Asda’s Live Facial Recognition Trial: Our Two Cents

Asda’s Live Facial Recognition Trial Goes Live

This month, Sky News reported on Asda’s trial of live facial recognition technology across five stores in Greater Manchester – part of the supermarket’s latest effort to deter shoplifting and protect staff from rising incidents of retail crime. Tremark’s Chairman, Mark Hodgson, was among the experts interviewed by Sky News to weigh in on the wider implications of this developing trend.

Mark’s comments echo a growing concern among privacy advocates, industry professionals, and the general public: as this kind of surveillance technology becomes more widespread, is enough being done to ensure it’s used lawfully, transparently, and ethically?

“Customers are already having their movements tracked and shopping habits monitored in stores, which raises serious concerns about linking this to AI and biometrics.”

A Matter of Consent and Clarity

There’s no denying that retailers face significant challenges when it comes to theft and abuse. According to data cited in the report, Asda alone recorded an average of four assaults on staff per day last year. But while the motive for exploring new preventative measures is understandable, how these tools are deployed matters just as much as why.

At Tremark, we’ve seen how the integration of technology into public and private spaces can outpace regulation and public awareness. That’s why Mark stressed the need for clearer communication and transparency from businesses:

“Supermarkets must be able to demonstrate legitimate interest in their data practices; whether they meet the necessary threshold as it stands is open to debate. They should be clear that biometric data will only be used for specific stated purposes like combating theft.”

Vague signage or after-the-fact disclaimers are not enough. Today’s consumers are more data-conscious than ever – and rightly so. The use of biometric data, including facial recognition, is highly intrusive. Businesses must not only comply with data protection laws but also ensure their actions align with public expectations of fairness and privacy.

Ethics Must Come Before Expansion

As experts in investigative practices, Tremark has long held the belief that technology must never be a shortcut to bypass ethical scrutiny. When used responsibly, tools like facial recognition can indeed support crime prevention. But when used carelessly or without oversight, they risk undermining public trust.

The fact that Asda is running the technology as a trial offers a window of opportunity to assess both its effectiveness and its impact on customers’ rights. As Mark pointed out:

“I hope they consider the legal and ethical ramifications of this process and act accordingly if rolled out nationwide.”

The success of any crime prevention strategy shouldn’t be measured by its technical capability alone but by how well it balances safety, privacy, and accountability.

Final Comments

Tremark was pleased to contribute to the public conversation on this issue via Sky News, and we will continue to advocate for responsible, lawful, and transparent use of surveillance and investigative tools. As biometric technologies become more accessible, we believe it is essential for businesses, regulators, and the public to engage in open dialogue about their implications.

Trust is hard-earned, and easily lost. If live facial recognition is to have a place in UK retail, it must be built on clear ethical foundations, not just technical promise.