Stricter Shoplifting Laws May Increase Court Backlogs and Drain Resources
The Crime and Policing Bill aims to abolish the £200 threshold for shop theft offences, potentially leading to more cases being tried in Crown Courts.
Critics have warned that the government’s plan to toughen shoplifting laws could exacerbate court backlogs and divert resources from more serious cases.
Under the proposed Crime and Policing Bill, all shoplifting offences, even those involving goods worth less than £200, would be categorized as either-way offences, allowing them to be tried in either magistrates’ courts or Crown Court.
While ministers argue that this change is necessary to address increasing retail crime, critics argue that it would strain the justice system.
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp, speaking in Parliament on Monday, expressed concerns that reclassifying shoplifting as an either-way offence could lead to longer delays if more defendants opt for a jury trial in Crown Court.
He mentioned, “Instead of those cases being heard in the magistrates’ court within six to eight weeks, there could be a delay of up to one and a half years. I am sure that is not the government’s intention, but that is what could happen if the change is made.”
Legal experts highlight that the Crown Court system is already strained due to COVID-19-related backlogs and staff shortages. The backlog in the year ending September 2024 reached a record high of 73,000 cases, compared to the pre-lockdown low of 33,290 cases in March 2019.
Stuart Nolan, chair of the Criminal Law Committee at The Law Society, noted that the additional burden of sending more shoplifting cases to Crown Court would be costly and time-consuming.
In England and Wales, shoplifters who steal goods valued under £200 currently face a maximum sentence of six months and can plead guilty by post.
Nolan raised concerns that defendants opting for Crown Court trials could face harsher sentences compared to magistrates’ court.
He pointed out, “If you stole something small, like a pair of shoes, that case would normally be swiftly dealt with in a magistrates’ court. However, opting for a jury trial in Crown Court could prolong the resolution to months or longer.”
Additionally, in a Crown Court, the maximum punishment for theft, including shoplifting, is seven years of imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.
Nolan questioned the effectiveness of harsher sentences in deterring shoplifting, given that many offenders engage in such crimes due to poverty or drug addiction rather than considering legal consequences.
Extra Numbers and Costs
Philp argued that lowering the £200 threshold could overload “valuable and scarce Crown Court jury trial time” by diverting the system’s focus to handle more shoplifting trials over serious cases like rape and murder.
Nolan added that Crown Court trials necessitate “premium” resources, making it challenging to see how additional cases wouldn’t strain the justice system.
According to government estimates, altering the shoplifting threshold could result in an increase of 2,100 cases in Crown Court, with figures ranging from 200 to 5,400.
The projected additional court costs are estimated to range between £340,000 and £8.46 million, with a central estimate of £3.3 million.
Shoplifting Epidemic
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper defended the bill, criticizing the £200 threshold introduced in 2014 and vowing to eliminate this “damaging” rule.
She mentioned, “That kind of crime spreads, creating a sense of lawlessness and significant frustration among the law-abiding majority who witness criminals getting away with it, undermining respect for the law.”
The move to adjust the £200 threshold comes amidst a record surge in shoplifting offenses since 2003, rising by 23 percent in the year ending September 2024.
Data from the British Retail Consortium (BRC) revealed that nearly a quarter of the population has witnessed shoplifting incidents in the past year. Another report by the Association of Convenience Stores (ACS) indicated 6.2 million shop theft incidents last year.
The ACS report estimated the total cost of crime to convenience stores at £316 million, with individual shops losing an average of £6,000 annually.
Both the ACS and BRC welcomed the proposed bill and the removal of the £200 shoplifting threshold.
BRC Chief Executive Helen Dickinson expressed, “We eagerly anticipate seeing essential legislation to protect retail workers being implemented later this year.”
Government’s Own Assessment
The government relies on court data and compensation payments, given the absence of precise figures on shoplifting cases involving goods valued at £200 or less. It estimates that nearly 88 percent of shoplifting cases involve theft of low-value items.
Over the past three years, 96 percent of shoplifting convictions occurred in magistrates’ courts, suggesting that most cases involved low-value theft.
Philp pointed out the government’s impact assessment, stating, “If this system was ineffective, why did 90 percent of charges relate to goods under £200?”
He refuted claims that the bill would lead to a significant change in how shoplifting cases are handled, citing the government’s impact assessment that projects no change in the number of charges due to this alteration.
Philp concluded, “The home secretary points to this matter as some kind of silver bullet, but I am afraid to say that her own impact assessment says something very different indeed.”
