Apple Retail Mission: To Not Catch A Thief

Written by Evan Schuman
January 4th, 2012

For many shoppers, the thief non-interference policy of many chains—especially when it involves firing a security guard who confronted a shoplifter—is baffling, even though it’s truly—albeit non-intuitively—the right thing to do. Apple’s approach to non-interference with thefts took on an especially surreal twist in Toronto late last month.

Seems that Scott Barkley had his iPhone—among other things in his coat—stolen from a neighborhood bar a few days before Christmas. He cancelled the phone’s service and contacted police. The next day, he received an automated E-mail from Apple, reminding him of his appointment that day at a local Apple retail store. He had made no such appointment, so he concluded that the thief—presumably frustrated by Barkley’s audacity for shutting off the phone service—scheduled the appointment to try and reactivate the phone.

Told of this, Apple refused to intervene. They told him that policy prevents them from getting involved. “I can’t believe they don’t have some protocol to deal with that. You can imagine it’s not an uncommon situation, people showing up with stolen phones,” Barkley was quoted saying in The Toronto Star. In fact, the store does have a policy: Don’t take sides. If the customer wants to call police, let the police handle it. If police aren’t called, treat everyone as a legitimate customer.

Barkley went to the Apple store, but he didn’t see the thief and the store stood by its do-nothing policy. Police arrived and could find nothing wrong. Turns out, the thief had already come and gone “with a story about buying it from a friend of Barkley’s uncle, only to find the phone didn’t work. The Apple clerk at the Genius Bar assumed it was a phone malfunction, and seemingly without checking to make sure, handed the man a brand new phone and put Barkley’s stolen phone in the back, to be sent off for servicing,” The Star reported.

The police later confiscated the “malfunctioning” phone and returned it to Barkley. As for that thief, if he’s dumb enough to continue to use the phone, he may find it’s becoming a homing signal for police looking to close out a theft. Anti-thief-interference rules make sense for store employees and for the chain itself. But would it really kill an Apple associate to fully read the notes before handing out new phones?


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.