OakR,
You are right, approaching the school is a sensible course of action, especially if Sainsbury's were able to provide CCTV images which should make the individuals responsible possible to identify within a school community.

The next course of action (if not the first) when anybody is subjected to anti-social behaviour or robbery, would be to speak to the police, and that may well include the Safer Schools’ Officer, as apparently arranged by the school.

Banning a whole group of people based on their voluntary/involuntary association with others in a group which includes the perpetrator, is not a fair course of action. I didn't like it when I was banned from various shops in Forest Hill because I went to the school, and I don't see why I should like it any more just because I'm a little older.

Small shops often have signs that request 'no more than 3 children at once', which seems perfectly reasonable but wouldn't work for a supermarket, but then small shops can't afford to employ security guards to deal with anti-social behaviour and shop-lifting.

I'm sure that there is a much longer history of the actions of offenders and the Sainsbury's management team, which I wouldn't expect them to be able to detail. And I don't find it acceptable that Sainsbury's staff or customers should be subjected to abuse or anti-social behaviour. But I feel that banning a whole school is also, in it's own way, anti-social.

I'm very pleased to hear that the store manager is reviewing the position, and I'm sure he will take account of feelings expressed on this forum.