MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Alan give the laptop back?
Comments
-
Ignoring the moral obligation, wouldn't this be gaining a pecuniary advantage?
As for the moral obligation, of course you should pay the difference, even if it is only a penny. I would argue you should be bringing attention to the misprice before it was processed at the till.
If something is (obviously) mispriced on a shelf (or online) and you make an offer of that price and they accept, that is a more shaky moral ground as you have offered the price asked - we're back to the original Kodak misprice here. I think I could walk away with a clear conscience in a case like that as they offered an item at a price, I offered that price and they accepted. A mistake in the actual ringing through at the till (typing 399 into the card machine instead of 39900 for example) I would point out.Ignore the username - feel free to call me Goblin or Stuart
0 -
Something like this happened to me in Ikea. I was buying a wardrobe with lots of component boxes and they forgot to scan four boxes worth about £50 each. The amount was much lower than I was expecting and when they gave me the receipt I saw what the mistake was and told them. To knowingly walk out when you've not paid for something is wrong, whether they've made a mistake or not.
That is actually different as you haven't been charged anything four boxes and therefore technically would have stolen them if you walked out. As you had no receipt for those four items.0 -
I once accepted a fake £20 (we had no equipment for identifying fake notes) and had it taken out of my wages. I earned £3.30 an hour at the time. For that reason, I would never accept a mistake in a shop.
Yes, legally the laptop would be yours, but you can't say that it was "gladly" offered at £3.99. It was *mistakenly* offered at that price, and at no point did the buyer genuinely believe it was the true price.
I would probably be tempted, but someone somewhere is going to have to take personal responsibility for the mistake, so I would point out the error at the till.0 -
I think I could walk away with a clear conscience in a case like that as they offered an item at a price, I offered that price and they accepted.
That is no different to here. They offer the item at a price of £3.99, you offer them that price by handing them the cash / giving them your card / putting your card in the machine (in the shop) or by entering your card details (online). They then agree to the transaction by confirming it by email (online) or receipt (in the shop).0 -
I would probably be tempted, but someone somewhere is going to have to take personal responsibility for the mistake, so I would point out the error at the till.
I would say that morally, the mistake is the manager's. A trainee should be trained. If a manager allows a trainee to work untrained and unsupervised in a position like this on their first day, then it is down to the manager.0 -
That is no different to here. They offer the item at a price of £3.99, you offer them that price by handing them the cash / giving them your card / putting your card in the machine (in the shop) or by entering your card details (online). They then agree to the transaction by confirming it by email (online) or receipt (in the shop).
The way I understood the original question is that the item was for sale at £399 but a mistake in the ringing in at the till (which I can only imagine as feasible if the cashier typed 399 instead of 39900/39999 into the card machine) caused the customer to be charged less than the agreed price *which they noticed* and chose not to say anything, meaning they knew the cashier had made a mistake and the cashier did not.
IF the cashier had asked for £3.99 and accepted that as the price then that is a different matter. I would have questioned it but if they confirmed they only wanted four quid for a laptop THEN the situation would be different.
I would probably still pay the difference but would have strong words with the manager about employing idiots.
I was in KFC last week and was asked £3.89 for something that was priced as £3.99. I questioned the cashier and they shrugged it off saying that's all the till wanted and that's all they would take. In a case like that, no problem.
I think it is interesting at what point being asked too low a price becomes obvious it is a mistake. If the laptop was priced at £399 and they asked £349, that would be a reasonably believable price change. Even £200, if they confirmed it would seem like a great, but plausible, reduction. £4, obviously not, but where would that crossover lie?
I worked in electricals and we sold off a (very) old Laserdisc player for £20 that was still listed on the till as £600. Not a misprice, but the asking vs till price is so different it seems like a mistake until you take account the age of that item.Ignore the username - feel free to call me Goblin or Stuart0 -
#140 No, the price asked for by the company was £3.99. The price asked for is the one in the contract, at the time the contract was made, at the checkout. The clue is in the question - After he'd paid, the manager came up and admited, that the laptop was legally his, but it was an obvious error by a trainee cashier on his first day.
There is no legal problem here, so just moral. Morally, I am happy paying the price that was asked for.
Then the manager is wrong. And there is definitely a legal problem here - it is theft if Alan knew that the price was incorrect. On what are you basing your opinion?
Morally however, is a different matter. I am stating the legal position.0 -
#148 I am basing my opinion on the fact that the manager admitted that legally the laptop was his - and no doubt he has a receipt to prove it.0
-
boxoffireworks wrote: »Then the manager is wrong. And there is definitely a legal problem here - it is theft if Alan knew that the price was incorrect. On what are you basing your opinion?
Morally however, is a different matter. I am stating the legal position.
I think it would be highly unlikely that CPS or the PF would proceed with a case on the evidence here,however if after asking for £3.99, shop insisted on £399.00 their would be a clear trading standards case to answer.The truth may be out there, but the lies are inside your head. Terry Pratchett
http.thisisnotalink.cöm0 -
Why should I be morally bound to answer each and every argument that you raise?
Answering just one would be a useful start! That's usually the correct way for arguments to be conducted.That's a poor defininition of morality.
Twasn't a definition, but the form it takes is actually quite accepting of morality - doing right by your fellow man. You are showing no such regard to your opponents in this discussion. Instead, deploying all the rhetorical tricks of someone out to convince with no consideration shown to anyone else.I've already stated why i don't consider haggling and this dilemna to be the same. I can't be bothered to repeat myself when you aren't really reading what I'm typing anyway.
So if it isn't akin to haggling then it isn't legit? I too don't think this dilemma has anything to do with haggling and I don't believe any but you has attempted to make such a distinction. I'd pay more attention to what you wrote if it made some sense and wasn't deliberately out to further obscure the issue at hand.My moral code equates taking deliberate advantage of someone else's mistake is dishonest, and, in this case, equivalent to theft.
Your moral code?
Taking advantage of another persons mistake is always wrong.
There is not a need to equate it to anything else, an argument should be able to stand by itself without appeals to emotion.
That seems like a worthwhile aim for morality.
Is it really always wrong to take advantage of another persons mistake? I doubt it, but feel free to argue for such a point.Your moral code is completely internalised to ensure you gain advantages regardless of how questionable the action may be.
Not quite, that's just you playing at being a master wordsmith once again. Tell me, have you always had this ability to think yourself right and for everyone else to be morally deficient? Just because Alan appears to have gained in this particular instance doesn't mean that he has. So he got a laptop for £3.99 where the shop had it 'marked up' at £399.00 Is this questionable, of course it is, it isn't called a mark up price for no reason, so my morality does take account of how questionable it is. I suspect however, yours doesn't give a dam. After all if it akin to theft, then why even consider whether it is right or wrong in the circumstances - as surely theft is always wrong.If that's the way you want to live your life than great, but don't kid yourself it's a good example to set to others.
It's a perfect example to set others, shame you aren't willing to go to the trouble of understanding the concept involved, one build on a consistence of thought, one being employed by people the world over. It is certainly a better example to set others than the one of intolerance to others; that you set. And yours seems to be decided on a whim of what you consider to be right. How questionable is that?At this point, I'll point out two things. On internet forums, as soon as someone starts arguing semantics (as you have) you know they are effectively struggling to come up with anything sensible and it's time to make better use of your day.
Oh dear, oh dear. Very bad form, this is one of the oldest tricks in the book, and one considered the least honest. When someone disagrees with you position you attack them for playing with semantics! On re-reading I think you'll find that it is hard to play semantics with something that had no substance in the first place!
As to what I do with my day, it is or very little concern of yours! How many times do you play the man, I've lost count! I bet I'm playing catch up!We are not going to agree, so what's the point of carrying on?
Please stop whenever you want! I'm not forcing you to reply!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343K Banking & Borrowing
- 250K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.6K Spending & Discounts
- 235.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards