In New York, One-Third Of Grocery Price Scanners Fail

Written by Frank Hayes
September 2nd, 2010

Nearly one-third of checkout price scanners in New York City grocery stores are inaccurate. That’s one of the findings reported this month (August 18) by the city’s Department of Consumer Affairs after a year-long inspection sweep of supermarkets. The bad scanners were in grocery stores ranging from small independents to major chains, although ironically the smallest convenience stores–what New Yorkers call “bodegas”–actually had fewer problems than full-service grocery stores.

Sometimes it’s hard for IT to demonstrate cost and value to retailers in hard dollars. This isn’t one of those times. A faulty scanner costs money when it’s caught by a city inspector–as much as $700 per scanner. That’s on top of fixing the scanner and whatever extra time is required when checkers have to key in prices by hand.

The bad scanners were the second-most-common reason for the stores being fined, after items that didn’t have price tags, according to a Department of Consumer Affairs spokesperson.

But the high failure rate for price scanners is something to worry about. It suggests one of two things: Either supermarket IT departments are intentionally deferring maintenance on price-scanning equipment or it simply doesn’t occur to IT that these devices need regular checking.

With most retail technology, failures are just an internal problem for the retailer. If kiosks don’t work or theft-prevention scanners fail, employees generally end up handling the problems and smoothing out the shortcomings of the technology.

Faulty price scanners, though, fall into a different category. They cost money when a scanner fails and a checker has to key in product numbers. They cost more money when the scanner fails a city inspection. Still more money is on the line if some enterprising lawyer launches a class-action lawsuit.

If that isn’t enough to push scanner maintenance up the priority list, this might help: The stores that had the lowest failure rate for scanners were bodegas, the independent “corner stores” with product selection too limited to qualify as supermarkets. Those are the stores that keep their scanners working the best–and they don’t even have real IT departments.


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.