The buyer sued the supermarket money for the prohibition of the lotus position

The man wrote a statement to the security guard, who, in his opinion, exceeded his authority

A thousand rubles of compensation was sued from the hypermarket to the buyer, who sat down to rest on a bench in the cash register area. The store security did not like the fact that the man was sitting on the pedestal in the lotus position: the security guard first demanded that the visitor leave the bench, and then roughly pushed it off.

As MK found out, some time ago in a hypermarket in the southeast of the capital there was a conflict between a visitor and a security representative. Around 7 pm, a man named Denis decided to sit on a bench near the cash register. At the same time, the buyer used a piece of furniture in a not quite traditional, but quite legal way: he sat on the surface in the lotus position. According to Denis, soon unknown people in the form of guards approached him and demanded to leave the bench. And after the man refused to do it, the representative of the private security company pushed the visitor with force.

Outraged by this behavior, Denis left an entry in the book of complaints and suggestions of the store. And then he turned to the police department for the Nizhny Novgorod district of Moscow with a statement about initiating a criminal case. Law enforcement officers interviewed the guard who was on duty on the ill-fated day.

The security guard explained that he really noticed a man who was sitting on a pedestal in the lotus position on that shift. However, according to him, this piece of furniture was not intended for sitting at all, but for packaging goods and food. The visitor’s feet were on the same surface on which other shoppers stacked their purchases, including edibles. The guard made a remark to the man, but he replied that he would not go down and remained sitting in the same position. The representative of the private security company assured that other visitors to the store also approached Denis, and one of them “carefully pulled him off the cabinet without causing physical harm.” However, it was not possible to prove the last fact – when the police tried to find that very polite buyer, it turned out that the recordings from the CCTV cameras had already been erased, since their storage period was only 30 days.

However, they refused to initiate a criminal case against Denis. Then he appealed to the Mytishchi city court with a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage. The man estimated moral suffering due to the actions of a security guard at 100,000 rubles. The judge, having studied the circumstances of the case, decided that the security guard had indeed used physical force against the plaintiff and thereby exceeded his powers. However, Themis considered the requested amount to be too high and decided to recover from the defendant only 1,000 rubles in compensation. Since the incident occurred on the territory of the store, which is the customer of security services, the responsibility for payments falls on the shoulders of the hypermarket management.