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 03-23-2019, 09:07 AM
 
Location: Riding a rock floating through space
1,857 posts, read 531,417 times
Reputation: 4672

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandon View Post
Here's a question: Why is something done about a situation like this, where the person who ordered the larger set is obviously rich...so of course the police are going to help find and bust the thief, right ?

But someone in MY situation who is poor, has a 30 dollar rare DVD stolen out of my locked mailbox by a neighbor....but the police say they can't do anything about that ?

This illustrates my problem with this story. Either you bust ALL Thieves or you bust none. Just because my DVD only cost what seems like a few bucks to the cops and the wealthy, is a lot of money to spend on a DVD.
It's not the guy who bought the tv that is out money, it's the shipping company that made the mistake that is looking at the loss.
Aside from that, just because someone buys a $2k tv doesn't mean they are rich, could be put on a credit card or be his life savings for all you know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-23-2019, 09:10 AM
 
Location: Texas
43,403 posts, read 52,393,689 times
Reputation: 70378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandon View Post
Here's a question: Why is something done about a situation like this, where the person who ordered the larger set is obviously rich...so of course the police are going to help find and bust the thief, right ?

But someone in MY situation who is poor, has a 30 dollar rare DVD stolen out of my locked mailbox by a neighbor....but the police say they can't do anything about that ?

This illustrates my problem with this story. Either you bust ALL Thieves or you bust none. Just because my DVD only cost what seems like a few bucks to the cops and the wealthy, is a lot of money to spend on a DVD.
The wine in my story was quite expensive.
No one cared.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2019, 09:22 AM
 
17,067 posts, read 10,046,192 times
Reputation: 28511
Well, as some have pointed out, the law is technically on the side of this guy.

According to the FTC, one may legally keep an item that was not ordered but received, as a free gift.

Even Amazon's website is a bit vague on this matter, leaving it up to the individual if they want to return an item.

However, the FTC guideline is open to interpretation. I noticed it doesn't mention anything about HOW the recipient received the item. Meaning, it doesn't say whether the recipient found the package on the doorstep, or whether the recipient signed for the delivery. In my opinion that's where the cops may have a case for what they are charging the guy with, false pretense, because the guy is claiming he didn't sign for the item, while the delivery service said he did.

By the way, how long before someone creates this same topic in the P&OC section of this forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2019, 09:38 AM
 
970 posts, read 333,567 times
Reputation: 3020
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
Yup. You are lucky.
I sent a wine order to my friend's old address by mistake (I had it switched in my book).
It was a gift to congratulate her for publishing a book.

The new people at the house signed for it and kept it and refused to give it back.
The wine company (wine.com) refused to help bc it was delivered to the given address (even though the wrong person signed for it - they don't seem to want to take responsibility for the correct recipient getting the package). UPS did not care either (again, not their problem if the wrong person signs for something).
We never saw the wine again.

People be scummy.
I hope it wasn't me who received your bottle of wine. LOL.

We received a bottle of wine via UPS (no signature required) that was addressed to a previous homeowner. I returned the package to UPS and explained the recipient was no longer at this address. I wrote on the box - "Return to Sender. Recipient no longer at this address." UPS re-delivered it to us - THREE times. After the third time, my husband threw it in the trash. We did our due diligence to return the package. UPS did not care.




The man should have returned the TV.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2019, 09:48 AM
 
Location: Texas
43,403 posts, read 52,393,689 times
Reputation: 70378
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnaGWS View Post
I hope it wasn't me who received your bottle of wine. LOL.

We received a bottle of wine via UPS (no signature required) that was addressed to a previous homeowner. I returned the package to UPS and explained the recipient was no longer at this address. I wrote on the box - "Return to Sender. Recipient no longer at this address." UPS re-delivered it to us - THREE times. After the third time, my husband threw it in the trash. We did our due diligence to return the package. UPS did not care.




The man should have returned the TV.
LOL! No. It was quite obviously not you. The people who signed for it and took it lied about taking it and acted like they had no idea what was going on.
Not upstanding folks like yourself.

I, too, have tried to return stuff (even when it has required quite a bit of inconvenience). I don't believe found stuff is 'up for grabs.' There's something karmically messed up about that way of thinking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2019, 09:52 AM
 
Location: Riding a rock floating through space
1,857 posts, read 531,417 times
Reputation: 4672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburban_Guy View Post
Well, as some have pointed out, the law is technically on the side of this guy.

According to the FTC, one may legally keep an item that was not ordered but received, as a free gift.

Even Amazon's website is a bit vague on this matter, leaving it up to the individual if they want to return an item.

However, the FTC guideline is open to interpretation. I noticed it doesn't mention anything about HOW the recipient received the item. Meaning, it doesn't say whether the recipient found the package on the doorstep, or whether the recipient signed for the delivery. In my opinion that's where the cops may have a case for what they are charging the guy with, false pretense, because the guy is claiming he didn't sign for the item, while the delivery service said he did.

By the way, how long before someone creates this same topic in the P&OC section of this forum.
I don't think the law is on his side at all. Receiving and keeping something sent to you by mistake is called conversion, and it's a crime. This guy apparently was given the chance to send it back before the cops were called, he deserves what he gets for being greedy and unethical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2019, 10:24 AM
 
3,194 posts, read 1,800,762 times
Reputation: 8427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburban_Guy View Post
Well, as some have pointed out, the law is technically on the side of this guy.

According to the FTC, one may legally keep an item that was not ordered but received, as a free gift.

Even Amazon's website is a bit vague on this matter, leaving it up to the individual if they want to return an item.

However, the FTC guideline is open to interpretation. I noticed it doesn't mention anything about HOW the recipient received the item. Meaning, it doesn't say whether the recipient found the package on the doorstep, or whether the recipient signed for the delivery. In my opinion that's where the cops may have a case for what they are charging the guy with, false pretense, because the guy is claiming he didn't sign for the item, while the delivery service said he did.

By the way, how long before someone creates this same topic in the P&OC section of this forum.
The problem is that the FTC deals exclusively with fraudulent transactions, or the lack thereof. They have neither the mandate or the ability to alter or decide the ownership of items NOT part of a fraudulent transaction or scam. There are no laws in the USA giving ownership to the unintended recipient of a miss-sent item ownership of said item. Context is everything in these cases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2019, 10:42 AM
 
970 posts, read 333,567 times
Reputation: 3020
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
LOL! No. It was quite obviously not you. The people who signed for it and took it lied about taking it and acted like they had no idea what was going on.
Not upstanding folks like yourself.

I, too, have tried to return stuff (even when it has required quite a bit of inconvenience). I don't believe found stuff is 'up for grabs.' There's something karmically messed up about that way of thinking.
I agree. If it is not yours, it is not yours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2019, 11:27 AM
 
Location: A tropical island
4,541 posts, read 4,405,708 times
Reputation: 11162
Quote:
Originally Posted by bpollen View Post
If anyone should ever need PROOF of anything, Amazon provides a button in your "Order" on amazon.com, for you to report anything like the wrong item delivered, item defective, you need to return it....anything.

So probably not a good idea just to call them on the phone for something that HAS been delivered. It should be put in writing, and Amazon provides an easy way to do that. You can also call, but best to put it in writing.

I had a defective DVD once from a third party seller. I hit the button for that item in my "orders" list on amazon. com, to notify the seller of the problem. Then they notified me they'd send a replacement. I did follow up with a call to tell them I'd return the one I got, but they told me not to bother. Since I had written proof I had notified them of the problem and them saying they'd send me a replacement, it wasn't a worry.
But if something shows up that I did not order, it won't show up when I click on "My Orders." I suppose if I wanted a record of what Amazon said to me, I could do an online chat (requesting a transcript at the end) instead of a phone call.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2019, 11:34 AM
Status: "Harlan Ogilvy was right!" (set 10 days ago)
 
Location: Bel Air, California
21,260 posts, read 21,760,201 times
Reputation: 33356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulsker 1856 View Post



That's a good example, but it will go right over the heads of those who think there's actually a law that says: FINDERS, KEEPERS.
I actually tried to find that precedent, but apparently it doesn't exist

apparently, my older siblings were lying to me all those years ago
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 · Bug Bounty

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