[Closed] stealing food from a skip

utter madness

I love this line.

Police returned the items to the Iceland store.

We can only presume to be thrown away again !

i thought anything thrown out was fair game, which is why its ok for detectives, apparently, to go through your trash.

doesn't sit well along side [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24603008 ]stories like this ![/url]

which is why its ok for detectives, apparently, to go through your trash.

Nope, case law has since ruled that illegal.

whilst at college i worked at M&S. used to have to chuck out the food past its sell-by date. to be fair to M&S everything that was going to be scrapped the day before was sold to staff at silly prices which is why our cat and dogs used to eat sirloin steak (mum assumed that since the sell-by date was exceeded we best not waste it... as opposed to putting it in the freezer).

the amount we used to chuck was saddening. i used to leave some bread out for the homeless dude, but got a rollocking. reason being was that if the homeless man got ill eating M&S produce he could sue them. wasn't even allowed to feed the ducks.

there is quite a community that in NY that eat out of bins. probably is here, too. well, not here in Munich as people have jobs. more likely some shit hole like Berlin where they are poor.

This world we've allowed 'them' to create makes me wonder sometimes.

thats just rediCOOOlus. I applaud their common sense in sourcing food and hope the supermarket waste issue becomes the media focus.

The article says they were in an enclosed area, but doesnt say if it was trespass and / or breaking and entering. I'd summise not, in which case, drop the case. mupps.

Most M & S stores now throw all the 'out of date' food away instead of selling to staff (Well they send it away for Bio fuel) It's an utter disgrace - the amounts of good food wasted each day is obscene 🙁

The total value of the items taken allegedly amounted to £33

Two things,

1) how much has it already cost in prosecuting these people, let alone how much is it going to cost, and

2) the total value of the items taken is zero, otherwise it wouldn't be in the bin, it'd be on the shelf priced accordingly.

I despair sometimes, I really do.

Boke. Boycott Iceland. Social media uproar

I'm not surprised.

They are poor so they must be criminals

Why Boycott Iceland? I doubt they have anything to do with whether the CPS think it's in the public interest for a prosecution to be followed?

That's like ostracising your neighbour because their bin got burgled?

2) the total value of the items taken is zero, otherwise it wouldn't be in the bin, it'd be on the shelf priced accordingly.

This.

If Iceland want to pursue these folk for trespass, that's up to them, but there is obviously zero public interest in any prosecution.

I think it's wrong for people to be eating food from bins, but not for the same reason as the CPS and Iceland think it's wrong.

It costs businesses money to dispose of their waste - Iceland should be paying these guys, not pressing charges.

I assume (IANAL) that Iceland will have had to report a crime as committed against themselves for this to be prosecuted - otherwise there isn't a crime, is there?

I shall be boycotting Iceland with immediate effect (although I don't shop there anyway, so no hardship).

I think it's wrong for people to be eating food from bins, but not for the same reason as the CPS and Iceland think it's wrong.

Where does it say Iceland think it's wrong? The accused were initially arrested for suspected burglary.

But carry on jerking those knees lads, don't let facts get in the way of a good witch hunt.

I think the big food sellers will not really want their waste food amounts to become well known, not least because we are paying for it in the money we spend there. I see a lack of interest in this case being sought by the food industry...

Most M & S stores now throw all the 'out of date' food away instead of selling to staff (Well they send it away for Bio fuel) It's an utter disgrace - the amounts of good food wasted each day is obscene

Supermarkets throw away food because customers won't buy the last item on the shelf. They have to overstock so that theres never a last item on the shelf. Its part of the buying/selling psychology and it applies to anything really, not just food - the last puppy in the litter for instance - when I used to sell art someones exhibition would sell like hot cakes until there were 3 pieces left and then those 3 would't shift, add more stock and things would sell again and those three were as likely to sell as any other. People want to choose their favourite thing but when theres only one of something left, particularly if its something you'd choose for its freshness, the feeling is people have already taken all the good cakes / chickens/ bags of salad / puppies and the one thats left is the one that everyone else has rejected.

If you wanted to reduce waste then you'd need to expect the supermarkets to run out of fresh food everyday, and to be nearly out of food, with limited choice, for a good part of the day. But as it is the choice is either overstock and throw food away, or stock just enough and have customers go away annoyed they couldn't get what they wanted and still throw food away, but having made fewer sales and possibly sent your customers into the open arms of your competitor.

20 years ago, for instance M&S were quite confident about letting stock run down- their competitors were envious that they could do that as it was a privilege that M&S had that they didn't- that if you went into a supermarket and their was no bread left you'd be angry at the shop for not stocking enough bread, but if you went into M&S and they were out of stock you'd angry at yourself for not getting there earlier.

should be illegal to chip out food on that scale. Supermarkets should be supplying food banks free of charge considering their waste levels(and exporting any further excess further afield.).

Some supermarkets on the continent pour bleach on the food when they throw it and they're the very same chains who allow food banks to have a collection at the entrance.
I just just find the whole thing distasteful, not in a bleachy way, but in a hypocritical business way.

I think it's wrong for people to be eating food from bins, but not for the same reason as the CPS and Iceland think it's wrong.

Where does it say Iceland think it's wrong? The accused were initially arrested for suspected burglary.

But carry on jerking those knees lads, don't let facts get in the way of a good witch hunt.

Fine:

I think it's wrong for people to be eating food from bins, but not for the same reason as the CPS [s]and Iceland[/s] think it's wrong

Its nonsense to prosecute but you can understand in this situation that 3 blokes were reported 'scaling a wall' to get into someone else's property. If it were your garden, you would expect the police to attend. This in turn wastes police time and costs tax ££s.

I'd like to know more about their lifestyles as well - needing to eat is one thing but choosing to squat and scavenge can be a lifestyle choice for some. Middle class 'look at me' types!

I assume (IANAL) that Iceland will have had to report a crime as committed against themselves for this to be prosecuted - otherwise there isn't a crime, is there?

Good job you aren't, with that level of understanding of the law 😉

Why does 'the victim' have to report the crime? What if the victim isn't able to report it, like in a murder for example?

The CPS make the decision to prosecute. The police gather the evidence to support the case, which in this case could be CCTV images, a report from a member of the public (read the link, that's what happened here) and apprehending these 3 with a trolley and holdall full of food.

should be illegal to chip out food on that scale. Supermarkets should be supplying food banks free of charge considering their waste levels(and exporting any further excess further afield.).

+1

Cheers,
Jamie

Food debate aside for the minute. Perhaps if they hadn't climbed over a wall to get to the area that the bins were in - let me make an assumption that it was a locked area, they wouldn't have been arrested in the first place?

I'm not sure many businesses or homes would be happy to find someone has jumped over the back wall and is having a root around to see what they could scavenge, rubbish or not.

Edit: Beaten to it. Again.

To add to comments made above - i too don't think it's right that people should have to scavenge for food, particularly food that is being dumped. I'm saddened that supermarkets can't find a mechanism to give it away charitably to those that could use it, which in turn may be due to the interpretation of food safety laws and the potential for people to sue if they get ill from 'out of date' food - which saddens me even more.

At the same time, to not prosecute creates a precedent where stealing from bins becomes an acceptable thing to do which then doesn't address the issue. I'd hope the magistrates find an appropriate means to deal with it, including taking into account as mentioned above whether these 3 are truly needing of scavenging from bins, or have chosen the lifestyle deliberately.

I've driven HGV's for a few of the large supermarkets in the past and the huge amounts of good food they throw away is gobsmacking,
It's not just food though, a lot of clothing stores and electronics stores throw perfectly good stock away as well, when I worked for the local council where I used to live, certain stores used to turn up and empty a lorry load of last years Addidas tops and football kit regularly, they used to turn up, get us to close the tip to the public (pre arranged), empty the lorry and we had to bury it with the loader so no one could get to it..
Nowt wrong with anything, just last years designs or suchlike..

If you wanted to reduce waste then you'd need to expect the supermarkets to run out of fresh food everyday, and to be nearly out of food, with limited choice, for a good part of the day. +

here in Germany that is often the case.... i say often, i mean 6 days a week (closed on Sundays). in fact i have in the past pointed out items of fruit or veg that have gone moldy. the offending item was either removed or the woman just shrugged her shoulders. and this isn't at discount stores such as Aldi or Lidl, but reatively expenisive place, Edeka.

Obviously got no class, back of Waitrose is where its at.

Our Waitrose has a twelve foot wall and gates at the back, you can't have the riffraff loitering around like that..

Its nonsense to prosecute but you can understand in this situation that 3 blokes were reported 'scaling a wall' to get into someone else's property. If it were your garden, you would expect the police to attend. This in turn wastes police time and costs tax ££s.

That seems to be the problem - I think we can all understand why, when the police get reports of blokes scaling the walls of business premises, they respond, but when they investigate and find out the situation is how it is in this case, how hard is it to say "no, there wasn't a burglary going on" and release them, rather than some poor person at the CPS going through statute looking for something, anything, that they can "do" them for and alighting on the 1824 Vagrancy Act?

Wildlife park I used to help out with used to regularly get batches of out of date food (veg, breads etc) from Supermarkets for the animals

I don't quite know how someone climbing over the back fence of the loading yard at midnight would be able to tell which food was going to be thrown away, and which would get picked up by us in the morning...

Arguably, there's some very good 'public interest' in this, because the people who take it don't know the history of whats happened to the food - what if, for example, its been thrown away because the fridge has broken and has been stored at the wrong temperature? what if its being thrown away because the shop have had a communication from head office saying 'this batch of food may have been contaminated, and needs to be removed from the shelves immediately' - the problem is, that someone taking this food from the bins wouldn't be aware of that, would they?

but when they investigate and find out the situation is how it is in this case, how hard is it to say "no, there wasn't a burglary going on" and release them, rather than some poor person at the CPS going through statute looking for something, anything, that they can "do" them for and alighting on the 1824 Vagrancy Act?

I think thats a bit arse about face - the initial arrest when they were caught was for 'found on enclosed premises' which is a good old catch all often used by the police where they feel something dodgy is going on, but don't necessarily have enough to suspect a specific offence - the decision taken after investigation and confirmed by by the CPS appears to be to charge for theft.

The difficulty in not prosecuting is setting the precedent, making it OK to enter a locked premises with intent to take discarded food away. Like I said, I think we all would want a situation in which the food can be distributed to those that genuinely need it without it being a free for all. At what point does it become OK. If the store closes at 8pm, is that the hooter for being OK to go in. We'd all better be there at that time then otherwise the good stuff'll be gone.

And who's entitled? 'Genuine' homeless only? People choosing to live a 'vagrant' lifestyle (not saying these 3 are, but there are some that do)? Benefits claimants (show your certificate at the bottom of the ladder)? Why can't i have some, i pay my taxes after all.

We'll need the police there to keep order!!

think thats a bit arse about face - the initial arrest when they were caught was for 'found on enclosed premises' which is a good old catch all often used by the police where they feel something dodgy is going on, but don't necessarily have enough to suspect a specific offence - the decision taken after investigation and confirmed by by the CPS appears to be to charge for theft.

Edit - oh, on further reading they were initially arrested for suspected burglary and have been charged under the vagrancy act

that means they're not actually being charged with stealing the food - so its all to do with the reason why they were there - thats even more interesting then, new use of old law!

I live next to a Tesco Express. They have a bin shed where they dump all the past it's sell by date food. Occasionally you'll get folk climbing the fence into the shed and raiding the bins. These people are dirt poor judging by their appearance. Dirty, old clothes, malnourished appearance. My missus goes mental and phones the police. I've tried explaining to her that if someone is so desparate for food that they're willing to raid bins just to survive, then perhaps a bit of charity on her behalf would be more appropriate instead of her usual right wing tirade against the poor...

I've done alot of freeganism in my time, getting a great deal of quality food that was perfectly edible... Marks and Spencer Lobster, Whole legs of Lamb, Strawberries aplenty: the problem lies in the Best Before Date legislation, which makes it illegal to sell perfectly good food.

It is a tricky system to improve, as the manpower and training required to check the safety of foodstuffs would probably be economically prohibitive, but it's really not acceptable the mind-boggling amounts of waste that occur in one City, let alone across the planet.

Once Marks + Spencer realized people were cottoning on to it, they started ripping open the packaging and covering the food in blue dye, which in itself requires additional manpower and wages. Some branches also built large secure compounds to prevent 'theft' of what had been deemed as waste...

"we feel there is significant public interest in prosecuting these three individuals"

Since when was it a popularity contest?

am i being nieve? why dont the supermarkets have deals with homeless charities in their local area to collect the out of date food and distribute it. Surely that would be benficial to all concerned and not cost any more than the process of disposing of the food?

[quote=ti_pin_man uttered]am i being nieve? why dont the supermarkets have deals with homeless charities in their local area to collect the out of date food and distribute it.

Because they're not allowed to give the food away once it is out of date.

[url= https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=nieve&espv=210&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=XenoUsLODunY7Abew4GYBQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=939#facrc=0%3Bnieve%20jennings&imgdii=_&imgrc=_ ]Are you Nieve?[/url]

if they can sell out of date food at isle ends then surely they can sell it to charities for, say, a penny?

EDIT: always been carp at spelling

Further edit: Foods marked with 'best before' or 'best before end' dates may be sold after their marked dates, provided that they remain of good quality and fit for human consumption. In these circumstances it is advisable to ensure that customers know that the date has expired before they make the decision to buy. (trading standards website).

I suppose the counter-argument is similiar to downloading music- the cost isn't the item you "stole", it's the item you didn't buy. I don't think that stands up, but it's a defensible position.

ninfan - Member

I don't quite know how someone climbing over the back fence of the loading yard at midnight would be able to tell which food was going to be thrown away, and which would get picked up by us in the morning...

My postie thinks it's a good idea to put packages in the bin but I don't think it's the norm in retail distribution.

there's a difference between 'best before' and 'use by'

Stuff sold at aisle ends (I've always been OK at spelling 😉 ) won't be out of date, it'll be close to going out of date and therefore reduced as an incentive for us to buy it. If it was same price and just on the shelf, people rummage to the back to get the one with a longer use by date.

there's a difference between 'best before' and 'use by'

Which is why we need to stop saying

won't be out of date

as it's meaningless. Stuff with a "REDUCED!!" sticker may have exceeded its "best before" date, but will not (legally) be past its "use by" date.

if they can sell out of date food at isle ends then surely they can sell it to charities for, say, a penny?

Some 'Best before' is spurious though, sometimes it relates to the promotion on the packet rather than the food inside, so a lot of preserved/long shelf life items get dumped simply because Toy Story 6 isn't still in the cinemas and the they want to use the shelf space and Rice Pops packet to advertise something else instead.

But 'Use by' is legally binding and its for items that start to become a hazard to health after an elapsed time. Plenty of best-before does find its way to charities and also through secondary markets discounting like 'Approved Foods'. But its not charitable to give people food that will make them ill.

I've tried explaining to her that if someone is so desparate for food that they're willing to raid bins just to survive, then perhaps a bit of charity on her behalf would be more appropriate instead of her usual right wing tirade against the poor...

Good for you Bob! Fight the power! 😉

I hope it does highlight the food-waste problem. I've had this debate about 'skipping' a few times. I think a lot of people just don't like the idea of people getting stuff without paying for it. It kind of bucks the whole system. But rather than think about it, it's easier to just call the skippers 'scroungers' or 'criminals'. You get the same kind of thing with the TV license debate. And, closer to home, the 'cyclists should pay 'road tax because we have to' brigade.

I remember seeing my grandad smash his TV with a hammer before taking it to the tip. Just in case someone recycled it or "got it for free".

I'd like to know more about their lifestyles as well - needing to eat is one thing but choosing to squat and scavenge can be a lifestyle choice for some. Middle class 'look at me' types!

^^This.

The guy is a web designer in London. He shouldn't be living in a squat scavenging food.

Iceland says it has asked CPS why men are being tried for taking food from bins

Chief executive says he has contacted prosecutors after men were charged and insists Iceland did not call police

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/29/iceland-cps-men-tried-taking-food-bins

[quote=andyrm uttered]The guy is a web designer in London. He shouldn't be living in a squat scavenging food.

Maybe he's not a very good web designer.

Supermarkets throw away food because customers won't buy the last item on the shelf.

From the Grauniad link

Lawyers for the three men have asked the CPS to consider dropping the case, but it responded this month that the case would go ahead, because "we feel there is significant public interest in prosecuting these three individuals".

Unreal. I made a complaint to the police a few years ago about a company that had defrauded people for thousands of pounds, and was told it was a civil matter and the police could do nothing about it, yet 3 guys take some food out a bin and that's suddenly in the public interest to prosecute.

Case dropped:

[url= http://blog.cps.gov.uk/2014/01/cps-statement-iceland-foods-case.html ]http://blog.cps.gov.uk/2014/01/cps-statement-iceland-foods-case.html[/url]

cps saying it was the Met's fault for bringing it to court using 200 year old legislation.

I think that's dangerous. Makes it hard to prosecute anyone for the same offence now, surely. They'll be queueing by the bins for closing time before long.

Much as it hurts to say it, they should have been prosecuted with the magistrates showing leniency IF it can be shown that they acted truly out of hardship; that might go some way to preventing others thinking it's fair game, and would also draw attention to the situation in which tonnes of edible food is being dumped when it could be used for good purposes.

On a side note, does anyone have any dealings with the [url= http://www.trusselltrust.org/ ]Trussell Trust[/url]. Have been thinking that I should set up a regular donation.

I think that's dangerous. Makes it hard to prosecute anyone for the same offence now, surely. They'll be queueing by the bins for closing time before long.

I don't see a problem with that.

I suspect that the interest here is to keep the issue of food waste of the big retailers out of the media.

Iceland may be the best but they have no desire to see this stirred up nor do the government

On a side note, does anyone have any dealings with the Trussell Trust. Have been thinking that I should set up a regular donation.

Yep, I give them £20/month. I feel very ashamed to live in a society where we think it is acceptable for people to be unable to feed their families yet pay billions in bonuses to bankers.....

+1. DD set up.

I suspect that the interest here is to keep the issue of food waste of the big retailers out of the media.

Iceland may be the best but they have no desire to see this stirred up nor do the government

+1

Supermarkets throw away food because customers won't buy the last item on the shelf.

That doesn't account for 40% of bagged salad being thrown out (unless there were only 2 bags on the shelf to start with and then the maths don't quite add up).

That totally accounts for 40% being thrown out - they over stock to avoid here ever being one to two items left on the shelf.

I don't see a problem with that

I do, if it turns into a free for all where it's acceptable to 'break into' secure premises in order to take dumped food. Particularly if groups who already are scrounging off the rest of society instead of paying their way see it as an entitlement now.

If there is as much use able food being dumped as there seems to be, there needs to be a proper means of redistributing it to those that need it, not for it to be appropriated by those that are fit enough to climb the fence.

supermarkets increase the price of the food you and i buy to account for the waste they throw away.
lots of which is not 'out of date' but simply thrown away to make room for the fresh stock about to be delivered.

i think there is 'significant public interest' in stopping this waste which some estimates quote at being £10 billion.

The pic in the link- is that junkyard?

^^This.
The guy is a web designer in London. He shouldn't be living in a squat scavenging food.

Why on earth do you think this is any of your business?

The difficulty in not prosecuting is setting the precedent, making it OK to enter a locked premises with intent to take discarded food away.

Trespass isn't a crime either. It's a civil offence that I imagine most people on STW do on a fairly regular basis.

I do, if it turns into a free for all where it's acceptable to 'break into' secure premises in order to take dumped food. Particularly if groups who already are scrounging off the rest of society instead of paying their way see it as an entitlement now.

What exactly did they "break" to enter?

It must be nice to have such a lucky life and then blame anyone who is down on their luck, I hope you never find yourself in such a situation as to need the compassion of others to help you along in life someday, because unfortunately your attitude is spreading and you would probably find yourself ****ed.

Apparently they are now not going to be prosecuted, and the shop had no involvement.

What exactly did they "break" to enter?

Well according to Jamie's link, Iceland said:

Products are only designated as waste when they have passed their use-by dates and are considered unfit for human consumption. We utilise secure storage areas and/or locked waste bins to dispose of such products

So either they broke in, Iceland were lying, or they weren't stealing waste produce.

Apparently they are now not going to be prosecuted, and the shop had no involvement.

Welcome to the contents of the rest of the thread.

MSP, wind your neck in and read my prior post on this subject.

I have absolute sympathy with those that find themselves genuinely in this situation. (I'm not sure that these 3 genuinely are btw but I'll give benefit of the doubt). I'm concerned that by making it ok to enter a secure premises (or break in, or whatever, just terminology) it opens it up for all to do the same. Whether they need to or not. If they were prosecuted but given no penalty on the basis that it was a crime of necessity or whatever the right phrase would be, then it doesn't make it ok for others to do it when they don't have the need. And it would stand more hope of forcing the government to work with the food standards people and the supermarkets to find a means to get this food into the hands of those that genuinely need it via proper routes.

I'm concerned that by making it ok to enter a secure premises (or break in, or whatever, just terminology)

It's not just terminology. Breaking in to me implies forcing entry, which means damaging stuff. Climbing over a wall is totally different - and as above, no worse than the trespass mountain bikers commit all the time.

MSP, wind your neck in and read my prior post on this subject.

This one? Maybe you should read your own posts, then wind your own neck in before criminalising poverty.

Particularly if groups who already are scrounging off the rest of society instead of paying their way see it as an entitlement now.

I see your point but I disagree. When a colleague had his car nicked, he didnt leave the door open, or the keys on the step. The scrotes nicked them through the letterbox causing zero damage. Just trespass?

Um no, that would be theft (or similar - IANAL). You know, an actual criminal offence resulting in the loss of something valuable.

Bit ridiculous to compare the two.

I'm talking about the benefit cheats and fraudsters, not those who genuinely need it, who I have sympathy for - so I'll say it again, the issue of food waste and redistributing needs to be addressed properly, not by a free for all where your entitlement will be defined by your ability to get over the fence.

You know, an actual criminal offence resulting in the loss of something valuable.

So, just as a hypothetical - what if someone took a load of food being thrown away from the back of a supermarket and sold it on for a few quid?

OK?

I'm talking about the benefit cheats and fraudsters

Which ones? The imaginary ones, or the ones you've read about in the Daily Mail? Where in this story does it mention anything about benefit fraud?

Also, genuine benefit fraud is actually quite rare - the amount lost to it is dwarfed by the amount of legitimate benefits that go unclaimed.

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-qa-benefit-fraud-perspective/15796

I was only addressing the means of getting access to the items, as that's what you were disputing. Gaining access to a locked premises with the intent of taking something that is not yours, doesn't necessarily mean you have to cause damage to do it. It's still 'breaking in' in my book.

What happened once inside is another subject. In both cases they took something that didnt belong to them. Value and intent *may* be different, as were the reasons why they took those steps but the action is the same.