The Voice - Consumer's Voice

Must I pay the school?

I need advice on an issue concerning my contract with a school that my daughter used to attend in Phikwe. I was transferred from Phikwe as my employer was closing our office there and I had a contract a school which had a clause on serving notice if a student is transferred from their school.

I notified the principal verbally in March 2017 as soon as I was notified of the office closure, that I will be transferring my daughter to Gaborone as soon as I got a date for the indefinite closure. I was advised to write a letter by the school head, and I delayed, ultimately my moving date came and I failed to make time to go to the school. The school head called me and informed that I have to pay a full term notice to them. I tried to talk to her and make her understand that my relocation was not an intentional move by me, it was a decision taken by my employer and I had no control over it. She was adamant about this. I however moved to Gaborone without making a payment to the school.

In May the school head called me and threatened that I write a commitment letter to make payments and I did but failed to commit as per the letter. I have since been summoned to court in Phikwe to answer for a debt of the full term fees to the school. I need advice or a legal person you can refer me to as I feel I am being treated unfairly.

Firstly, I should state that I’m not an attorney so obviously I can’t offer legal advice. However, simply as a layperson I suspect you have no excuse. Firstly, you signed a contract with the school which explained what would happen if you withdraw your child. The contract includes a clause which says that you “understood that a full term written notice is required when withdrawing a child at any level from the school and that failure to do this will place me liable for an entire terms notice”. You admit that you didn’t do this.

Secondly you later signed a commitment letter saying that you would pay this fee and again you failed to do this. The school was within its rights then to go to court to get an order against you to pay the debt you’ve twice admitted in writing you owe but have still failed to pay.

I suggest that you contact the school and come to some agreement about paying the debt you owe them. However, given that you’ve twice failed to abide by such an agreement, don’t expect them to be very flexible!

Can they strip-search or punish me?

Sir does a security guard have the right to search me on suspicion of theft in a shop or do they have the right to order me to undress. Does the shop owner have permission to punish me even if they have caught me with a stolen item? 

No, they certainly do NOT have the right to search you. And they certainly don’t have the right to make you undress or to “punish” you, no matter what the situation. Any store or guard who does that has abused you and has grossly overstepped their powers.

The only right that a store has, and this includes security guards, is the same right that any private person has, and that’s to arrest someone that they believe has, or might have committed, a serious crime. That includes theft. But that’s all they can do. They can’t search you or your belongings regardless of the circumstances. Only a police officer can do that. All a store or an individual can do is detain you until the police arrive.

In a case a few years ago, a brave woman who had been forced to submit to a search of her bags as she was leaving a store took the security company who had abused her to court and won her case. She was then awarded P60,000 in compensation from the security company. The judge explained that she deserved this, ”considering the humiliation embarrassment and impairment of her dignity as an honest member of society”.

It actually doesn’t matter whether you’re “an honest member of society” or a criminal, either way you have rights and those rights cannot be abused.

Search or molest?

Yet again we get THAT question. Can security guards insist on searching you when you enter or leave a store?

A member of our Facebook group recently asked again. I’ve removed the name of the store for now.

“On Saturday I went to store XXX in Francistown. There is a writing by the door which you will not see when not careful which reads something like "we have the right to search any bag or luggage that gets in or out of these store". You will not see this writing if you are not careful as it is small. Most people were shown that writing when they were trying to resist being searched. When I asked about it they said their search was legal, and they even said the writing was known by the authorities and was approved. They even said the consumer affairs people knew about it and there is nothing they could do. How true is it? Anyway I do not think I will ever go back there since I really, really hate it when someone goes through my handbag as I feel its just too personal. Anyway I just want to know if true the small writings make it legal for them to search us. Just curious. Thank you in advance.”

We get this question every couple of months, usually after some unfortunate person has been mistreated by a security guard. They ask what powers security guard have. Can they, for instance, ask to search our bags as we enter or leave the store they’re guarding? Can they insist on doing so? Can they detain us if we don’t want to let them search us? What exactly can they do?

Our advice has always been simple. Security guards aren’t police officers, they’re just normal civilians like the rest of us. They don’t have any powers that we don’t have.

On the other hand, stores are private property, just like our homes. You have the right to prevent me from entering your house as well as from entering your store if you don’t want me there. In exactly the same way the owner of a store can refuse you entry unless you play according to his or her rules, so long as they’re legal ones. A store is entitled to refuse you admission unless you volunteer to leave your bags at the counter or volunteer to be searched. But how many stores are really prepared to do that? How many are really ready to turn away people with the money they so desperately want?

But why do security guards behave this way? Is it because they’ve been told they can by their managers?

In May 2011 a woman went shopping in Pick N Pay at Riverwalk with her three daughters and some of their friends. As they were leaving the store a security guard from Scorpion Security blocked her way and demanded to search through her handbag. Rather than asking nicely he just grabbed the bag from her in a manner she described as “violent and physical”, searched through it and, finding nothing, handed it back to her. She claims that she felt “belittled and humiliated” by his treatment of her in front of her children and their friends but being a strong character she decided not to take this lying down. Her later complaint to the security company about the way their guard had treated her was met with a promise of an apology but this never came.

So she dragged Scorpion Security to court.

And she won.

When the case was heard in the High Court in Francistown the Managing Director of Scorpion Security gave evidence in defence and told the judge that his “security guards could search. That they had the authority to do similar to that of Police Officers.”

Wrong!

In his judgment the judge found that “indeed the Defendants searched the Plantiff without her consent and it was unlawful. […] The Plaintiff has proved her case on a balance of probabilities and I accordingly grant judgment in her favour.”

He went on to say that she had suffered “humiliation embarrassment and impairment of her dignity as an honest member of society” and that she deserved compensation for that. He forced the security company to pay her P60,000 in compensation.

Maybe you think this case was a very rare event? Unfortunately not. Last year we did a large-scale survey of security guard behaviour. 82% of the people we questioned said that they had, on at least one occasion, been stopped by a security guard as they left a store and almost 90% of them had been asked to show their belongings to the guard to be searched. 83% of people had indeed allowed the guard to do so.

62% of the people who’d had their belongings searched said they were “offended or upset” by the experience and I can imagine why.

Then we went further. How many people had been searched themselves? Not just their packages, but their bodies?

Only one in six people had been stopped by a security guard who then wanted to search their person and 70% of these people had felt obliged to permit the search. Almost all of them said they had been offended or upset by the experience.

And the worst thing? In over half of these situations it was a male security guard searching a woman.

This suggests that one in seventeen adults in Botswana is a woman who has been molested by a male security guard.

The situation is out of control and we do not deserve to be treated this way. I urge you never to shop in any store that allows its guards to mistreat and molest you.

Next time a guard tries to search you or your belongings I suggest you ask them if their MD can afford P60,000 in damages. And to be seen as an employer of molesting perverts.

Your rights

By now most of you will know at least some of your consumer rights. You’ll know that goods and services must be “of merchantable quality”, meaning that they are “fit for the purposes for which commodities of that kind are usually purchased”. You’ll know that suppliers must deliver services “with reasonable care and skill”. You’ll know that second-hand, deteriorated or reconditioned goods can’t be sold as new. You’ll know about all of these things and more.

But what about other rights, ones that aren’t quite as clear-cut?

Someone asked in our Facebook group recently “Is it allowed for consumers to be searched by shops? Can someone explain that to me coz the security said its written at the door that they will search bags, parcels when one leaves the shop”.

The answer is simple. Yes, of course stores can search you. They can search your bags. They can take your money and keep it for themselves. They can drive your car. They can move into your house and eat your food. They can even have sex with your partner.

If you permit them to. And if your partner likes the look of them.

But if you don’t want them to, they have absolutely no right to search you or do any of those other things. Only a police officer can search you or your belongings against your will. That’s what the law says.

In May 2011 a woman went shopping in Pick N Pay at Riverwalk with her three daughters and some of their friends. As they were leaving the store a security guard from Scorpion Security blocked her way and grabbed the bag from her in a manner she described as “violent and physical”, searched through it and, finding nothing, handed it back to her. She claims that she felt “belittled and humiliated” by his treatment of her in front of her children and their friends but being a strong character she decided not to take this lying down. Instead she took Scorpion Security to court.

And she won.

When the case was heard in the High Court in Francistown the Managing Director of Scorpion Security gave evidence in defence of his guard’s actions. He explained that he saw their job as looking after their client’s goods but then went on to embarrass himself in front of the judge by having no idea what powers his guards had. In his ruling, the judge said that the MD “did not know circumstances when a legal search could be made.” Apparently he’d told the judge “that security guards could search. That they had the authority to do similar to that of Police Officers.”

Wrong!

In his judgment the judge said that: “I find that indeed the Defendants searched the Plantiff without her consent and it was unlawful. […] The Plaintiff has proved her case on a balance of probabilities and I accordingly grant judgment in her favour.”

It gets better. Considering that she had suffered “humiliation, embarrassment and impairment of her dignity as an honest member of society” the judge awarded her P60,000 in compensation.

That security guard’s actions cost Scorpion a lot of money.

So what about a sign on the wall that says the store can search you? Does that mean they can?

Well consider this. If there was a sign that said the store was entitled to shoot you in the head if they don’t like the look of you, would that be legal? Of course not. A sign doesn’t make laws, Parliament does and judges enforce them.

However, stores do have some rights. Like the right to throw you out. I’ve heard from a number of organizations recently who have asked what they can do with customers they no longer want. One contacted us asking whether she could cancel the booking made by customers who had failed to pay the full fee for the services she offered and had then abused her publicly on Facebook. I said that of course she could. They were behaving so badly that the relationship between both parties had collapsed irretrievably. Fire that customer!

We’ve heard many times from restaurant managers who’ve had customers who arrive, order and complain, demanding not to be charged for the food and drinks they ordered. The following week they do exactly the same thing. And again the next week. The first and second time the manager gave them the benefit of the doubt but eventually lost patience and asked us for advice. Ban them, we said. You’re better off without them and your other customers, the ones who aren’t abusing you, will thank you for it.

I also have huge respect for managers who stick up for their staff. The MD of a company told me recently that she was going to cancel all contracts with one particular customer who repeatedly verbally abused her staff. She valued the contentment of her staff more than she valued one abusive customer. I respect that greatly.

Another restaurant manager contacted us just a few weeks ago saying that a loud and drunken customer had abused his staff and demanded special treatment (and no doubt free drinks), claiming that he worked for a part of Government that could investigate his business. This restaurant manager was made of strong stuff. He called the local Police who advised him that he should ban the customer and he should call them if he made a fuss. They promised to take him away in handcuffs if he didn’t cooperate.

Customer service is a two-way street. Yes, the supplier owes perhaps a little extra to the customer but they are within their moral rights to demand that customers behave themselves properly.

The default position is clearly that customers should be treated with respect by the people serving them but that respect is finite and it can be withdrawn the moment the customer proves to be an ass.

First Issues on Store Security

If you missed the First Issues program on store security last week you can see it here.

Who is the real criminal?

Security guards are still operating illegally.

Last month we reported on a complaint that we received about the conduct of a security guard at a branch of Jet Stores in Gaborone.

She told us that she had visited the store but didn’t actually buy anything. As she left the store a security guard approached her demanding that she return to the store. The guard said that she believed the customer had stolen something and rather than undergo further embarrassment she did as she was told and went back to the store.

Once back inside the guard, another woman, insisted on taking her prisoner to a changing room and then insisted that she lift up her dress to prove that she hadn’t concealed anything under her clothing. The poor customer was then forced through the indignity of stripping to her underwear in front of this guard, finally proving that hadn’t stolen anything.

After this ordeal was over and the guard had accepted that there was no cause to detain her the victim decided to stand up for herself. She demanded to see the manager and complained about the way she had been treated. That’s when this already unpleasant situation became bizarre. The guard’s excuse to the manager for her behavior was to point to the victim and say “this is the one that stole shoes on Wednesday”. That’s when the victim got even angrier, having now twice been insulted and accused of being a criminal. Quite rightly she went straight to the nearest police station.

The police demanded to know the evidence for the guard’s claim that the victim was a previous criminal but under pressure the guard relented and apparently confessed that it wasn’t actually true, she’d made that bit up.

So we have a guard who accosts innocent people, strip searches them and then makes up lies to defame them and defend her actions. We know who the real criminal is here, don’t we?

The bad news is that this isn’t an isolated incident. I know this for two reasons. Firstly we’ve heard from a number of individuals who’ve had similar experiences and secondly we recently did a survey of the public to find out what had happened to them. We asked several hundred people to complete a simple questionnaire about their experiences with security guards.

82% of the people we questioned said that they had, on at least one occasion, been stopped by a security guard as they left a store and of them almost 90% had been asked to show their belongings to the guard to be searched. 83% of people had indeed allowed the guard to do so.

So how did people feel about this experience? Were they angry about being treated like a potential thief?

62% of the people who’d had their belongings searched said they were “offended or upset” by the experience and I can imagine why.

Then we went further. How many people had been searched themselves? Not just their packages, but their bodies?

Not surprisingly the figure was much lower than those who had their belongings searched. Only one in six people had been stopped by a security guard who then wanted to search their person. Unhappily 70% of these people had felt obliged to permit the search and nine out of ten of these people said they had been offended or upset by the experience.

It gets worse. In over half of these situations it was a male security guard searching a woman.

The law in Botswana regarding security guards is simple and this was confirmed in a case before the courts in 2013.

In May 2011 a woman visited Pick N Pay at Riverwalk with her children and their friends. As they left the store a security guard from Scorpion Security stopped her and demanded to search her handbag. Rather than asking nicely he just grabbed the bag from her in a manner she described as “violent and physical”, searched through it and, finding nothing, handed it back to her. She claims that she felt “belittled and humiliated” by his treatment of her in front of her children and their friends but being a strong character she decided not to take this lying down. She took Scorpion Security to court.

And she won.

When the case was heard in the High Court in Francistown in August 2013 the Managing Director of Scorpion Security gave evidence. He explained to the court the powers he believed his guards possessed. He told the judge “that security guards could search. That they had the authority to do similar to that of Police Officers.” In his ruling, the judge said that the MD “did not know circumstances when a legal search could be made.”

The judge went on to say that:

“the Defendants searched the Plantiff without her consent and it was unlawful. […] I accordingly grant judgment in her favour.”

It gets better. He continued:

“On the issue of damages, considering the humiliation embarrassment and impairment of her dignity as an honest member of society I have considered that P60,000 would be sufficient solatium for her dented image in society.”

So let’s make it clear, yet again. Security guards are just civilians in uniform. They do a difficult job that helps to protect us but that doesn’t mean they have special powers. All a security guard can do is detain you until the police arrive. Only a police officer can search you against your will.

There’s one final finding from our research that worries me. 72% of the people we questioned knew that security guards don’t have the legal right to search customers. However given this knowledge 68% of people have nevertheless allowed guards to search their bags and 11% have allowed them to search their bodies. Given that almost everybody felt offended by being searched there’s only one conclusion we can reach.

People allow guards to search them because they feel bullied into doing so.

Are we really going to accept this?

Guard yourself

Against security guards.

The behavior of some security guards is getting out of control. Not only are they exceeding their powers, they are assaulting and abusing people.

Last week we heard from a consumer who had visited a store but hadn’t actually bought anything. As she left the store a security guard approached her from behind demanding that she return to the store. The guard believed she had stolen something from the store. Rather than undergo further embarrassment she did as she was told.

Once back in the store the guard, another woman, insisted on taking her prisoner to a changing room and then insisted that she lift up her dress to prove that she hadn’t hidden anything under her clothing. The poor customer was then forced through the indignity of stripping to her underwear in front of this guard, finally proving that there was actually nothing hidden, nothing stolen.

After this ordeal was over and the guard had conceded that there was no cause to detain her the victim decided to stand up for herself. She demanded to see the manager to complain about the way she had been mistreated. That’s when this already unpleasant situation became bizarre. The guard’s excuse to the manager for her behavior was to point to the victim and say “this is the one that stole shoes on Wednesday”. That’s when the victim got even angrier. Quite rightly she went straight to the nearest police station. Not only had she been insulted and abused, she was now being accused of being a proven criminal.

To their credit the police demanded to know the evidence for the guard’s claim that the victim was a previous criminal. Under pressure from the officers in blue the guard relented. No, she said, that wasn’t actually true, she’d made that bit up.

So we have a guard who accosts innocent people, strip searches them and then makes up lies to defame them and defend her actions. We know who the real criminal is here, don’t we?

Despite being a strong woman with the courage to stand up to abuse she was still very upset. She told us “I am an honest member of society and this incident has really upset and unsettled me, my blood pressure is high and I am now taking medication.” I think she’s the victim of a crime.

The first ever case we had of abuse by a guard was many years ago when a guy called us to report his 17-year old daughter’s experience. She had also been accused of stealing from a store, this time a pair of shoes that the guard suggested she had hidden down her jeans. Given that the daughter was very slim and was apparently wearing skin-tight clothing this seemed unbelievable. Nevertheless the male security guard had insisted she strip off her clothing in front of him.

You can imagine how her father felt and what he was tempted to do. Luckily reason prevailed and he was able to express his understandable rage to us and then to the store. To their credit the store was as appalled as everyone else and they apologized for the disgraceful conduct of their lecherous, perverted, sex-abuser guard.

However the tide is beginning to turn.

In May 2011 a woman went shopping in Pick N Pay at Riverwalk with her three daughters and some of their friends. As they were leaving the store a security guard from Scorpion Security stopped her and demanded to search her handbag. Rather than asking nicely he just grabbed the bag from her in a manner she described as “violent and physical”, searched through it and, finding nothing, handed it back to her. She claims that she felt “belittled and humiliated” by his treatment of her in front of her children and their friends but being a strong character she decided not to take this lying down. She got angry and took Scorpion Security to court.

And she won.

When the case was heard in the High Court in Francistown in August 2013 the Managing Director of Scorpion Security gave evidence. He explained that he saw their job as looking after their client’s goods but then went on to embarrass himself in front of the judge by having no idea what powers his guards had. He told the judge “that security guards could search. That they had the authority to do similar to that of Police Officers.” In his ruling, the judge said that the MD “did not know circumstances when a legal search could be made.”

The judge went on to said that:

“I find that indeed the Defendants searched the Plantiff without her consent and it was unlawful. […] I accordingly grant judgment in her favour.”

It gets better. He continued:

“On the issue of damages, considering the humiliation embarrassment and impairment of her dignity as an honest member of society I have considered that P60,000 would be sufficient solatium for her dented image in society.”

So let’s make it clear, yet again. Security guards are just civilians in uniform. They do a difficult job that helps to protect us but that doesn’t mean they have special powers. All a security guard can do is detain you until the police arrive. Only a police officer can search you against your will.

Of course we should do our best to help stores protect themselves against thieves but that doesn’t mean they can treat those of us who are honest members of society as criminals.

Next time you are accosted by a security guard make sure you stand up for your rights!

The Voice - Consumers Voice

A lottery warning

Good day. I have been playing a lotto for some time now. I have always wondered who can help me how to find if this is a legal lotto or one of the scams. Please may you check and advice if this is scam. Their website is www.freelotto.com. Please send your findings and also advice others people if this is a scam lotto as they will also fall for it. I have been paying US$14.99 for more than 5 years now.

Here’s a simple question. You’ve been paying about P150 every month for five years for a lottery that has “free” in its name? That doesn’t sounds free to me. You’ve paid a total of around P9,000 over the past few years and I guess you’ve not won a single thebe in return?

The site you mention makes some extraordinary claims, including that they have “already awarded $103,141,469.00 in cash and prizes to lucky FreeLotto® lottery-style game players”. That’s a truly extraordinary amount of money but I can find no real evidence that their claim is actually true. And did you spot something else in that claim? “lottery-style game”. This isn’t a lottery at all, it’s a form of online gaming.

If you do a quick Google search you’ll find that there are many complaints and criticisms of this site, suggesting that you have to pay to win prizes. As your experience shows, they’re not free in any way.

I suggest that you do your best to cancel your monthly payments although I’ve seen comments online that suggest getting them to stop taking the money can he difficult. Good luck!

Can they search me?

Is it rite for security guards to search our bags when we leave a shop?? I was told either I leave my handbag at the door or I’ll be searched when I get out.

You’re not the first person to ask us this questions and I know you won’t be the last. So many people contact us asking this, usually because they’ve felt violated and insulted by a guard who has insisted on searching either them or their belongings when they go shopping.

So let’s make this perfectly simple. Security guards have no right to search you. They can only do so if you agree to being searched, otherwise they can’t touch you. The only exception to this is if they have a good reason to think you’ve committed a serious crime like theft but even then all they can do is detain you and then call the Police. Only a Police office can insist on searching you or your belongings. Security guards are just civilians like you and me. Think of it this way. If I come to your house or office and when I leave you think I’ve stolen your laptop all you can do is to detain me until the cops arrive.

A couple of years ago a woman was stopped by a security guard at a major supermarket in Gaborone. The guard insisted on searching her handbag even though he had no evidence to think she was a thief. This brave woman got extremely angry and took the security company to court and was later awarded P60,000 in compensation. The judge explained that she deserved this ”considering the humiliation embarrassment and impairment of her dignity as an honest member of society”. What made that case worse was that the Managing Director of the security company told the court that he thought his guards had the same rights as police officers. Not so, the judge told him.

Those of us who are honest members of society have a right to exercise our freedom unimpeded by security guards who have been told they have special rights and powers. While we all understand how much stores lose to shoplifters they have to learn that the vast majority of us, the ones who are decent and honest shouldn’t be treated like criminals.

The Voice - Consumer's Voice

Can store security guards search me?

Today I was coming out of a supermarket and I had a plastic bag in which there was a box of juice. In my other hand I had a gift bag. So the security guy asked me to stop so he could search me, and he also wanted the receipt. I asked him to hold the gift bag for me while I look for the receipt. I looked for the receipt but couldn't find it so I told him I cant find it, so he should give me my gift bag so I can go because with the little knowledge that I have, I don't have to be searched if I don't want to. So I asked him to give me back my gift bag so I can go but he refused and even held on tight to it, insisting that I give him the receipt. He told me that he is supposed to search people, whether they want to be searched or not.

I suggested that we go to the lady who sold me the items but he still refused and insisted on the receipt. He finally saw it in the bag which had the juice and saw that indeed I did not steal these items. My question here is what is supposed to happen by the shop door when a customer leaves with items they have paid for in that shop? Are these security guys supposed to do this to customers? I felt harassed and inconvenienced and I also feel that there is lack of education amongst some of these security guys. There is a need to address this in case the same thing happens to other customers. Even if security guys have the right to search customers, they are supposed to do so without ridiculing customers. And I asked him why he wants to search me and he couldn't even give me a clear answer. I would really appreciate if you enlighten me in this.

It’s very simple. Security guards have absolutely no right to search people. They often forget that they’re not police officers, they’re just civilians in uniforms. They have no more rights than you or I have.

All that a security guard can do is detain you if he or she has good reason to suspect that you have committed a serious offence such as theft but that’s ALL they can do. They are not allowed to search either you or your belongings unless you allow them to. Only the police can search you without your consent.

If a guard does ever stop you and demand to search your belongings you should remind them that the goods you bought (even the plastic bag which you paid for) now belong to you and that you will not permit a stranger to seize or search your belongings. You should also say that if they suspect you’ve stolen something then you’ll happily wait until the police arrive. Maybe even remind them that the police have more important things to do and they don’t like having their time wasted.

This security company should remember the case a few years ago when a woman who had a very similar experience in a supermarket took the security company to court and was later awarded P60,000, the judge explaining that this was ”considering the humiliation embarrassment and impairment of her dignity as an honest member of society”.

Part of the problem is that security companies often tell their guards that they have special powers. In the court case the MD of the security company apparently told the judge that he taught his guards that they “had the authority to do similar to that of Police Officers”. The judge responded by saying that the MD “did not know circumstances when a legal search could be made."

I contacted the Head Office of the supermarket concerned and they are taking this matter very seriously. You can expect feedback from them very soon.

Meanwhile let’s all stand up to security guards when they abuse us. We all know that shoplifters exist and that the money the stores lose to thieves they pass on to us, the law-abiding customers, and we have a part to play in helping stores protect themselves but that doesn’t they can think they have special powers. It’s time for them to learn this, don’t you think?

Cult of Mac: "Your biggest online security mistakes (and how to avoid them)"

Image c/o Cult of Mac and Scott Schiller

From the Cult of Mac site, an article worth reading if you want to protect yourself when buying things online: Your biggest online security mistakes (and how to avoid them).

"We all make compromises daily when it comes to online security. Everybody wants to be safe and secure when making purchases online, but practically none of us do everything necessary to keep our data secure."

It's not specific to Mac users, these lessons are important for everyone who operates online regardless of the type of computer they use.

They are:

• Don’t reuse user names or email addresses
• Use secure payment systems (not credit cards)
• Only shop secure websites
• Stop using simple passwords

That last one is particularly important. I know it's frustrating and irritating but passwords need to be complicated. Every additional character can make it up to 80 times harder to crack if you use upper and lower case characters, numbers and some of the weird symbols you can find on your keyboard. If you make your password 16 characters long rather than 8 and use all the extra possible characters you can make your password billions, trillions or quadrillions of times harder for a cybercrook to crack.

So instead of using a password like "watchdog" choose something like "Consum9rW#tchd0g" and you might save yourself a LOT of bother, heartache and money.

The Guardian - "How you could become a victim of cybercrime in 2015"

Image c/o The Guardian

Stuart Dredge from the Guardian predicts the cyber threats we'll face in 2015 in "How you could become a victim of cybercrime in 2015".

You don't have to be a techie or a nerd to understand the sort of threats he thinks will be likely.

He predicts:

• Targeted attacks and sophisticated spam
• Banking and healthcare companies at risk
• Ransomware on the rise
• Mobile payments could be hot... for criminals
• Mobile malware aims at Apple, not just Android
• Open source code still a target
• Criminals hiding on the darknet
• Social media malware and malvertising
• Internet of Things a rising concern
• Cyberwar as criminal/state boundaries blur

Read this to give yourself some warning of what is going to be.

Mmegi - Your password can’t be trusted

The passwords you use on your computer can’t be trusted.

They can’t be trusted because you can’t be trusted. You and I simply can’t be trusted to pick passwords that are reliable enough. Almost all of us, myself included, choose passwords that are meaningful to us. Some of us choose the names of our children, our partners or our dogs. Others choose their home towns, their holiday destinations or their favourite foods.

The trouble is that these can probably be discovered quite easily from your Facebook or LinkedIn accounts. Even worse is that if you’ve used any word as your password a determined hacker can break it in moments using what they call a “dictionary attack”. Their computer simply sends every word in a dictionary to the web site or service you use and sooner or later it’ll guess the right one.

On solution is to use more complicated or “stronger” passwords. I used to think that it was enough to take a simple word that was familiar to me, say “mmegi” (which could easily be found in a dictionary) and then just change one letter to make it into a word that couldn’t be found like “mmogi”. But I suspect that’s not good enough any more. Password crackers are becoming more and more resourceful and we need to take much better measures to protect ourselves.

Many web sites will now tell you how strong the password you’re choosing is. The simplest way to select a strong password is just to make your password a lot longer than usual. Think about it. Every additional character you add can make it up to 75 times more difficult for a password cracker to guess if you include both lower and upper case characters, numeric digits and special characters. For instance if you choose a 5-digit password (like “mmegi”) there are just over 2 billion possible passwords you could choose from. If instead you decide to use a password that has 10 characters (like “MmegiToday”) you’re making it 5.6 quintillion times more difficult for someone to guess. Make it 15 digits (like “MmegiFriday28-4”) and I don’t even know how to write how much more complicated it is (it’s 13 followed by 27 zeroes).

Of course this is all useless if you do something stupid (and trust me, I’ve seen this) like writing your password down on a sticky label and attaching it to the side of your computer’s screen. That’s asking for trouble.

Image c/o Wikipedia

But even if we do all of this and select the strongest passwords possible we’re still at risk. You may have heard recently of “Heartbleed”, a flaw that was found in OpenSSL, one of the encryption tools used on servers all over the web. The popularity of OpenSSL meant that this flaw was so widespread throughout the internet that companies as big as Facebook, Yahoo, Google and Wikipedia were shown to be vulnerable. Of course they all worked very hard and very quickly to patch the problem but for a few days we were all being advised to consider changing our passwords. The irony was that if a web site you used was exposed, changing your password could have been the worst possible thing to do. Any hacker who had already breached that site’s security by exploiting Heartbleed would then have seen your new password as easily as he saw your old one. It was only when the breach had been filled that you should change your password.

The good news is that the Heartbleed flaw has been fixed by most organisations and you’re probably safe. The bad news is that there are many more security flaws out there, plenty of them, we just don’t know about them yet. Every couple of months there’ll be another flaw that’s discovered and we’ll panic and over-react again every time. There’s nothing you and I can do about it, our job as consumers is to do our best to protect ourselves by choosing strong passwords and by keeping them entirely safe from prying eyes.

You’ll also have seen that Microsoft has finally withdrawn support for older computers running Windows XP. Frustrating as it is, we have to move on. Windows XP has been around for 12 years which is a lifetime in the IT world and it’s become increasingly expensive for Microsoft to keep XP up-to-date. Your choices are simple. Continue using XP and expose yourself to increasing levels of risk, disconnect your old PC completely form the internet, upgrade to a more recent version of Windows that is supported (if your computer can run it), upgrade to a newer computer or migrate to a completely different operating system such as one of the many free versions of Unix.

One alternative that you might consider is not even knowing your own passwords and relying instead on technology to do it for you. There are several password manager applications you can download, some laptops even come with them installed. These apps decide your passwords for you, choosing extremely strong passwords, remember them for you and enter them when you need to sign on. The one I use even stores all these passwords, in an encrypted format online so that my laptop, phone and iPad all have access to these passwords. It really does make life a lot simpler and more secure.

Online security is a bit like the traditional security you might consider for your home or office. Having a combination of fences, dogs, infra-red beams, barred windows and internal motion sensors will offer you a level of comfort at home, but nobody would ever say it’s foolproof, you’re just giving yourself the best chance of safety. Think of online security in the same way. The more things you do to protect yourself the better. Never use the same password for different services, use strong passwords, consider using a password manager and keep your system as up-to-date as possible.

So far most of us have been lucky and haven’t had our passwords cracked. But it will happen to you soon if you don’t protect yourself.

On the TV again, discussing Store Security and Fake Degrees

On First Issues again, this time talking about store security and what security guards can and can't do to you and the people around us with fake degrees.

 

Secure yourself

Against security companies. Sometimes security guards are almost as much of a threat as the criminals that they are meant to protect us against.

The Romans used to ask “Quis custodiet ipsos custodies?” Who watches the watchmen?

In our case who guards us against the guards?

We’ve been asked many times by a variety of readers what powers security guards have. Can they, for instance, ask to search our bags as we enter or leave the store they’re guarding? Can they insist on doing so? Can they detain us if we don’t want to let them search us? What exactly can they do?

Our advice has always been simple. Security guards aren’t police officers, they’re just normal civilians like the rest of us. They don’t have any powers that we don’t have.

Of course we ordinary people DO have certain powers. Section 31 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act states that every:

“private person, in whose presence anyone commits or attempts to commit [a serious offence] or who has knowledge that any such offence has been recently committed, is authorized to arrest without warrant or forthwith to pursue the offender; every other private person to whom the purpose of the pursuit has been made known is authorized to join and assist therein.”

This doesn’t permit mob justice but it is clear that any of us can legally arrest someone if we think they’ve committed a serious crime. It’s what’s often called a “citizen’s arrest”. But that’s all we can do. We can’t search anyone, we can’t punish them, all we can do is detain them until the police turn up and take over. That’s all. Security guards have no powers other than that.

On the other hand you have to remember that stores are private property, just like our homes. You have the right to prevent me from entering your house as well as from entering your store if you don’t want me there. In exactly the same way the owner of a store can refuse you entry unless you play according to his or her rules, so long as they’re legal ones. A store is entitled to refuse you admission unless you volunteer to leave your bags at the counter or volunteer to be searched. But how many stores are really prepared to do that? How many are really ready to turn away people with the money they so desperately want?

But why do security guards behave this way? Why do they exceed their legal powers? The answer is simple. It’s because they think they’re cops and they think this because they’ve been told this by their managers.

In May 2011 a woman went shopping in Pick N Pay at Riverwalk with her three daughters and some of their friends. As they were leaving the store a security guard from Scorpion Security blocked her way and demanded to search through her handbag. Rather than asking nicely he just grabbed the bag from her in a manner she described as “violent and physical”, searched through it and, finding nothing, handed it back to her. She claims that she felt “belittled and humiliated” by his treatment of her in front of her children and their friends but being a strong character she decided not to take this lying down. Her later complaint to the security company about the way their guard had treated her was met with a promise of an apology but this was a promise that never came.

So she got angry and started legal action against Scorpion Security.

And she won.

When the case was heard in the High Court in Francistown in August this year the Managing Director of Scorpion Security gave evidence in defence. He explained that he saw their job as looking after their client’s goods but then went on to embarrass himself in front of the judge by having no idea what powers his guards had. In his ruling, the judge said that the MD “did not know circumstances when a legal search could be made.” He told the judge “that security guards could search. That they had the authority to do similar to that of Police Officers.”

Wrong!

In his judgment the judge said that:

“I find that indeed the Defendants searched the Plantiff without her consent and it was unlawful. […] The Plaintiff has proved her case on a balance of probabilities and I accordingly grant judgment in her favour.”

It gets better. He continued:

“On the issue of damages, considering the humiliation embarrassment and impairment of her dignity as an honest member of society I have considered that P60,000 would be sufficient solatium for her dented image in society.”

Last week my hero was Dr Seipone from the Ministry of Health for telling certain private health facilities to stop ignoring basic medical ethics by refusing to treat people in emergencies unless they coughed up cash first.

This week my hero is Judge Solo at the High Court for showing that our laws protect the individual against jumped up civilians who think they have special powers just because they have a uniform and against their bosses who tell them that.

It’s worth looking at the words Judge Solo used. He said that her “dignity as an honest member of society” had been undermined by the guard. We mustn’t forget that we all have that right, to be seen as honest members of society until there is evidence to the contrary. We have a right to go about our business without being humiliated and embarrassed by thugs in uniform.

Next time a guard tries to search you or anything you’re carrying I suggest you just remind them that Judge Solo says they can’t and do they really want to get on his wrong side? Can their MD afford another P60,000 in damages?

Guard yourself against stupidity

I saw a comment on Facebook that amused me.

Source: Who knows where, somewhere on Facebook

We all know that there are organisations out there that rely on our stupidity to make money. Ok, maybe it’s not always stupidity. Sometimes it’s ignorance, other times it’s naiveté, sometimes it’s greed. Whatever it is, it’s about exploiting a consumer’s weakness in order to make money.

It’s not a minor thing either. It can be, like with the Eurextrade Ponzi scheme, a massive amount of money at stake. We heard of people who cashed in insurance policies, emptied their saving accounts, people who even sold cars and houses to raise the money to “invest” in the scheme. We know of people who “invested” over P500,000 and I have suspicions that some hit as much as P1 million. I know that much of this was because people were greedy, believing, despite what was being said by critics, that it was possible to earn “up to 2.9%” interest every day on their investment. Despite this element of greed, there was also a level of ignorance at play. Many people had never heard of Ponzi schemes, they’d never been told how scams like that operate, they’d never been taught to be skeptical.

Admittedly Eurextrade was an extreme example but there are others that, while smaller in scale, affect even more people. Store credit is one of them. I don’t just think store credit exploits our ignorance, I KNOW it. We hear every week from people who have misunderstood how store credit works.

The unfortunate truth is that stores make their store credit agreements difficult to understand and even difficult to see. In a recent experiment we sent mystery shoppers out to investigate. Each of them visited a store and expressed an interest in a household item and in buying it on credit. Every time they asked to see a copy of the credit agreement they were told no, they could only see that when they sign it, not before. Without exception.

Why do stores do this? Why do they want to keep their customers in the dark? That’s easy. They do it because they don’t want their customers to know what the agreements contain because if they did they wouldn’t sign them. Given that furniture stores make most of their profits from moneylending they have to protect that part of their business above all things.

Most importantly the stores never take the time to warn customers what will happen if things go wrong. They fail to explain that if the customer has a problem paying his or her instalments and the goods are repossessed they will still be lumbered with the debt. Repossession of the goods doesn’t mean the agreement is cancelled, it just means you’ll owe the store slightly less money. Until debt collectors get involved when the debt will just get bigger and bigger.

Another example. Store security.

We’ve heard from readers many times about how irritated they are by excessive store security. Most often the irritation is at its worst as you try to leave a store when the security guard insists on stopping you and checking your belongings.

I should begin by saying that I’m very sympathetic towards stores. Stores face an enormous problem presented by our less than respectable neighbours who steal things. It really is a genuine problem that costs them a lot of money and effort, the cost of which they pass directly back to us in higher prices. However that doesn’t mean they can abuse our rights and exploit our ignorance.

Here’s a simple act that is often overlooked by stores, security companies and consumers. Security guards are not police officers, they’re just ordinary people in uniforms. They have no special rights or powers, they have to follow exactly the same rules the rest of us do.

The law is quite simple. Any of us can arrest a person who we reasonably believe has committed a serious crime and we have the power to detain such a person using the minimum force necessary. But we have no right to search that person, just to detain them and only if you have reason to suspect they have committed a serious offence. You can’t arrest someone just because you feel like it or because you don’t like the way they look. You can’t arrest someone just because they refused to be searched.

In fact a security guard who detains you without good cause and who then searches you and your goods against your will might himself be committing a crime. Often security guards and the stores that employ them forget that they’re just civilians in uniforms and that they don’t have the right to take away our civil rights.

We’ve heard from many people who are incredibly irritated by the behaviour of store security guards and hugely offended by the way they’re treated and the insult implied by being stopped and treated like a thief.

So here’s Consumer Watchdog’s simple advice on dealing with store security guards.

Don’t let them stop you and search you. Simply refuse. If they try, politely tell them that they have no right to search your bags, no right to stop you and if they persist, demand that they call the police. Remind them that only a police officer can search you.

Security guards need to guard us, not harass us and they and their employers need to learn that.

And as for the stores that let this happen, they need to understand that their right to protect themselves from theft doesn’t allow them to steal our civil rights.