Retail Security Challenges: From Shoplifting to Building Theft

The Impact of Theft and Vandalism on Retail Buildings and Security Measures

This episode explores the multifaceted issue of theft in retail environments, beyond common shoplifting concerns. The discussion covers the various types of theft involving building materials and expensive equipment, such as solar panels and EV charger units. Organised criminal activities, seasonal variations and advancements in theft tools are highlighted. Host Gary Marshall also addresses the responsibilities of retailers and landlords in managing security, the complex lease agreements regarding repairs and the broader impacts on staff and operations. Various security measures and their effectiveness, including physical presence and surveillance systems, are examined in the context of preventing and mitigating theft-related losses.

00:00 Introduction to Retail Property Insights

00:19 Theft in Retail: A Persistent Problem

00:38 Unusual Targets: Building Materials and Equipment

02:22 Seasonal and Specialised Thefts

05:01 Creative and Audacious Theft Attempts

06:05 Security Measures and Challenges

07:44 Tenant and Landlord Responsibilities

14:04 Antisocial Behavior and Its Impact
 
 12:54 Daylight Robbery

15:39 The Cost of Security

17:40 Conclusion and Final Thoughts

Related episodes:

Sharing Common Space and Facilities - a Land Grab for EV Chargers and Storage Containers

Bailiffs, Billboards, Breaking and Entering: Five Cautionary Tales of Landlord Encounters

Maintenance, Repairs and Dilapidations in Retail Leases

Never miss an episode! Follow and like That Retail Property Guy on your favourite podcast platform - available on Apple, Spotify, Amazon and more.

Find out more and message us on the podcast website

Go to ThatRetailPropertyGuy for more on Gary Marshall, Smarter Estates and the TRPG podcast. You can also check out the TRPG Blog for reading versions of key episodes. 

For our niche 'Accounts Recoverable in Retail Property' business services, visit SmarterEstates

And find Gary and team on LinkedIn for regular updates and community info!

Transcript

0:00

Welcome to that Retail Property guy with your host, Gary Marshall. In each podcast episode, we delve into topics from the perspective of a retailer as tenant sharing stories and insights through Gary's unique lens. We hope you'll be entertained, enlightened, and may be a little inspired. From a retailer's point of view, any kind of theft is a problem. All thefts hit the bottom line and cause consequences for retailers. Shoplifting is a particular scourge. It's been fairly high in the news for years as retail organizations urge the police to recognize it as a crime that merits attention. But those of us in retail estate management tend to encounter other issues relating to the fabric of the building and its services. It may come as a surprise to many, but yes, people steal bits of building and the kit attached to them. This might be a newsworthy event if a retail outlet happens to have a Banksy mural on the gable. And somebody decides to chisel that section away in the dead of night, or there are so many examples of expensive lead flashing, disappearing off church roofs and other grand buildings. You can imagine the relative ease with which a thief could fence the stuff. It's frustrating, of course, that the criminals proceeds are so often negligible, almost. Pocket money compared to the immense cost of repairing the damage and replacing the flashing. But theft from retail buildings isn't limited to lead off the roof. There are so many other areas that get unwanted attention. Expensive equipment is always an attraction. Stolen items can generally be resold quickly at reduced prices and passed on to unsuspecting buyers. Some items are stripped for parts as spares or just for precious metal value. Theft of solar panels is on the increase. Organized criminal gangs target big solar farms, but there are also lots of chances and local delinquents stealing odd panels from retail and industrial estates. There's clearly an organizational background behind this that panels are specialized items, but they are sellable in the underground economy, just like a partly used catalytic converter from a prestigious car. Speaking of cars thieves are also targeting EV charger units and their cables, mostly for the copper wiring, which can be stripped and sold for scrap. And there are seasonal variations too. In the festive period, it's common for thieves to target Christmas displays, stealing lights, and their supporting framework. Again, either to strip for recycling or for spares, or to reinstall for unscrupulous clients who must surely know where this stuff comes from. In the middle of a heat wave, attention turns to air conditioners. These are the big units on the outside of the building, maybe on the roof, maybe bolted to the wall. They're only part of the overall air con system, but they are commonly targeted to meet general demand, possibly even stolen to order for spares replacements, and the upgrade of faulty units somewhere else. Even parts of the actual fabric of a building are vulnerable to the sticky fingered minority. We've spoken about lead flashing, but other sheet metal is an obvious choice. Steel sheeting is used as a cladding on modern retail parks simply bolted to the structural frame. Thieves, especially target vacant premises, but it isn't necessarily restricted to unattended locations. Trading stores can also be targeted, especially with modern tools. It takes very little time to liberate large quantities of sheet cladding, guttering, or fascia. Let's not forget, stainless steel, chimneys, air extraction units, pumps, fencing, and other enclosures gates. Even signage, although signage might be more due to pranksters than card carrying thieves. Valuable roof slates, stonework, glass, and architecturally significant decorative work. It all seems fair game to the moonlit economy. The thieves who take an interest in this stuff range from vandals and Ill-advised amateurs who perceive a value when perhaps there isn't one, or at least don't recognize that an item could be really difficult to shift and so possibly ends up just getting dumped. At the other end of the scale, semi-skilled professionals with the right tools for the job and the right contacts for the onward marketing. eBay also helps of course, and readily available. Battery operated hand tools make the job just so much easier. An 18 volt handheld angle grinder can be hidden in the pocket of a hoodie, but can cut through padlocks, security chains, Harris fencing, bolts, metal bars, and sheet metal like the proverbial knife through butter. An SDS drill can carve through masonry, stonework, and concrete. It's noisy but swift, so it's relatively efficient if the next security patrol isn't due anytime soon. Tools like these give a thief ample opportunity to cut and remove almost anything, whether it's bolted down or not. A bit like waving Harry Potter's magic wand. Attempted thefts can be creative. I recall one instance in a Manchester suburb where a gang spent several days secretly tunneling from some unused land under delivery yard to the sellers of some high street shops, one of which sold mobile phones and other tech gadget. It was enterprising and remarkably well executed. They excavated loads of dirt, piled it up, braced the tunnel to prevent Cains, and reached the cellar wall of exactly their target premises. They smashed through the brickwork. They gained access to the cellar. Perhaps hoping it'd be a store room or give them access to the sales area. Fortunately for the retailer, it was the manager's office with a locked door, and when the gang tried to force the door, they triggered an alarm and the police arrived within minutes. The gang escaped back through the tunnel. No goods were taken, but damage and repairs were costly. Thankfully, the landlord's insurance covered parts and the retailer's loss of business insurance covered the rest. It seems the best tactic a property owner can adopt is to make life as difficult as possible for the thief to obstruct them, delay them, and make it more difficult to sell the stuff on, but it's unlikely they'll actually prevent it permanently. So now we're into the realms of security, whether that's a physical manned presence or a virtual monitoring like CCTV systems and sensitive alarms, whether it's the police or a private security firm, whether it's onsite 24 7 or an occasional drive past inspection, every few hours. And remember that a physical presence isn't always the answer. Most security guards are well advised to not get physically involved, to not put themselves at risk, endanger their own lives or limbs. I. But generally speaking, the moonlit economy shies away from publicity. Its operators avoid confrontation, risk of being identified and so on. Not to mention being arrested, I say, not to mention because arrest by the police is sadly not very likely to happen. Private security is the bigger player, but who pays for this private security? Who's responsible for providing the proactive and reactive presence? Who foot the bill and do they get value for money? Retailers who own their own premises surely carry their own risk management obligations. It's up to them what level to provide, who to outsource it to, and what the likely costs should be. Their outlay could be commensurate with the recognized risk and the potential loss. I. Bear in mind that local convenience stores are often targeted for the contents of the booze cabinets or the meat chillers as much for the contents of the safe or the office equipment. But retailers who are tenants share a responsibility with their landlord. Ultimately, it's the landlord's building after all. So it's important to know who owns and must replace the air handling unit, the air conditioning condenser, the lead flashing, or the metal fire escape ladder. If the tenant's demise includes everything that might be pinchable, then it could fall to the tenant to repair, renew, replace, and this can be difficult and costly if the stolen item was badly hacked off, leaving damaged operating systems, damaged fixings and mountings damaged structure. The repair could be more than a quickly installed new condenser. It could require a builder, an electrician scaffold, permits the higher of an expensive cherry picker. If the stolen and damaged items are not specifically demise to the tenant, then does the lease provide that the landlord must repair, replace, and renew them? Is there an actual clause to that effect? There can be lots of gray areas. Meanwhile, the occupying tenant has to absorb the inconvenience, the disruption, the loss of facility during any delay until the damage is sorted out. In a typical retail park or managed shopping center, the structure of many common services are retained by the landlord and managed under the service charge. The service charge might include for the provision of CCTV alarms and physical security. But at what level, particularly is this only to patrol the high footfall public access areas and maybe the carpark, but maybe not to bother with the service areas and the delivery yards, which might be shared by several tenants in common, but not intended to be public access? I once saw an inspired and relatively low budget security deterrent. A small retail park had suffered several attempted burglaries via the service yard. The landlord's security team was challenged to do more, to be more evident, to make a difference. But at the same time, it's reasonable that they shouldn't put themselves in harm's way, which makes direct confrontation a bit risky. So one night a gang turned up, they circled the car park and then parked their van near the delivery yard gates. They forced entry into the yard and tried to gain entry to a shop. The security team made a big show of arriving lots of noise and lights, so the gangs scarpered hurrying back to their van. But while the gang had been busy, so had security, they'd clamped the van, so the gang abandoned the vehicle and ran off. The police were able to trace them from the vehicle and successfully prosecuted inspired security. I thought I. Do the tenants know whether the nighttime cover is a single individual in a small van who does a slow donut in the center of the car park at midnight and then isn't seen again? Is the cost of security commensurate with the benefits? Does everyone pay fairly and get a fair benefit? Does a bigger space user contribute more due to the square footage of their unit, but see less of the security team who hang out near the cafe? I. Is one neighboring retailer urging the landlord for lower spend on service charge, which would drive down the security while others are complaining that the level isn't high enough and maybe seeking the landlord should cut marketing costs. Instead. For many retailers trying to manage their own business, it's academic whether or not the responsibility falls to the landlord. For security and repairs, et cetera. The perceived risk, the actual losses, the impact on staff morale and on trading profits is all just too high to delegate to a third party. The retailer needs to take control, but what can they do without landlord approval and participation? How much does the tenant stepping up? Just allow the landlord to step back. Tenant retailers can consider watermarking their valuable equipment, therefore, theoretically making it harder to sell on, and at least complying with some insurers requirements and maybe some police guidance they could consider installing. CCTV and external floodlights intended to deter delinquents creeping around after dusk. But does their lease allow them to mount these on the external cladding of the shop unit or on the fencing columns or on the walls of the service yard? If the lease doesn't give these privilege, would the landlord grant them as an outta lease concession at no cost, or would they be concerned with public liability risks and the aesthetics of the building and compromised warranties for the cladding, et cetera? The same goes for reinforced protection around valuable kit steel bars, cages, heavy duty fencing, and anti ram bull arts. Should a landlord provide this as standard, should they allow a tenant to install it? Should they object for whatever reason? And does it make any difference to the nocturnal visitor with an angle grinder or as thieves are more brazen these days? The daytime visitors who turn up mob handed and help themselves in plain sight. Many years ago in the retail hearts of an upmarket market town in rural Cheshire, a devious gang committed an audacious daylight robbery. The bare face cheek of it tricked all passes by including me. This gang turned up mid-morning with a flatbed lurry, and quickly set up a striped tent. Some traffic cones even put some seats out, like highway workmen often do at the start of a lengthy job. Then they carefully set about lifting a long run of yorkstone paving slabs that had formed the pavement of this high street location for hundreds of years. These beautiful northern stone slabs are rich in texture and color and proportion. They stack the slabs neatly on the back of a truck and carried on digging a few holes in the exposed dirt. One of them working while two others watched all the typical trademarks of genuine workers. They even stopped to make a brew. And then around midday, they hopped in the lurry, leaving the tent and tools as an indicator that they'd be back after lunch, except of course they didn't return. And the distraction of the tent, the cones, the clutter meant nobody had actually noticed the may call registration of the vehicle just audacious. we often think about security as primarily about managing against the crime of theft and of boosting personal and staff safety. But it's also about antisocial behavior that raises risk for the tenant occupiers and their customers. This includes the impact of events like car meets, organized on social media, filling a retail parks car park with powerful cars, and very competitive. But Ill experienced drivers. Where is security when this happens? What can they achieve, especially when not supported by the police? A recent example in Peterborough became high profile due to the police actually getting involved in the preceding 18 months. There were 32 complaints. So the police issued A-P-S-P-O-A public space protection order to deter unauthorized car meets. Now, the police can issue a thousand pound fine to anyone who breaches the PSPO, but of course the proof will be in the pudding. Antisocial crime includes petty crime from dumpster divers, whether genuinely looking for something to eat or looking for discarded valuables or confidential data. It includes party crime where shops, car parks, or good yards are broken into. Not for burglary, but for a sheltered space to sell or do drugs. There is common evidence of canisters, needles, condoms, even human waste, and this all needs clearing up in the morning. At substantial risk to those staff members who have to do it with some of that detritus, then needing specialist disposal at additional cost to the tenant. So in broad terms, security is a necessary expense to support owners and occupies against the ill-intentioned few. It costs money, whether paid directly or via the service charge. It needs careful control to avoid security teams acting like vigilantes, but also to protect them from abuse by others. It needs to be there when you need it and present even when you don't. As a deterrent, of course, the deterrent just nudges the low life to go bother somebody else somewhere else. It kicks the can down the road. It doesn't fix it. That overall solution would be the responsibility of the police. Security issues at local level, like theft, damage, and criminal behavior, all have an impact on staff on a personal basis. Shifts are often organized, so the most vulnerable colleagues are heading home before dark. But is it fair that everyone else faces a risk? Colleagues often park their cars in the delivery yard, not the carpark to avoid vandalism, but this impacts deliveries. It irritates the neighbors. It causes ill feeling. And the cost consequences of security issues hit the bottom line. Costs of extra security patrols have monitored CCTV with its associated GDPR challenges, especially if it uses facial recognition of extra fencing and of lockable containers of repairs due to damage during theft, and in case somebody shouts. But it's all covered by the insurance. We should recognize that insurers increase the premium cost for high risk environments, sometimes even declining to provide cover at all. Often loading the policy with substantial excess thresholds so it becomes quicker and cheaper for the tenant to just pay for the repair rather than claim on the insurance. There are no two ways about it. All the aspects that require security are a cost of doing business. They're a drain on profit and all with no guarantee of delivering the result of preventing the crime. Thank you for listening to that Retail Property guy. I hope you enjoyed today's discussion and found it both entertaining and insightful. Be sure to like, share and subscribe so you can never miss an episode. For more information, visit that retail property guy.com. Thanks again for tuning in.