Confusing question

[dickie davies]

I totally agree with your last paragraph.
It's the rest I don't. If he took the money out of the till walked 20 yards and was nicked he could simply say he wanted to show how weak the store security was. He had no intention of keeping the money. In fact in law, he doesn't have to say anything at all. It is upto the police and the CPS to prove beyond all reasonable doubt he intended to keep the money so, if he is nicked whilst still near the till, you cannot prove theft.

(In my opinion)

Are you Rui Pinto's legal council?

 

[jonmcity]

Depends on the cost of goods

 

[KS55]

No that's wrong mate.

"How much (£££) has the store lost" (asks the OP)

They have lost £30 plus the stock which didn't cost them £70, they bought it at wholesale price so maybe 40 or £50 ish

Until you know what the shop paid for the stock you can't say exactly what they lost.

It was only worth £70 once they'd sold it (which they hadn't)

Look at the till balance; they are £100 down. QED.

 

[Bill Walker]

Look at the till balance; they are £100 down. QED.

No he gave them 70 back.

 

[Coatigan]

No he gave them 70 back.

He did no such thing. They are still £100 down. The rest is a distraction, to overthink it.

 

[JOGAMIGMOG]

At the end of the day the shop does a till balance. They started off with a grand in the till and sold £700 of stuff according to till roll. Therefore they should have £1700 in the till. However upon checking they only have £1600 so they’re down £100.
In this example say they started off with only £100 in the till and sold £70 of stuff they should have £170 at the end of the day. However, upon counting they only ended up with £70 and so they are down £100.
£100 is my final answer

 

[hammocity]

The Police won’t get involved if goods are not worth £200 +, so if you up the factor x 3 the tea Leaf would probably lose the lot and the Store would get its stock and money back (providing they catch the thief of course)

In the original scenario retail used to work on a margin (not mark up) of around 10% to 20% so not £70 worth of goods.

 

[Coatigan]

The Police won’t get involved if goods are not worth £200 +, so if you up the factor x 3 the tea Leaf would probably lose the lot and the Store would get its stock and money back (providing they catch the thief of course)

In the original scenario retail used to work on a margin (not mark up) of around 10% to 20% so not £70 worth of goods.

He didn't steal £70 worth of goods. The goods are all accounted for, in regular sales. The cash is not. They are £100 down, regardless of how much or little they sell in goods or at how big a margin.

 

[Coatigan]

'poll added' in the thread title change incoming.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

He did no such thing. They are still £100 down. The rest is a distraction, to overthink it.

The till is £100 down. The business is £30+ the trade cost of the items bought for £70. That is less than £100.