Woolworths caught out on pricing for shopping bags

dungfungus said :

You have a point, but the shop still has a duty to provide the customer with relevant information and not make assumptions.
.

What “duty” would that be?

I went and checked the baked beans shelf – there is no sign there saying, “this isn’t free”. But somehow, Woollies’ customers apparently know that the stuff in the shop isn’t free and has to be paid for.
Same with every other shelf at Woollies, although at Bateman’s Bay there are several shelves with a sign saying something along the lines of, “Shoplifting is a crime”.

I have no idea why so many people want to talk about “laws” and “rights” and “duties” when the only issues Woollies face here are some very minor issues of staff training, communications and PR.

If the elderly people with infirm minds need advice, I would advise avoiding the self-scan and get the trained professional to do it for you.

HiddenDragon said :

What a lot of hoo-ha over nothing! For starters, the bags don’t look like the bags that are normally given out. It would be strange to presume those thicker plastic bags were free.
Many years ago (over thirty probably to show how behind the times we were) I was in another country and the bag I was about to use wasn’t free and I didn’t know. I didn’t make a fuss about it as people have here; instead I think I paid for it and then continued to reuse it so I wouldn’t pay again. I didn’t see any problem with that. There is no problem here; either pay for it or bring your own bag. Such an unnecessary fuss over nothing. Those bags in the photograph don’t look like the free lightweight bag and the average person would know this. They look like bags that one pays for.

You have a point, but the shop still has a duty to provide the customer with relevant information and not make assumptions. When you provide a store that caters to interstate and elderly patrons, they should be obliged to provide them with the information so that there is no miscommunication.

It’s also why there are “do not microwave tin foil” signs on apple pies – there is a duty to the lowest common denominator, not to common sense.

madelini said :

rommeldog56 said :

Nilrem said :

John Moulis said :

Good to see the RiotAct community engaged by such an important issue.

I understand the whole premise of this argument to be incorrect however. My understanding is that shops are under no obligation to price any item, unless there is specific legislation requiring it (alcohol/tobacco/drugs etc).

When we approach a vendor, the offer and exchange occurs then and there. We can offer 10c for the bags, or accept the 15c price that some shops have.

Its not illegal to have an item for sale, without a price tag/ticket price.

Can you link to anything supporting that? I have done some basic research, and it appears they are required to price them, and Fair Trading has indicated they will investigate, so I presume that means a *possible* breach of the act has occurred.

I think the poster above is getting confused with the ‘invitation to treat’ interpretation of contractual law, which says there is no agreement until and unless there is an offer and acceptance; and the trade practices act/state and territory fair trading laws which effectively override the common law of contract.

Even if we were to accept that there was no legal requirement to price things, there IS a legal requirement to not engage in misleading and deceptive conduct.

And then, its a very long leap from that to proving theft. It’s going to be a bit difficult for the shop to positively prove intent, which is a required mental element when alleging theft. Bearing in mind the circumstances of the case, someone who diligently paid for all items from the shop and then helped themselves to a plastic bag on the face of it would not have intent, and then if the store met their burden and shifted the onus to the defendant, they could very easily raise honest and reasonably mistake.

Also I doubt the police/DPP are going to prioritise the prosecution of one or more 15c bag thefts.

In summary, Woolworths have contempt for their customers and it shows in how they run their business.

Thanks for clarifying that, i believe your explanation to be correct as I understand things.

That is in fact the exact element of consumer/contract law I am referring to. I don’t see it as confusion. It is consistent with my argument that they are not required to display a price tag.

If you have a reference somewhere that says a store must display a price tag, I stand corrected.

I agree that the suggestion that a theft occurred is inappropriate, but I did not think that was the key argument: it was whether Woolworths had price tags for their bags- and also whether they were required to.

Firstly, I would like to note the ACT Regional Managers own words to me on Monday morning, which was that Woolworths believed the situation I uncovered was quote “not in compliance”. Regrettably, I did not clarify whether he meant Internal Policy or Legal compliance – I will follow this up – however Woolworths themselves believe the situation as it was is not acceptable, hence their response.

As to the legal aspect. I have just been on the phone with ACT Fair Trading to get a better understanding of it all. There are four possible aspects to I am informed following that conversation.

1st. Misleading & deceptive conduct, ‘facts known only to them, and the facts are relevant to the decision’.

2nd. False and misleading representations, with regards to ‘the price of the goods or services’.

3rd. Possible requirement under the Plastic Bag Ban legislation regarding the sale of the replacement bags.

4th. Possible requirement under Industry Code, similar to the price scanning policy when prices don’t match.

I have been told my written summary of the situation will be investigated to see if any of those 4 points apply which has been sent to them.

Will update further as more information comes to hand.

There are 3 levels to this.

Woolworths has to stick within the laws, acts and common law which is extended from the English common law system which came from Rome.

Woolworths are voluntarily signature to the Australian scanning code of practice. That is if an item scans up at a different price you get it for free. However this isn’t against the law not to do this, you might have grounds on breach of contract though this would be a civil matter.

Woolworths would have their own standards that apply the above two items and more. This would also include things like the types of clothes that employees wear. If an employee started to wear shorts and thongs to work and you complained to Woolworths you would get the same reaction definitely “not in compliance [with Woolworths standards]”.

However one would hope that Barr and his mob aren’t going to arrest someone for wearing shorts and thongs to work…
I’m also surprised they have the bags on the weighting machines, I’m pretty sure they usually turn them off. I guess having the bags on them is a good way to know they are off.

If they hassle you into paying for the bags, give them the big finger!

Well you can grab those plastic bags in the veggy section for nuthin. So the interstate elderly gent probably thought the same with the green ones.
Sue ’em for damages to his well being and whatever else…. ‘call bloomers”

Words almost fail me. But not quite.

1. There is no “deceptive conduct”. Normal people know that the bags need to be scanned. Like much else you buy, they have a barcode. There are no “facts only known to Woolworths”. They aren’t offering a product for sale knowing something about it that would affect your decision to buy it.

2. There are no “false and misleading representations”. The shop hasn’t promised you the bag will cook dinner for you or wipe out even the most stubborn stains.

3. Plastic bag legislation. Irrelevant. These bags which are for sale aren’t “plastic bags”. Read the Act.

Addendum. Seriously, you have spare time to be indulging in this sort of nonsense?

What a lot of hoo-ha over nothing! For starters, the bags don’t look like the bags that are normally given out. It would be strange to presume those thicker plastic bags were free.
Many years ago (over thirty probably to show how behind the times we were) I was in another country and the bag I was about to use wasn’t free and I didn’t know. I didn’t make a fuss about it as people have here; instead I think I paid for it and then continued to reuse it so I wouldn’t pay again. I didn’t see any problem with that. There is no problem here; either pay for it or bring your own bag. Such an unnecessary fuss over nothing. Those bags in the photograph don’t look like the free lightweight bag and the average person would know this. They look like bags that one pays for.

Nice work, Mordd.

rommeldog56 said :

Nilrem said :

John Moulis said :

Good to see the RiotAct community engaged by such an important issue.

I understand the whole premise of this argument to be incorrect however. My understanding is that shops are under no obligation to price any item, unless there is specific legislation requiring it (alcohol/tobacco/drugs etc).

When we approach a vendor, the offer and exchange occurs then and there. We can offer 10c for the bags, or accept the 15c price that some shops have.

Its not illegal to have an item for sale, without a price tag/ticket price.

Can you link to anything supporting that? I have done some basic research, and it appears they are required to price them, and Fair Trading has indicated they will investigate, so I presume that means a *possible* breach of the act has occurred.

I think the poster above is getting confused with the ‘invitation to treat’ interpretation of contractual law, which says there is no agreement until and unless there is an offer and acceptance; and the trade practices act/state and territory fair trading laws which effectively override the common law of contract.

Even if we were to accept that there was no legal requirement to price things, there IS a legal requirement to not engage in misleading and deceptive conduct.

And then, its a very long leap from that to proving theft. It’s going to be a bit difficult for the shop to positively prove intent, which is a required mental element when alleging theft. Bearing in mind the circumstances of the case, someone who diligently paid for all items from the shop and then helped themselves to a plastic bag on the face of it would not have intent, and then if the store met their burden and shifted the onus to the defendant, they could very easily raise honest and reasonably mistake.

Also I doubt the police/DPP are going to prioritise the prosecution of one or more 15c bag thefts.

In summary, Woolworths have contempt for their customers and it shows in how they run their business.

Thanks for clarifying that, i believe your explanation to be correct as I understand things.

That is in fact the exact element of consumer/contract law I am referring to. I don’t see it as confusion. It is consistent with my argument that they are not required to display a price tag.

If you have a reference somewhere that says a store must display a price tag, I stand corrected.

I agree that the suggestion that a theft occurred is inappropriate, but I did not think that was the key argument: it was whether Woolworths had price tags for their bags- and also whether they were required to.

Firstly, I would like to note the ACT Regional Managers own words to me on Monday morning, which was that Woolworths believed the situation I uncovered was quote “not in compliance”. Regrettably, I did not clarify whether he meant Internal Policy or Legal compliance – I will follow this up – however Woolworths themselves believe the situation as it was is not acceptable, hence their response.

As to the legal aspect. I have just been on the phone with ACT Fair Trading to get a better understanding of it all. There are four possible aspects to I am informed following that conversation.

1st. Misleading & deceptive conduct, ‘facts known only to them, and the facts are relevant to the decision’.

2nd. False and misleading representations, with regards to ‘the price of the goods or services’.

3rd. Possible requirement under the Plastic Bag Ban legislation regarding the sale of the replacement bags.

4th. Possible requirement under Industry Code, similar to the price scanning policy when prices don’t match.

I have been told my written summary of the situation will be investigated to see if any of those 4 points apply which has been sent to them.

Will update further as more information comes to hand.

rommeldog56 said :

That is in fact the exact element of consumer/contract law I am referring to. I don’t see it as confusion. It is consistent with my argument that they are not required to display a price tag.

If you have a reference somewhere that says a store must display a price tag, I stand corrected.

I agree that the suggestion that a theft occurred is inappropriate, but I did not think that was the key argument: it was whether Woolworths had price tags for their bags- and also whether they were required to.

Saying that no binding agreement arises under contract law, is no answer to an allegation that the consumer was misled or deceived under the competition and consumer act or mirror state/territory legislation. It’s long since been established that misleading and deceptive conduct includes acts of silence or omission.

It’s possible that neither party has broken the law; one party has committed a technical breach of the law; or that both parties have committed a technical breach of the law.

But the older gentlemen would never be prosecuted and the large national corporation should know better, and moreover train its staff better. If you are going to employ twelve year olds you can’t complain when they fail to demonstrate common sense.

Richard Farmer said :

I’ve seen this kind of thing happening several times when people either forget to scan or simply don’t realise that these are purchasable goods. But in essence, this is actually an issue of thoughtless, or half-baked UX (user experience) design, not only through lack of signage but also through lack of intelligent design of the checkout software process itself. The ‘checkout wizard’ interface for all self-serve checkouts should inquire if the customer is buying bags (and how many), prior to—or even at the end of the product scanning phase and charge them accordingly and automatically without the need for scanning of bags.
This of course still requires the customer to be honest and declare that they’re using bags, but the fact that you’re confronted with the question in the wizard means you cannot feign ignorance.

I tweeted your suggestion at the Woolworths social media account late last night:

Mordd @Mordd_IndyMedia Jul 27
@woolworths Could self checkout be made to automatically ask customer if they are buying any bags before groceries are scanned? #UXdesign

They replied today:
Woolworths @woolworths Jul 27
@Mordd_IndyMedia We’ve forward your suggestion onto the relevant team for consideration regarding future system upgrades. Thanks Mordd.

The tweet I sent to them also got 1 new ‘like’ overnight as well (which is good for my small number of followers).

Nilrem said :

John Moulis said :

Good to see the RiotAct community engaged by such an important issue.

I understand the whole premise of this argument to be incorrect however. My understanding is that shops are under no obligation to price any item, unless there is specific legislation requiring it (alcohol/tobacco/drugs etc).

When we approach a vendor, the offer and exchange occurs then and there. We can offer 10c for the bags, or accept the 15c price that some shops have.

Its not illegal to have an item for sale, without a price tag/ticket price.

Can you link to anything supporting that? I have done some basic research, and it appears they are required to price them, and Fair Trading has indicated they will investigate, so I presume that means a *possible* breach of the act has occurred.

I think the poster above is getting confused with the ‘invitation to treat’ interpretation of contractual law, which says there is no agreement until and unless there is an offer and acceptance; and the trade practices act/state and territory fair trading laws which effectively override the common law of contract.

Even if we were to accept that there was no legal requirement to price things, there IS a legal requirement to not engage in misleading and deceptive conduct.

And then, its a very long leap from that to proving theft. It’s going to be a bit difficult for the shop to positively prove intent, which is a required mental element when alleging theft. Bearing in mind the circumstances of the case, someone who diligently paid for all items from the shop and then helped themselves to a plastic bag on the face of it would not have intent, and then if the store met their burden and shifted the onus to the defendant, they could very easily raise honest and reasonably mistake.

Also I doubt the police/DPP are going to prioritise the prosecution of one or more 15c bag thefts.

In summary, Woolworths have contempt for their customers and it shows in how they run their business.

Thanks for clarifying that, i believe your explanation to be correct as I understand things.

That is in fact the exact element of consumer/contract law I am referring to. I don’t see it as confusion. It is consistent with my argument that they are not required to display a price tag.

If you have a reference somewhere that says a store must display a price tag, I stand corrected.

I agree that the suggestion that a theft occurred is inappropriate, but I did not think that was the key argument: it was whether Woolworths had price tags for their bags- and also whether they were required to.

John Moulis said :

Good to see the RiotAct community engaged by such an important issue.

I understand the whole premise of this argument to be incorrect however. My understanding is that shops are under no obligation to price any item, unless there is specific legislation requiring it (alcohol/tobacco/drugs etc).

When we approach a vendor, the offer and exchange occurs then and there. We can offer 10c for the bags, or accept the 15c price that some shops have.

Its not illegal to have an item for sale, without a price tag/ticket price.

Can you link to anything supporting that? I have done some basic research, and it appears they are required to price them, and Fair Trading has indicated they will investigate, so I presume that means a *possible* breach of the act has occurred.

I think the poster above is getting confused with the ‘invitation to treat’ interpretation of contractual law, which says there is no agreement until and unless there is an offer and acceptance; and the trade practices act/state and territory fair trading laws which effectively override the common law of contract.

Even if we were to accept that there was no legal requirement to price things, there IS a legal requirement to not engage in misleading and deceptive conduct.

And then, its a very long leap from that to proving theft. It’s going to be a bit difficult for the shop to positively prove intent, which is a required mental element when alleging theft. Bearing in mind the circumstances of the case, someone who diligently paid for all items from the shop and then helped themselves to a plastic bag on the face of it would not have intent, and then if the store met their burden and shifted the onus to the defendant, they could very easily raise honest and reasonably mistake.

Also I doubt the police/DPP are going to prioritise the prosecution of one or more 15c bag thefts.

In summary, Woolworths have contempt for their customers and it shows in how they run their business.

Thanks for clarifying that, i believe your explanation to be correct as I understand things.

Good to see the RiotAct community engaged by such an important issue.

I understand the whole premise of this argument to be incorrect however. My understanding is that shops are under no obligation to price any item, unless there is specific legislation requiring it (alcohol/tobacco/drugs etc).

When we approach a vendor, the offer and exchange occurs then and there. We can offer 10c for the bags, or accept the 15c price that some shops have.

Its not illegal to have an item for sale, without a price tag/ticket price.

Can you link to anything supporting that? I have done some basic research, and it appears they are required to price them, and Fair Trading has indicated they will investigate, so I presume that means a *possible* breach of the act has occurred.

I think the poster above is getting confused with the ‘invitation to treat’ interpretation of contractual law, which says there is no agreement until and unless there is an offer and acceptance; and the trade practices act/state and territory fair trading laws which effectively override the common law of contract.

Even if we were to accept that there was no legal requirement to price things, there IS a legal requirement to not engage in misleading and deceptive conduct.

And then, its a very long leap from that to proving theft. It’s going to be a bit difficult for the shop to positively prove intent, which is a required mental element when alleging theft. Bearing in mind the circumstances of the case, someone who diligently paid for all items from the shop and then helped themselves to a plastic bag on the face of it would not have intent, and then if the store met their burden and shifted the onus to the defendant, they could very easily raise honest and reasonably mistake.

Also I doubt the police/DPP are going to prioritise the prosecution of one or more 15c bag thefts.

In summary, Woolworths have contempt for their customers and it shows in how they run their business.

Good to see the RiotAct community engaged by such an important issue.

I understand the whole premise of this argument to be incorrect however. My understanding is that shops are under no obligation to price any item, unless there is specific legislation requiring it (alcohol/tobacco/drugs etc).

When we approach a vendor, the offer and exchange occurs then and there. We can offer 10c for the bags, or accept the 15c price that some shops have.

Its not illegal to have an item for sale, without a price tag/ticket price.

Can you link to anything supporting that? I have done some basic research, and it appears they are required to price them, and Fair Trading has indicated they will investigate, so I presume that means a *possible* breach of the act has occurred.

I don’t know what’s worse:

Having them inaccessible because someone complained while not knowing the ‘fair trading law’.
They checked every store and found they were all setup the same way.
That Woolworths didn’t know the laws either and strongly reacted to the accusation.
Being from out of town is apparently an excuse to steal.
Having an attendant watching so closely they notice this, because they are never around when the machine stuffs up usually.
Having to pay for the bags in the first place.

Just to be clear, just because the price is missing doesn’t mean something is free. Common sense would say that otherwise everyone would just rip the labels off things and walk out with them.

Coles has the price displayed on a white card above each bag dispenser. They also sell other more durable shopping bags too. I have shopped at Coles Gungalhin for the last eight months.

Good to see the RiotAct community engaged by such an important issue.

I understand the whole premise of this argument to be incorrect however. My understanding is that shops are under no obligation to price any item, unless there is specific legislation requiring it (alcohol/tobacco/drugs etc).

When we approach a vendor, the offer and exchange occurs then and there. We can offer 10c for the bags, or accept the 15c price that some shops have.

Its not illegal to have an item for sale, without a price tag/ticket price.

Oh! I haven’t yet, but my plan was to check some Coles stores this week, just to be fair, to see how they do it. I haven’t actually shopped at a Coles for a while so I am not sure what I will find, but I will let you know. If their social media person is clever though, they might already be forewarned and checking themselves, we shall see.

Wow, so many comments, Yes this has been an interesting story to reveal, and I understand this went all the way up the chain to the national manager.

I was dm’ing with Woolworths twitter social media person on sunday afternoon (interesting they were working then but makes sense) after I revealed the update to my original post on my media feeds, that the issue was ACT wide not just confined to a single store.

I then got a call from Woolworths complaints team late sunday, to inform me a level 1 escelation had been raised regarding it. I then got called at virtually 9am on the dot monday morning by the ACT regional manager to inform me of Woolworths response.

It’s interesting to note that out of the hundreds (low thousands?) of Woolworths staff, from senior management all the way down, that would have eyeballed this in the past, never occured to them that this was a problem. I have looked at it myself though how many times and never noticed before either.

My presumption, although I of course can’t prove it, is that it has been like this for quite a while, and no-one ever noticed who worked for Woolworths and escelated it or it never got pointed out to a staff member by a customer who then actually did something about it, until I tweeted at Woolworths about this 1 week ago originally. (anyone wanting to see the tweets back & forth, check my RA profile or just search for “Mordd” on twitter).

What’s even more ironic, is that apparently the original design never accounted for having price tags attached, which is why they were forced to pull all bags and replace with the boxes to ensure immediate compliance with the law. They actually have to get a policy change approved first to allow pricing on each dispenser before they can then action that, as the policy never and does not account for that currently. Amazing!

Chatting with the guy after (who asked not to be identified, but was happy to talk with me, and was happy for me to write about it, just without identifying him) he thought that Canberra just had really nice free plastic bags, and he thought it was pretty cool that we did, and that it was just a Canberra does it different thing. It never for a second occurred to him that they were for sale and that he was ‘stealing’ a bag. And why would it? Put yourself in his shoes and imagine.

@digitalchet – you are 100% on the money with the UX design – it should ask you if you are buying bags and how many as the 1st step, that’s the best suggestion i’ve heard so far about this!

rommeldog56 – it would be interesting to see someone prosecuted for stealing a bag in the absence of signage or pricing indicating them for sale, I would think that would be tossed out by the judge at the very first mention hearing, but it would be funny to see them try and do this.

I don’t encourage anyone to try stealing bags as a protest though, but if you do, let me know so I can write about it please (anonymous source or otherwise, your choice).

So far I have visited two Woolworths since yesterday morning, and both had all bags stripped from the dispensers and replaced with bags in boxes, with pricing attached. I will be checking further once Woolworths informs me they have actioned the pricing for the dispensers themself and confirmed this myself in at least 2-3 stores, I will then update you all again.

rommeldog56 said :

justin heywood said :

When I am in Coles I pack my groceries into a bag and just walk out.

If u mean a Coles plastic bag, it would be interesting to see if u could be charged for theft or shoplifting if there is no indication that the bags are for sale and must be scanned.

I have about a 50% strike rate of remembering to scan the bags, on the occasion that I use them. I genuinely forget because in Aldi, they scan your groceries for you, and at Costco they don’t have bags at all. So if I find myself in Colesworths, by definition something has already gone wrong.

Now, when I step on the scales I normally don’t get much change back from 100 (kg), and I so much hate shopping at Colesworths these days that on the rare occasions I find myself there, I don’t have a warm and inviting smile on my face. So some spotty faced teenager might be less willing to approach me about this (let’s face it, trivial) issue than they would a mild-mannered elderly gentleman. Or, this gentlemen was just unlucky to be on the receiving end of some vigilante shopkeeping. But despite having been forced into the self-serve checkout at Colesworths on far more occasions than I’d like, no pre-pubescent checkout overlords have ever challenged me about anything.

justin heywood said :

When I am in Coles I pack my groceries into a bag and just walk out.

If u mean a Coles plastic bag, it would be interesting to see if u could be charged for theft or shoplifting if there is no indication that the bags are for sale and must be scanned.

Yeah – nice impression of Canberra to leave a visitor with! “Welcome to Canberra – the Nation’s Capital Nanny State – watch out, or the plastic bag police will get you…”

justin heywood said :

When I am in Coles I pack my groceries into a bag and just walk out. Shoppers in Queanbeyan don’t have to pay for bags so why should we?

Oh no – please dont start the ACT Labor/Greens Govt plastic bag ban argument on here again. Its so painful. But I agree with your sentiment.

Woolworths at Erindale just has the plastic bags in boxes. No pricing on them and no warning that they are for sale so have to be scanned. But then again, it’s the worst Woolworths I’ve ever been in, so that’s no surprise.

justin heywood said :

When I am in Coles I pack my groceries into a bag and just walk out. Shoppers in Queanbeyan don’t have to pay for bags so why should we?

Well, you could always do your shopping in Queanbeyan… or move there, if you resent the ACT laws.

When I am in Coles I pack my groceries into a bag and just walk out. Shoppers in Queanbeyan don’t have to pay for bags so why should we?

I’ve seen this kind of thing happening several times when people either forget to scan or simply don’t realise that these are purchasable goods. But in essence, this is actually an issue of thoughtless, or half-baked UX (user experience) design, not only through lack of signage but also through lack of intelligent design of the checkout software process itself. The ‘checkout wizard’ interface for all self-serve checkouts should inquire if the customer is buying bags (and how many), prior to—or even at the end of the product scanning phase and charge them accordingly and automatically without the need for scanning of bags.
This of course still requires the customer to be honest and declare that they’re using bags, but the fact that you’re confronted with the question in the wizard means you cannot feign ignorance.

Interesting that they pounce on the old man who didn’t know to scan his bag, but they let through so many people scanning their organic pink lady apples as the much cheaper red delicious…

Nice work. I wondered why there was no bags in the self serve yesterday.

Did you have a look at Coles too?

I read somewhere (most likely a previous Riotact article about recycling them) that the fine is $27,000 for failing to charge for the bags. I have shopped at Woolworths on occasion and thought whilst the bags were meant to be “sold” they did not care about the fifteen cents due to the lack price signage.

I hope the Woolworths employee apologised to the gentleman. It would have been embarrassing to be chased down accused of theft. On a side note I know about a instance were someone was paid about $20,000 for being accused of stealing from a St Vincent de Paul Society store.