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 03-22-2019, 02:25 PM
 
20,262 posts, read 16,451,303 times
Reputation: 38025

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by blktoptrvl View Post
Law seems pretty straightforward, what laws have you read that contradict this?

https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Consumer/...erchandise.asp

"Have you ever received merchandise out of the blue that you didn’t actually order? Some people have. This column explains your legal rights if a merchant sends you something you did not order and do not want.

In some cases, the merchandise may be accompanied by a letter asking the recipient to pay for the item or return it. Other times, the fine print may state that acceptance of the “free” merchandise will enroll the consumer into a “club” that requires regular payments. When this happens, consumers often have a number of questions: Do I have to pay for the merchandise? Am I required to return it? Is this legal?

Under state and federal law, recipients of unordered merchandise may keep the goods and are under no obligation to pay for or return them. The recipient may treat the merchandise as an unconditional gift—and may use or dispose of the merchandise as he or she sees fit. The recipient also may refuse to accept delivery. Federal law states that the sender cannot send you a bill or collection notice for unordered merchandise."
It doesn’t apply when you DID order something from a company and they sent one extra by mistake. It is about when you did NIT have any dealings with a business but they sent it anyway. The law you keep quoting is about scams not legit mistakes on a purchase.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2019, 02:27 PM
Status: "Harlan Ogilvy was right!" (set 7 days ago)
 
Location: Bel Air, California
21,253 posts, read 21,750,689 times
Reputation: 33348
Quote:
Originally Posted by eliza61nyc View Post
ok, I've can't get mad at the guy because this was what happened to me.

I ordered a pair of Michael kors boots from Bloomingdales. for some reason they sent me two pair. so trying to be a good citizen I take them back to Bloomies, they take the boots and say they have to give me a gift card. I tell them, I don't want any thing that this is actually an "extra" pair.

Well, that cause all kinds of confusion because they don't have any procedure for just "taking" some thing without giving some sort of return. cash, credit of gc.

finally after 2 hours of calling, speaking with managers, etc. the store manager says to just keep them. I decide to mail them back..... they credited my account. SMH
should have just made a dash out the store, although you'd probably would have been chased by store security blowing their whistle and attempting to give you the boots back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PinaCarlotta View Post
I'm related to someone who'd have no problem taking advantage of a mistake like this guy did. yuck. What slimy behavior. You know you didn't pay for it, give it back if asked, and definitely if demanded.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2019, 02:28 PM
 
15,352 posts, read 13,395,567 times
Reputation: 20789
Quote:
Originally Posted by blktoptrvl View Post
Law seems pretty straightforward, what laws have you read that contradict this?

https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Consumer/...erchandise.asp

"Have you ever received merchandise out of the blue that you didn’t actually order? Some people have. This column explains your legal rights if a merchant sends you something you did not order and do not want.

In some cases, the merchandise may be accompanied by a letter asking the recipient to pay for the item or return it. Other times, the fine print may state that acceptance of the “free” merchandise will enroll the consumer into a “club” that requires regular payments. When this happens, consumers often have a number of questions: Do I have to pay for the merchandise? Am I required to return it? Is this legal?

Under state and federal law, recipients of unordered merchandise may keep the goods and are under no obligation to pay for or return them. The recipient may treat the merchandise as an unconditional gift—and may use or dispose of the merchandise as he or she sees fit. The recipient also may refuse to accept delivery. Federal law states that the sender cannot send you a bill or collection notice for unordered merchandise."
And yet none of this applies; being pretty obtuse, aren't you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2019, 02:31 PM
 
3,774 posts, read 1,946,770 times
Reputation: 17941
Quote:
Originally Posted by blktoptrvl View Post
Law seems pretty straightforward, what laws have you read that contradict this?

https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Consumer/...erchandise.asp

"Have you ever received merchandise out of the blue that you didn’t actually order? Some people have. This column explains your legal rights if a merchant sends you something you did not order and do not want.

In some cases, the merchandise may be accompanied by a letter asking the recipient to pay for the item or return it. Other times, the fine print may state that acceptance of the “free” merchandise will enroll the consumer into a “club” that requires regular payments. When this happens, consumers often have a number of questions: Do I have to pay for the merchandise? Am I required to return it? Is this legal?

Under state and federal law, recipients of unordered merchandise may keep the goods and are under no obligation to pay for or return them. The recipient may treat the merchandise as an unconditional gift—and may use or dispose of the merchandise as he or she sees fit. The recipient also may refuse to accept delivery. Federal law states that the sender cannot send you a bill or collection notice for unordered merchandise."
Nope. That doesn't apply here. The company didn't send him the TV. It was delivered to him by mistake. He is wrong to keep it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2019, 02:37 PM
 
Location: SC
8,774 posts, read 5,601,715 times
Reputation: 12765
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl View Post
It doesn’t apply when you DID order something from a company and they sent one extra by mistake. It is about when you did NIT have any dealings with a business but they sent it anyway. The law you keep quoting is about scams not legit mistakes on a purchase.
What law are you quoting? Please post it. And there is nothing in the law I quoted that says it is only valid in the case of scams. You seem to think there is a law - that's OK, but unless you can provide a reference, I will continue to believe that the law I quotes - that covers this situation is in effect.

You folks want to talk about what is right or wrong... On that basis I can agree, but I am talking about a written on paper (ok, electrons) law that is on the books. Laws are not invalid just because you don't think they should be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2019, 02:39 PM
 
Location: SC
8,774 posts, read 5,601,715 times
Reputation: 12765
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javacoffee View Post
Nope. That doesn't apply here. The company didn't send him the TV. It was delivered to him by mistake. He is wrong to keep it.
I'm sorry, did you see the delivery label? If it was indeed addressed to someone else, I would agree with you. But nowhere in the article did I read that it was misaddressed; can you point that out? Nowhere in the law that I posed does it say that mistakes invalidate the law. If it does, please quote that portion for me, I am not seeing it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2019, 02:46 PM
 
Location: SC
8,774 posts, read 5,601,715 times
Reputation: 12765
You folks can continue to quote what you "want" or "believe" the law says. I am quoting what it actually says. If you can prove otherwise, please do so, Otherwise I'm done here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2019, 02:47 PM
 
Location: A Yankee in northeast TN
10,342 posts, read 14,207,405 times
Reputation: 22782
Quote:
Originally Posted by blktoptrvl View Post
I'm sorry, did you see the delivery label? If it was indeed addressed to someone else, I would agree with you. But nowhere in the article did I read that it was misaddressed; can you point that out? Nowhere in the law that I posed does it say that mistakes invalidate the law. If it does, please quote that portion for me, I am not seeing it.
While the article isn't detailed this statement would indicate the man knowingly kept a package meant for someone else.
"The shipping company claims that Memmo signed for the incorrect delivery, which Memmo disputes. He also said that he never informed them he was someone he is not."

It does seem that this should be easy to prove if the shipping company has a copy of his signature where he signed for the delivery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2019, 02:50 PM
 
Location: SC
8,774 posts, read 5,601,715 times
Reputation: 12765
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubbleT View Post
While the article isn't detailed this statement would indicate the man knowingly accepted a package meant for someone else.
"The shipping company claims that Memmo signed for the incorrect delivery, which Memmo disputes. He also said that he never informed them he was someone he is not."
A delivery order can say 500 gumballs when only 1 was ordered to the correct person and address, that that is a mistake I would say is not covered. Again it has nothing to do with the law as written.

The second sentence, maybe you have a point, but it is not spelled out in the article. If a follow up article say that it was addressed to another person, then as I said above, then I agree.

Until then, it is an unknown and nebulous.

"The company also said Memmo signed for the delivery, which he disputes."

Last edited by blktoptrvl; 03-22-2019 at 03:00 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2019, 02:54 PM
 
Location: A Yankee in northeast TN
10,342 posts, read 14,207,405 times
Reputation: 22782
Quote:
Originally Posted by blktoptrvl View Post
A delivery order can say 500 gumballs when only 1 was ordered to the correct person and address, that is a mistake, the same kind of mistake you are quoting. Again it has nothing to do with the law as written.

The second sentence, maybe you have a point, but it is not spelled out in the article. If a follow up article say that it was addressed to another person, them as I said above, then I agree.
No, that mistake would be in fulfilling the order, this is a delivery error which has nothing to do with the retailer. The retailer isn't on the hook for this, the delivery company is, which is why Amazon didn't care but the delivery company opened an investigation.
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