One of the most common misconceptions about working in security is the level of authority you’ll actually have. People see the uniform, the professional demeanour, and sometimes the handcuffs, and assume security guards operate with police-like powers. The reality is starkly different, and understanding this distinction isn’t just important for members of the public—it’s absolutely critical for anyone considering security training as a career path.
Security guards, regardless of their SIA licence status, have no more legal powers than any ordinary member of the public. This fundamental principle shapes everything about how security work is conducted in the UK, and misunderstanding it can lead to serious legal consequences for security professionals.
The foundation: citizen’s arrest powers
The primary legal tool available to security guards is the citizen’s arrest, codified in Section 24A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE). This provision was introduced by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, replacing earlier arrest powers and creating a uniform framework that applies to everyone, security professionals included.
According to the legal framework, a citizen’s arrest can be made by any person for an indictable offence. An indictable offence is a more serious crime that can be tried in a Crown Court, such as theft, assault, or criminal damage. For a security guard to lawfully perform a citizen’s arrest, two strict conditions must be met:
First, someone must be in the act of committing an indictable offence, or the guard must have reasonable grounds for suspecting them to be doing so. Alternatively, an indictable offence must have been committed, and the person being arrested must be guilty of it or reasonably suspected of being guilty.
Second, it must appear to the person making the arrest that it is not reasonably practicable for a police constable to make the arrest instead, and the arrest must be necessary to prevent the person from causing physical injury to themselves or others, suffering physical injury, causing loss or damage to property, or making off before police can arrive.
These conditions create a high bar. Security guards cannot detain someone based purely on suspicion or gut feeling. There must be reasonable grounds, and those grounds must be demonstrable if challenged in court.
What police officers can do that security guards cannot
The contrast with actual police powers is stark. Police constables operate under Section 24 of PACE, which grants them significantly broader authority. A constable can arrest anyone they have reasonable grounds for suspecting is committing, has committed, or is about to commit any offence—not just indictable ones.
More importantly, police officers have extensive powers that security guards completely lack:
Stop and search powers: Police can stop and search individuals based on reasonable suspicion under various statutory powers. Security guards have no such authority. They cannot search anyone without explicit consent, and even when consent is given, the search must be conducted appropriately.
Entry and search of premises: Police can enter and search premises with a warrant, or in certain urgent circumstances without one. Security guards can only access property they’re authorised to be on by the property owner. They cannot force entry to private premises under any circumstances.
Seizure of property: Police have broad powers to seize evidence under Section 19 of PACE. Security guards can retain suspected stolen items until police arrive, but only in very limited circumstances and always with the obligation to hand them over to police immediately.
Questioning and investigation: Police can formally interview suspects under caution, with all the protections of PACE codes of practice. Security guards have no power to formally question anyone or compel them to answer questions. If someone refuses to speak to a security guard, there’s nothing the guard can legally do about it.
Use of force: Both police and security guards can use reasonable force, but the contexts differ dramatically. Police can use force to effect an arrest for any offence. Security guards can only use force in self-defence, defence of others, prevention of crime, or during a lawful citizen’s arrest. The threshold for what’s considered “reasonable” is also much more stringent for security personnel.
Detention vs arrest: a critical distinction
Legally speaking, security guards cannot actually “detain” people in the way many assume. They can perform a citizen’s arrest under the conditions described above, or they can ask someone to wait for police. However, if a person chooses to walk away, the guard cannot lawfully restrain them unless the criteria for citizen’s arrest are met.
This creates a grey area that causes confusion. A security guard might ask a suspected shoplifter to “wait here whilst we call the police,” but if that person simply leaves, the guard must make a split-second decision: do they have sufficient grounds to perform a citizen’s arrest, or must they let the person go?
Making the wrong call can be catastrophic. Preventing someone from leaving without lawful justification amounts to false imprisonment, a serious tort that can result in substantial compensation claims and potential criminal charges.
The consequences of overstepping authority
Court cases involving security guards who exceeded their powers demonstrate how quickly situations can deteriorate into legal nightmares. In a high-profile 2014 case at Liverpool Lime Street station, a security guard employed by Carlisle Security unlawfully arrested and assaulted a passenger, Mark Holt. The incident, captured on CCTV, showed the guard acting with “police-like powers” despite having no legal authority to do so.
Mr Holt, who had consumed a couple of drinks but was not drunk or disorderly, was forcibly detained, assaulted (suffering a broken tooth), and held overnight in police custody. The resulting compensation claim settled for a five-figure sum plus legal costs. The case attracted significant media attention, with the Liverpool Echo and Daily Mirror both publishing the CCTV footage and highlighting the guard’s unlawful actions.
Similarly, a 2018 incident at a Burger King restaurant saw a security guard forcibly remove a customer based on the mistaken belief that she had thrown food at him. Without proper investigation or reasonable grounds, the guard physically restrained and ejected the woman from the premises. The case settled for £7,100 in compensation—a sobering reminder that even brief incidents of unlawful detention can have serious financial consequences.
What makes these cases particularly instructive is that the security guards likely believed they were acting correctly. They saw behaviour they deemed unacceptable and took action. But without lawful authority, their actions constituted assault and false imprisonment, regardless of their intentions.
Searching people and property
Another area where security guards’ powers differ dramatically from police concerns searches. Security guards cannot search anyone without consent. This is absolute. If a security guard asks to search your bag and you refuse, that’s the end of it—they cannot force a search.
However, refusal to be searched can have consequences. In venues like nightclubs or events where bag searches are a condition of entry, refusing a search means being denied access. But that’s a contractual matter between the venue and the customer, not a legal power of the security guard.
Police, by contrast, have extensive search powers. Under PACE Code A, constables can stop and search people and vehicles in public places where they have reasonable grounds to suspect they’ll find stolen goods, weapons, or other prohibited items. No consent is required—the search is conducted under statutory authority.
The exceptions for security guards are very limited. They can search property that’s been left unattended in suspicious circumstances (for security reasons), and they can search an unconscious person’s belongings to identify them or for their welfare. That’s it. Attempting a forced search without consent can constitute assault.
Special circumstances at licensed premises
Door supervisors at pubs and clubs often operate in a unique environment where the rules about searches can seem different. Venues can make bag searches a condition of entry, and this is perfectly legal. However, the legal basis isn’t that the security guard has special powers—it’s that the venue owns the property and can set conditions for who enters.
If someone refuses a search, the door supervisor cannot force it. They can only refuse entry. If the person is already inside and refuses to leave when asked, that’s when things get complicated, and the citizen’s arrest provisions might come into play (for trespass, if applicable).
Use of force and weapons
Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967 allows anyone to “use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances” in the prevention of crime or to effect a lawful arrest. This applies to security guards just as it does to any citizen. However, the key word is “reasonable,” and the threshold for security guards is often lower than for police.
Security guards in the UK are not permitted to carry weapons. Unlike police, they cannot carry firearms, batons, tasers, or pepper spray. The only equipment they might have is handcuffs, and even these aren’t mandatory or specifically licensed. Handcuffs are considered tools for safely restraining someone during a lawful citizen’s arrest, not weapons.
When handcuffs are used, they must be applied correctly to prevent injury. Improper use can expose both the security guard and their employer to civil liability for assault or negligence. Many security firms require guards to undergo specific training before being permitted to carry handcuffs, even though there’s no legal requirement to do so.
Police officers, by contrast, carry an array of protective equipment including batons, PAVA spray (similar to pepper spray), and in some cases, tasers and firearms. They’re extensively trained in the use of these tools and operate under strict protocols about when and how they can be deployed.
Powers on private property vs public spaces
One area where security guards do have additional authority—albeit derived from the property owner, not from any special legal status—is on private property. On private premises, security guards acting on behalf of the property owner can refuse entry to anyone and ask people to leave.
If someone refuses to leave when lawfully asked to do so, they’re committing trespass (or potentially aggravated trespass, depending on circumstances). At that point, reasonable force can be used to escort them off the premises. However, this power comes from the property rights of the owner, who has delegated that authority to the security guard. It’s not a special security guard power.
In public spaces, security guards have no more authority than anyone else. They cannot order people to move along, disperse, or stop what they’re doing unless it relates to preventing crime. Police officers have various public order powers that allow them to manage public spaces in ways security guards cannot.
CCTV and surveillance powers
Security guards commonly operate CCTV systems and may wear body cameras. They can legally record people, but must comply with the Data Protection Act 2018 and GDPR regulations. This means informing people they’re being recorded (typically through signage), storing footage securely, and using it only for legitimate security purposes.
Police also use CCTV and body-worn cameras, but with access to national databases and systems that security guards cannot access. Police can request CCTV from security firms as part of investigations, and security personnel are obliged to cooperate with such requests.
Identifying themselves and their authority
Security guards must not misrepresent their authority or imply they have police powers. Doing so could constitute impersonating a police officer, which is a criminal offence. Their uniform should clearly identify them as private security, and they must wear their SIA licence badge visibly at all times when working in a licensed role.
Police officers have formal identification and warrant cards. They’re also required to provide their name, station, and collar number when making an arrest or exercising certain powers.
Liability and accountability
When security guards overstep their authority, both they personally and their employer can face legal consequences. Individuals who’ve been unlawfully detained or assaulted by security staff can bring civil claims for damages. These claims can include compensation for false imprisonment, assault, battery, and in appropriate cases, aggravated damages if the guard’s conduct was particularly high-handed or oppressive.
Compensation for false imprisonment is calculated based primarily on the duration of unlawful detention. Even relatively brief periods can result in awards of several thousand pounds. In one case involving supermarket security guards, a man wrongly arrested for theft settled his claim for £13,000 plus full legal costs after the guards used excessive force and detained him without proper grounds.
Police officers benefit from certain protections when acting in the course of their duties, though they can still be held liable for unlawful actions. The complaints process also differs—police complaints go through the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), whilst complaints about security guards are handled by the Security Industry Authority and can lead to licence revocation.
What this means for aspiring security professionals
If you’re considering a career in security, understanding these limitations isn’t about being discouraged—it’s about being realistic and professional. The security industry needs people who respect legal boundaries and understand that their authority is limited.
During your SIA training course, you’ll cover these legal aspects in detail. Pay close attention. The difference between a successful security career and a disastrous incident often comes down to understanding exactly what you can and cannot legally do.
Remember that every physical intervention, every citizen’s arrest, every use of force must be justified. You need to be able to explain, potentially in court, why you believed you had grounds to act and why your actions were reasonable and proportionate. “I thought they looked suspicious” won’t cut it if challenged legally.
The best security professionals understand that their primary role is observation, deterrence, and communication—not enforcement. When situations require enforcement powers beyond citizen’s arrest, that’s when police should be called. Trying to operate as if you’re a police officer when you’re not is a guaranteed path to trouble.
The importance of proper training
This is why choosing an approved SIA training provider matters. Proper training will drill these legal principles into you, use scenario-based learning to test your understanding, and prepare you for the difficult split-second decisions you’ll face in real situations.
Bad training, or no training, leaves you vulnerable. You might think you’re doing your job correctly, right up until the moment you’re facing a false imprisonment claim or criminal charges for assault. The cost of proper training is insignificant compared to the cost of getting it wrong.
Understanding your place in the security landscape
Security guards play a vital role in society. They protect property, deter crime, provide reassurance to the public, and often serve as the first point of contact in emergencies. But they do all this as private citizens with limited authority, not as quasi-police officers.
Police officers undergo months of intensive training at police college, have ongoing professional development, operate under strict codes of conduct, and have access to support systems and legal protections that security guards don’t. The difference in training, accountability, and legal authority reflects the difference in their roles.
Accepting this reality isn’t about feeling inferior—it’s about being professional. The best security officers work effectively within their legal boundaries, develop excellent communication and de-escalation skills, and know when to step back and call for police assistance.
If you’re entering the security industry, embrace what you can do rather than resent what you can’t. You can provide a professional presence that prevents problems before they start. You can de-escalate situations through communication rather than force. You can be the eyes and ears for police, providing crucial information and evidence. And when necessary, you can perform a lawful citizen’s arrest and use reasonable force to protect people and property.
But you cannot, and must not, try to exercise powers you don’t have. Understanding the difference between security guards and police officers isn’t just academic—it’s the foundation of professional, lawful security work. Get it right, and you’ll have a successful career. Get it wrong, and you’ll be the subject of the next cautionary case study about unlawful detention and excessive force.
