advice Bureau. Archived from the original (PDF) on 6 May 2014. Retrieved 5 June 2017.
  6. 1 2 "First ten years of Proceeds of Crime Act nets more than £80 million". Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service. n.d. Retrieved 7 May 2014.
  7. "The recovery of management and staff costs during recovery" (PDF). www.edwincoe.com. Edwin Coe LLP. 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 6 May 2014. Retrieved 6 May 2014.
  8. "Pro bono win for BWB in landmark 'Civil Recovery' case". www.bwbllp.com. Baites Wells Braithwaite. 17 May 2012. Archived from the original on 6 May 2014. Retrieved 6 May 2014.
  9. 1 2 Purpura, Philip (2013). Security and Loss Prevention: An Introduction (6 ed.). Waltham, MA: Buterworth-Heinemann. p. 556.
  10. "California Penal Code" . Retrieved 2010-01-24.
  11. Payless Drug Stores v. Brown,708P.2d1143(Oregon Supreme Court1985).
  12. "Shoplifting Statutes and a Sample Civil Complaint Form Letter". Archived from the original on 2007-10-18. Retrieved 2008-02-22.
  13. "Wisconsin Statutes" . Retrieved 2012-10-11.