U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 06:59 PM
 
6,900 posts, read 2,093,394 times
Reputation: 5199

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bus man View Post
According to the comments on the Yahoo article, the article left out a pertinent detail: TWO television sets were delivered to the man -- a smaller one that he had ordered, and a larger one that he had not. And apparently he refused to return the mis-delivered one when asked to do so. (Presumably, he also refused to pay for it; but this was not disclosed.) So, given that, it sounds like it was proper to arrest him for theft.
No, it's not a crime unless the shipper or owner sends someone to pick it up and he refused to let them take it. Is that what happened?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 07:04 PM
 
6,900 posts, read 2,093,394 times
Reputation: 5199
Quote:
Originally Posted by blktoptrvl View Post
Sounds like he might have a TV and a couple of lawsuits on his hands...

According to the FEDS...

https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/article...ed-merchandise

"What do you do when you receive merchandise that you didn’t order? According to the Federal Trade Commission, you don’t have to pay for it. Federal laws prohibit mailing unordered merchandise to consumers and then demanding payment."
  • So, maybe he gets a TV.
  • Can sue the merchant.
  • And can sue to cops.
Right, you don't have to pay for it, but you do have to give it back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 07:49 PM
Status: "God bless our president." (set 1 day ago)
 
Location: Middle of the Pacific Ocean
10,825 posts, read 5,836,898 times
Reputation: 10594
Yeah, the right decision was made IMO. If the delivery company was demanding that the man pay/arrange to have the wrongly-delivered television set returned in a manner that was cumbersome/unreasonable on the man (using his own money, even if he was getting reimbursed; driving the thing to a shipping center; etc.), I'd side with him. But apparently the company contacted the man numerous times in an efforts to pick up the merchandise. No sympathy. Lock him up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:20 PM
 
19,602 posts, read 12,854,656 times
Reputation: 13336
There are two sides to everything:


"
The shipping company says that they had made multiple phone calls trying to get in touch with Memmo before they contacted police; the Freetown man ignored the calls. He stated, “I have my phone ringing all day. I get calls from Google, website people, I have no reasons to answer all these calls. If it’s not important I just hang up.”
When the two televisions were delivered to Memmo’s home, he is alleged to have signed for the delivery, which he denies. Days later, when the police tried questioning him about the delivery, he answered many questions with "I don’t know." Memmo asked police, “Do I need to hire an attorney?” to which they responded he was not under investigation at that point.
On Monday night, officers obtained a search warrant for Memmo’s house. Freetown police officers surrounded the house with flashlights in the windows and knocked on the door. Memmo came outside, where he was immediately handcuffed. The officers proceeded to enter the house, where they found an 86-inch flat screen television mounted to the living room wall. "
https://www.uptoboston.com/freetown-...-to-his-house/


*If* Mr. Memmo took delivery (and signed for two) television sets that is bad. He's claiming now that he never signed, so we shall see where that goes.


It is one thing coming home and finding two packages sitting on your front porch or whatever, one of them containing merchandise you didn't order/request. It is quite another to have a delivery truck show up with a big a$$ed television that you know or should have known you didn't order but sign for or otherwise allow it to be delivered (take possession).


Mr. Memmo's response as to why he ignored repeated telephone calls from delivery company in their attempts to retrieve the television are suspect as well. It all smacks of someone trying to run game and got caught.


Seems to me that the guy dramatically misunderstood that common FTC advice about keeping goods not requested/ordered. This was compounded by deliberately (or whatever) refusing to return/give access to delivery company which opens up all sorts of charges based upon intent.


Worse still by unboxing and mounting the television he has used the unit making it no longer "new" far as the original shipper is concerned. It is now an "open box" item and thus suffered a depreciation in value.


The guy should call Saul or someone, otherwise he's going to jail. That or man up and offer to pay for the television in exchange for all charges being dropped and case closed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:14 AM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
4,644 posts, read 1,816,803 times
Reputation: 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk View Post
He should have handed it to the police when they arrived.
Do you have any evidence that police asked for the TV? I see nothing about that they asked for the TV. Only that they asked him questions which he refused to answer. It was his Constitutional right not to answer their questions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:16 AM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
4,644 posts, read 1,816,803 times
Reputation: 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl View Post
Where are you getting that he had to take off from work? He was home when the driver came to get it and he refused to give it to him. That delivery company then contacted the police. When the police went to his house and asked him to release the television, he would not cooperate with them. There’s no reason to assume when the articles give fairly detailed info on what happened.
Your source for that information that he was at home. I see that in none of the stories that I have read. I have also read nothing that the police asked him to release the TV. Only that they wanted to ask him questions which he refused to answer. Which is Constitutional right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:30 AM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
4,644 posts, read 1,816,803 times
Reputation: 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbdwihdh378y9 View Post
Right, you don't have to pay for it, but you do have to give it back.
No read it. You do not need to return it. The FTC is very clear about it. You have no legal obligation to pay for or return the merchandise. You can if you so choose, offer to return it, if the seller agrees to pay for shipping and handling.

Quote:
Q. Am I obligated to return or pay for merchandise I never ordered?

A. No. If you receive merchandise that you didn’t order, you have a legal right to keep it as a free gift.

Q. Must I notify the seller if I keep unordered merchandise without paying for it?

A. Although you have no legal obligation to notify the seller, you may write the seller and offer to return the merchandise, provided the seller pays for shipping and handling.
Unordered Merchandise _ Consumer Information
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:44 AM
 
Location: Texas
42,974 posts, read 51,468,688 times
Reputation: 69099
The "I didn't know" defense suffers a certain death once the merchandise is found mounted on your wall.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:46 AM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
4,644 posts, read 1,816,803 times
Reputation: 6080
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
The "I didn't know" defense suffers a certain death once the merchandise is found mounted on your wall.
That remains to seen. I give him 95% chance of acquittal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:52 AM
 
19,602 posts, read 12,854,656 times
Reputation: 13336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
That remains to seen. I give him 95% chance of acquittal.

When the going gets tough, you don't want a criminal lawyer. You want a CRIMINAL lawyer.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvlEqAjg8aU
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top