Gatekeeper Systems determines to put brakes on trolley push-out crime

Gatekeeper Systems recently commissioned an independent academic study that has now put the brakes on prevailing myths surrounding push-out crime and has also introduced the Purchek trolley wheel-locking technology which not only stops thieves in their tracks, but also reduces incidents of violent confrontation with security staff or store colleagues.

The White Paper evaluation ‘Controlling Trolley Push-Out Thefts’ conducted by Emeritus Professor Adrian Beck investigates the efficacy of the Purchek trolley wheel-locking technology across parts of the 2,000-store estates of two of the UK’s largest supermarkets who currently boast combined annual sales of £50 billion.

The 52-page study, which uses data collected before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, examines 239 store installations of the new technology and charts a detailed analysis of over 900 recorded incidents of trolley push-outs covering three 15-week periods.

Widespread assumptions

Prior to the study, there were widespread assumptions about the profile of offenders, the value of goods stolen and resulting levels of confrontation and conflict. Unconscious bias factors may need to be re-evaluated in light of the study’s findings. 

In fact, the study finds that an elevated risk supermarket with annual sales of approximately £40 million is likely to experience at least 140 trolley push-out incidents per year. That’s almost three per week costing in the region of £31,500 on an annual basis (ie the equivalent to approximately 4% of all unknown stock loss).

The findings also suggest that the average cost of a trolley push-out incident is £224, although some incidents were valued at more than £2,000.

The report highlights that incidents costing £200 or more account for one-quarter of all recorded incidents (26%, in fact), but represent nearly two-thirds of all the value (at 64%). Of those people stopped, 21% went on to pay for the products they were trying to steal. In terms of those perpetrators, most acted alone, with just 10% of cases involving more than one offender. 

The latter were far more likely to try and steal higher value quantities of stock – more than double the amount attempted by single offenders, in fact.

Engagement with law enforcement

Incidents of trolley push-outs rarely lead to the involvement of the police. Just 3% of recorded incidents involved engaging with law enforcement.

Furthermore, there was little evidence that trolley push-out interventions triggered violence and/or verbal abuse. In fact, just 3% of recorded incidents involved aggression, with no relationship found between the seriousness of the event – a factor measured by the value of the goods or the number of offenders involved and the likelihood of violence and verbal abuse occurring.

In addition, there was no evidence that trolley push-out offenders were typically known to security staff. Just 1% of incidents mentioned that the perpetrator was a known previous offender. 

The data clearly shows that a very large proportion of offenders have been operating below the ‘security radar’ of most retail stores. When a trolley push-offender was stopped, 18% offered a ‘reason’ for why they had no proof of purchase. The most common excuse was that a relative had the receipt, followed by a direct admission that they were trying to steal, then that they had forgotten to pay, or that they were on the way to their vehicle to collect their wallet/cash to pay for the goods in the trolley. 

Interestingly, those who offered a reason were much more likely to go on and pay for the products they were attempting to steal.

Higher value goods

Offenders discovered to be employing techniques to defeat other forms of retail security – by using foil-lined bags, de-tagging products and distraction strategies, etc – were more likely to be attempting to steal significantly higher value goods. More than double the average, in fact.

The findings into the impact of trolley push-out intervention show a marked decline in the number of incidents and weekly value of losses associated with the crime after Purchek’s solution had been installed for three weeks. 

Professor Beck said that this ‘golden period’ of deterrence would seem to have a profound effect upon the regular offenders, but for this to be achieved, the research finds that it was critical that store staff were made available to respond to the alerts.

The number and value of losses declined by on average 49% and 47% respectively after the initial period of use of the Intervention.

Return on investment model

A return on investment model revealed that, for a grocery store with annual sales in the region of £40 million and an average installation cost of £30,000, the discounted payback period for use of the intervention was just over a year, generating a net present value of £46,614 and an internal rate of return of 70%.

The research highlights the value of alarm activation visibility provided by the intervention that offers security staff a more unambiguous method of identifying which customer had triggered the exit alarm.

The report’s Executive Summary concludes: “Overall, for those retailers who offer their customers the use of a trolley, the threat of push-out thefts is both real and significant. The evidence presented in this report suggests that the use of the Purchek wheel locking technology has a very positive impact on this type of crime, offering an attractive return on investment proposition for retailers investing in this system.”