Shoplifting cases going unsolved rise by a fifth in a year
Nearly 270,000 shoplifting cases were closed without a suspect being identified in England and Wales in the year to September 2024, a 19 per cent rise on the previous year.
They accounted for 55 per cent of all shoplifting cases recorded in the year ending September 2024.
On average, 738 shoplifting cases went unsolved every single day in 2024.
Just 88,165 shoplifting offences last year resulted in a charge or summons, accounting for 18 per cent of all cases, according to the analysis of Home Office data by the Liberal Democrats.
Shoplifting has hit a record high with stores across the country reporting two thefts a minute to police.
Overall offences in the year to June 2024 hit nearly 470,000, up 29 per cent on the previous year, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).
Lisa Smart, the Lib Dem home affairs spokesman, said: 'For too long, shopkeepers have been left vulnerable while criminal gangs are allowed to operate with virtual impunity.
'Our high streets and communities deserve better than this. If the Government wants to deliver safer streets, getting a grip on the unsolved shoplifting epidemic must be a priority.
'The Liberal Democrats are urging the Government to keep their promise by restoring proper community policing – with more bobbies on the beat focused on stopping and solving crime.'
The Met had the worst outcomes, with 75 per cent of shoplifting cases going unsolved, adding up to 59,133 cases.
Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire also fared poorly, with both police forces seeing 66 per cent of shoplifting cases go unsolved.
The ONS figures show that there are more than 9,000 shoplifting offences a week, or 1,290 a day, and more than two a minute based on average UK store opening times of 10 hours a day.
Crisis adds 6p a transaction
The figures are the highest since records began in March 2003, with retailers warning the crisis adds at least 6p to every store transaction by customers.
The British Retail Consortium calculates losses at £1.8 billion stolen each year, with a further £700 million spent on extra security.
The police-recorded figures are a fraction of the total amount stolen as most shops only report to police when they catch an offender in the act or have CCTV or other evidence.
Labour has pledged to introduce laws that require police to investigate even if the goods are worth under £200.
A Policing and Crime Bill, to be unveiled next week,will reverse a so-called 'shoplifter's' charter' introduced in 2014, by which theft of goods under £200 is considered 'low value'.
The Bill will also introduce a standalone offence of assaulting a shop worker which could carry a maximum sentence of six months to two years.
Under an agreement in October 2024 between the Government and police, officers attend shoplifting cases if there is violence against a store worker, a suspected thief is detained or officers are needed to secure evidence. Police say it is 'not realistic' for officers to respond to every shoplifting report.
The offences helped push overall police-recorded theft up by three per cent to 1.8 million. There was also a significant 20 per cent jump in theft from the person offences, which include pickpocketing and opportunistic stealing of bags or equipment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Asylum hotel group awarded £2.5billion taxpayer deal faces claims secret Deliveroo and Uber Eats takeaway kitchen was being run from inside one of its chain
A 'secret' takeaway kitchen running from inside a taxpayer-funded asylum hotel has been shut down after the operation was exposed online. The Home Office has launched a major investigation into Cedar Court Hotel in Wakefield, West Yorkshire, after the pop-up kitchen was revealed. The site, which houses more than 300 migrants, was also operating as a collection point for Uber Eats and Deliveroo. However, Government officials last night branded the fast-food operation as 'wholly unacceptable' amid claims it could be in breach of the hotel's lucrative asylum contract, worth millions. 'Immediate action has been taken to ensure the service is no longer operating at the site and we are in close contact with the provider,' a Home Office spokesman said. The operation was exposed in a video on YouTube. The clip, posted by TH101UK - a group of activists who claim to 'inspect' hotels for migrants, shows two men walking into Cedar Court's grounds to investigate its use as a business. Footage showed a sign on the door of the premises, which is closed to the public, which stated: 'Uber Eats, Deliveroo Collection Point'. The men were later removed from the site by security officials. The four-star retreat is run by EC4 Hotel Ltd, which has three other premises and is owned by Monaco-based Nadja Kovic Nassar, 66. The Home Office spends £5million a day on contracts with Clearsprings, Mears Group and Serco to provide asylum accommodation. Mears Group now oversees the running of the hotel as part of its nationwide asylum seeker deal with the government - which will see a staggering £2.5billion of taxpayers' cash being spent over ten years, from 2019 to 2029. A probe is now underway to see if EC4 breached the terms of its contract with the government by sub-letting its kitchen to fast food businesses Big Boi Burgers and Absurd Stacks. The two companies - which have since been removed from both Uber Eats and Deliveroo pending an enquiry - have allegedly been running a 'dark kitchen' from the hotel. So-called dark kitchens operate as takeaway-only businesses and don't run a sit-down meal service like traditional restaurants. In recent years, they have become increasingly popular with the rise of Deliveroo and Uber Eats. Big Boi Burgers and Absurd Stacks were given licences to operate by Wakefield Council. However, the authority has now launched its own probe amid the row, YorkshireLive reports. It was suspected migrants based in the hotel may have been illegally operating as delivery drivers for the fast-food takeaway apps. However, the Home Office said in a statement residents living in the hotel 'were not involved' in running the kitchen. Pictured are security guards as they escorted the two YouTubers out of the hotel Speaking of the kitchen, a spokesman said: 'This activity is wholly unacceptable,' adding: 'We take all allegations of misuse of asylum accommodation and the safety of residents extremely seriously. We will now be investigating.' In 2023 the Home Office unveiled plans to increase the number of migrants accommodated at the hotel from 148 to 306. News of the kitchen row at Cedar Court has left local residents outraged. 'I was shocked to see the Deliveroo sign at the back but not surprised,' one neighbour told the Sun, adding migrants were being dumped in 'small rural' communities 'without a care' for the people already living there. In May, a report into the three companies sharing the £2.5billion migrant hotel deal - Clearsprings, Mears and Serco - found they had made a combined profit of £383million since 2019 after expected cost to run asylum accommodation tripled. In response to the takeaway kitchen at the migrant hotel, a Deliveroo spokesman said: 'Virtual brands like Absurd Stacks are fully registered food businesses, offering a delivery-only restaurant service. 'After being made aware of the potential relationship between the hotel group running the virtual brand and the Home Office, we suspended them from our platform while we investigate further.' An Uber Eats spokesman added: 'We have suspended this restaurant's access to our platform and are fully investigating.' A spokeswoman for Wakefield Council added: 'The Home Office is responsible for asylum accommodation and the arrangements with providers. 'Whilst EC4 Hotels Ltd were compliant with all the processes the council has to follow, we do share the Home Office's concerns. 'We will be seeking an urgent meeting to discuss their contractual arrangements with accommodation providers.'
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Jamaican murderer wins bid for asylum after claiming he can't go home due to threats from notorious gang who killed his family
A Jamaican murderer has been granted asylum in the UK after claiming that if he returned home he would be targeted by a notorious gang who killed his family. The killer won the human rights appeal after explaining his 'fear' of One Order - one of Jamaica's most powerful gangs. One Order, which was established over 20 years ago, are said to be affiliated with the Jamaica Labour party and are accused of killings, extortion, and drug dealing. The unnamed Jamaican migrant, who has been in the UK since 1996, claimed that the crime syndicate shot his brothers and attacked their family home. Meanwhile, his sister had to be put into Witness Protection as a safety precaution. Due to the circumstances, the migrant won an appeal at the Upper Tribunal which ruled that he could be at risk from the One Order gang if he were to return. When the Home Office initially tried to deport him, he lost an appeal against their decision at the First-tier Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber. But the Upper Tribunal in Cardiff found that the First-tier Tribunal 'overlooked' key concerns about potential dangers for him in Jamaica and did not properly assess his 'credibility'. It was directed that his case must be heard again. A judgement said he committed murder but did not specify details, other than that he has been through 'offender management' during his rehabilitation and now shows an 'admirable work ethic'. The Jamaican argued that the First-tier Tribunal the judge not take properly consider his concerns about the One Order gang. In Jamaica, the One Order gang is based in the city of Spanish Town, which is in an area of Jamaica that is a hotbed for criminal activity. Earlier this year, the One Order's kingpin Othneil 'Thickman' Lobban was gunned down and killed by police, sparking a violent backlash that closed schools and businesses. Outlining his arguments, the judgement said: '[The Jamaican said] the judge had failed to take into account that the key facts were not disputed by the Home Office. 'The judge was wrong to find [him] vague in naming the One Order Gang as the source of risk. 'The judge misunderstood which family members had been murdered and when. 'The judge failed to take into account the steps taken by and on behalf of the [him] to confirm that [his] sister was in the Witness Protection Programme.' Upper Tribunal Judge Sean O'Brien said the First-tier Tribunal was mistaken in its ruling. Judge O'Brien said: 'The [First-tier Tribunal] judge had overlooked the fact that the core elements of the [Jamaican's] account were not challenged by [the Home Office], had misunderstood [his] evidence about [his] family he claimed had been murdered because of gang retribution and when, and had given no apparent consideration to the attempts made to verify that [his] sister remained in Witness Protection. 'I agree therefore that the judge's findings on the credibility of the [Jamaican's] account of events in Jamaica involved the making of an error of law.' Judge O'Brien cast doubt over elements of the migrant's claims and said because he has been away for so long he may avoid being targeted. But he said because of the previous 'erroneous' and 'unsustainable' ruling, a fresh hearing must be held. 'All in all, I cannot be satisfied that the judge would necessarily have found that the [Jamaican] would not be at risk from the One Order Gang had she taken a permissible approach to credibility', Judge O'Brien added.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Murderer cannot be deported because rival gang would kill him
A Jamaican murderer has avoided deportation after claiming he will be targeted by a notorious gang if returned home. The killer won a human rights appeal at an immigration court after telling of his 'fear' of the powerful One Order gang on the Caribbean island. The crime syndicate is said to be affiliated with the Jamaica Labour party and is accused of killings, extortion and drug dealing. The Jamaican man claimed his family members have been killed by the One Order and his sister had to be put into a witness protection programme. The unnamed migrant – who has been in the UK since 1996 and committed murder – has mounted a legal fight for protection in Britain. He argued that Britain must grant him asylum and not deport him back to Jamaica on human rights grounds because he will be 'targeted' by the One Order. The Home Office tried to deport him and he lost an initial appeal against their decision at a first tier immigration tribunal.. But, he has now won an appeal at the Upper Tribunal which ruled he could be at risk from the gang if returned. The Upper Tribunal found the lower court 'overlooked' key concerns about potential dangers for him in Jamaica and did not properly assess his 'credibility'. It ruled his case must be heard again. The case is the latest revealed by The Telegraph where foreign criminals have used article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to claim they would face persecution if deported. Ministers are planning to rewrite rules to make it harder to allow to back appeals against removal. 'He now shows admirable work ethic' The One Order gang is said to be responsible for hundreds of killings over its rivalries with other gangs. One of its leaders Othneil 'Thickman' Lobban was this year gunned down and killed by police, sparking a violent backlash that closed schools and businesses. The Upper Tribunal, sitting in Cardiff, was told that the unnamed Jamaican migrant seeking asylum 'fears being targeted in Jamaica by the One Order Gang' as 'his family have been targeted there'. He has been in the UK since 1996, mostly without leave to remain. A judgment said he committed murder but did not specify details, other than that he has been through 'offender management' during his rehabilitation and now shows an 'admirable work ethic'. The Jamaican argued that the first tier tribunal judge had not properly considered key facts about his concerns about the One Order gang, which the Home Office had not disputed. His sister was in a witness protection programme while his brothers had been shot in Jamaica and the family home was attacked. Upper Tribunal Judge Sean O'Brien said the First-tier Tribunal was mistaken in its ruling. Judge O'Brien said: 'The [First-tier Tribunal] judge had overlooked the fact that the core elements of the [Jamaican's] account were not challenged by [the Home Office], had misunderstood [his] evidence about [his] family he claimed had been murdered because of gang retribution and when, and had given no apparent consideration to the attempts made to verify that [his] sister remained in Witness Protection. 'I agree therefore that the judge's findings on the credibility of the [Jamaican's] account of events in Jamaica involved the making of an error of law.' Judge O'Brien cast doubt over elements of the migrant's claims and said because he has been away for so long he may avoid being targeted. But he said because of the previous 'erroneous' and 'unsustainable' ruling, a fresh hearing must be held. 'All in all, I cannot be satisfied that the judge would necessarily have found that the [Jamaican] would not be at risk from the One Order Gang had she taken a permissible approach to credibility', the judge added.
