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)
 
Old 03-25-2019, 02:30 PM
 
556 posts, read 148,071 times
Reputation: 1373

Advertisements

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 didnít order? According to the Federal Trade Commission, you donít 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.
This does not apply: allegedly the guy received a tv ADDRESSED to someone else- with a different address.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-25-2019, 02:43 PM
 
Location: Austin
12,031 posts, read 6,872,293 times
Reputation: 13298
I think the man stole the 86" TV. he didn't pay for it.

I once got a check from an employer that mistakenly had two zeros added to what I had earned that pay period. I returned the incorrect paycheck to human resources as soon as I saw it was in error.

people are human and humans make mistakes. taking advantage of a person's mistake is no justification for theft.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2019, 02:50 PM
 
20,537 posts, read 13,559,955 times
Reputation: 14182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations View Post
Me purposely sending you something you didnít order in hopes of making you pay for it is one thing.

Getting something delivered to you that you didnít order in error is something entirely different

Thank you! Someone finally got it in one!


This isn't an instance of someone sending merchandise unordered; but rather a mistaken delivery that the company tried to correct. If the guy has any proof that will stand up in court original seller told him "not to worry about it" and or otherwise keep the second television set that is another matter.


My guess is the shipping company is on the hook for their mistake and that is what prompted them to take action in first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2019, 02:58 PM
 
Location: AZ
667 posts, read 387,892 times
Reputation: 2748
Regardless of outcome, the guy has an arrest record now---forever. Even a mistaken arrest stays with you. Even if found not guilty you still have an arrest record. Goofy system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2019, 03:04 PM
 
Location: San Diego
34,900 posts, read 31,942,971 times
Reputation: 19365
You get a birthday card with a 20 in it addressed to your neighbor doesn't mean you get to keep it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2019, 03:48 PM
 
Location: 912 feet above sea level
2,270 posts, read 867,452 times
Reputation: 12419
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidt1 View Post
Keep this simple. Receiver, keeper. Stick it to the man.
'the man'?

Guess who 'the man' is?

It's everybody who orders items via mail, and we all have to pay extra to cover losses like this.

But you think the price of this TV is somehow getting deducted from the CEO's salary...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2019, 03:54 PM
 
3,114 posts, read 798,991 times
Reputation: 3635
You don't just deliver a TV without a signature. Or if the receiver wanted to claim naivete, you never really know what's in the box until you open it.

The fact that if it was in his house (especially if unboxed and plugged in) it sure didn't help matters. But the one thing to the guy's defense is no, you're not entitled to own what's misdirected to your address, BUT he is NOT LIABLE for return shipping costs.

The turnout of this case will depend on if he made a good faith effort (in the eyes of law enforcement) to contact the merchant to attempt to return it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2019, 04:23 PM
 
19,769 posts, read 11,024,670 times
Reputation: 19790
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
Thank you! Someone finally got it in one!


This isn't an instance of someone sending merchandise unordered; but rather a mistaken delivery that the company tried to correct. If the guy has any proof that will stand up in court original seller told him "not to worry about it" and or otherwise keep the second television set that is another matter.


My guess is the shipping company is on the hook for their mistake and that is what prompted them to take action in first place.
The shipping company is the obvious most likely point of failure, so certainly they have to prove that they delivered to the correct address and that the property was accepted by the correct person.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2019, 04:25 PM
 
Location: Riding a rock floating through space
1,857 posts, read 530,122 times
Reputation: 4672
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddm2k View Post
You don't just deliver a TV without a signature. Or if the receiver wanted to claim naivete, you never really know what's in the box until you open it.

The fact that if it was in his house (especially if unboxed and plugged in) it sure didn't help matters. But the one thing to the guy's defense is no, you're not entitled to own what's misdirected to your address, BUT he is NOT LIABLE for return shipping costs.

The turnout of this case will depend on if he made a good faith effort (in the eyes of law enforcement) to contact the merchant to attempt to return it.
If this guy wouldn't cooperate with the police about returning it, I think we can safely assume he wouldn't cooperate with the shipping company first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2019, 04:26 PM
 
19,769 posts, read 11,024,670 times
Reputation: 19790
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddm2k View Post
You don't just deliver a TV without a signature. Or if the receiver wanted to claim naivete, you never really know what's in the box until you open it.

The fact that if it was in his house (especially if unboxed and plugged in) it sure didn't help matters. But the one thing to the guy's defense is no, you're not entitled to own what's misdirected to your address, BUT he is NOT LIABLE for return shipping costs.
The shipper went to his house to retrieve the package--but he turned them away--so there's no question of shipping cost liability.

Quote:
The turnout of this case will depend on if he made a good faith effort (in the eyes of law enforcement) to contact the merchant to attempt to return it.
Law enforcement arrested him, so we know what he looks like in their eyes.
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. The time now is 05:08 PM.

© 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