MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Alan give the laptop back?

catkins

x-shysteria-x wrote: »

I definitely wouldn't bother owning up - the cashier will learn from her mistakes - my conscience would be clear and I'd be very pleased with my bargain for the day. If it broke or got stolen, Oh well!!! I only lost £4.00 and could get another laptop for £395.00

The cashier may well learn from their mistake by getting the sack - thought of that!

I am amazed just how many people think it would be ok to take the item at £3.99 - just shows what a selfish and greedy society we live in.

If Alan was happy to pay £399 (the proper price!) then he should pay it. The cashier made a mistake which anyone can do. How anyone that took advantage of a mistake can live with their conscience I do not know.

Also a lot of tills (like the ones where I work) you have to scan the barcode but then put in the price manually and it is easy to make a mistake although usually you do notice it.

boxoffireworks

andy_hunk wrote: »

But this IS legal as the sale went through before the store realised the error, do you think that they would have the same argument if Alan was charged £3,999? then they would soon agree that the computer is his and that he can't return it because there is no fault.

This is NOT legal; it is theft since the buyer knew that the store had made a mistake and decided to keep quiet about it. This is well supported by case law.

The original question (from memory) was whether it is morally wrong to keep it and say nothing. When can theft ever be morally right?

Gekite

hyperbole wrote: »

What if you wanted to get insurance for that laptop? I guess you would have to provide the receipt to estimate the cost of replacement but then again to loose the PC that is worth £3.99 wont heart you that much.

No, insurance doesn't work that way.

hyperbole wrote: »

I say why be a hypocrite and gain profits from others weaknesses/mistakes I am quite sure you wouldn’t like to be charged for something that is not worth that much. If you were willing to pay £399 pay £399. I call it greed

I'm not sure I quite follow, but you are referring to the practice of business on a daily basis, we are generally always charged more than something is worth, otherwise there would be no such thing as profit. Most worth is artificially manufactured. So Alan got something for far less than he would anywhere else, maybe tomorrow Alan will pay for something at 1000 times it's worth. That's how business works, will the business say oh no hang about I only bought than for 2p so it's not fair to you if I sell it on for more than say 4p, erm no, so where is that great so-called morality now or does it only apply to the people that buy and not those that provide? There are hundreds upon hundreds of companies that trade in manufactured items that sell for pennies, yet a consumer will be charged pounds.

What is greedy about wanted to get something for less? Sounds sensible to me. Do you not haggle, do you not shop around? Why are you here? Arguably the greed is in wanting the item in the first place, not in wanting it for less and not in being able to get it for or being charged less.

My last laptop was free, not even £3.99 how greedy am I for not even paying one cent for it!?

A.Jones

catkins wrote: »

The cashier may well learn from their mistake by getting the sack - thought of that!

If it is a trainee on their first day, let's face it, they are going to get the sack anyway once the manager knows, whether or not the customer cannot live themself for getting a good deal.

A.Jones

boxoffireworks wrote: »

This is NOT legal; it is theft since the buyer knew that the store had made a mistake and decided to keep quiet about it. This is well supported by case law.

So when I buy something in Tescos that is advertised on the shelf at one price, and scanning at another (lower) price, and I know the scanned price is wrong, then I am committing theft?

In that case, you better inform the police of the Tesco misprices thread on MSE.

Dungbeetel

Gekite wrote: »

As for my children, I bring them up to understand that others exist and to realise that what they think isn't necessarily to be considered right beyond question. So in effect more morally honest, more accepting of other human beings and more open to life in general.

I'm with KidMoe in response to that.

Gekite wrote: »

That's up to the store manager and his conscience. He already seems like quite an understanding chap as he's just informed Alan of the position on the purchase of the laptop.

Agreed. I wonder why he would mention it then ?

Gekite wrote: »

I'm sure he'll just put it down to one of those things that happen in business. This day the customer won tomorrow and the next no doubt the store manager and his business will once more be king.

We don't know. I'm reminded of Basil Fawlty who was very good at showing one face to customers then slapping Manuel around the head.

I'm not a manager, but I imagine that store managers are well aware of the threat to their livelyhood from online shopping. His/her business is king no more. Margins are slim and those that provide good customer service will be more likely to survive.

Gekite

KidMoe wrote: »

The only lesson you would teach a kid by keeping the laptop at 3.99 is that it's ok to screw other people for your own personal gain. Regardless of whether it was bought at a chain or an indie, someone is going to have to take responsibility for the mistake.

There's no way you can claim that you thought the laptop was on sale for 3.99. It's completely dishonest, and just as bad as shoplifting in my opinon.

NO other person has been 'screwed', it was a business transaction and it certainly wasn't for any personal gain. Alan purchased the laptop, not me! Alan purchased the laptop at the price agreed at checkout. And there are many lessons that can be learnt from such as this. One such is that it is better too measure twice before cutting - that is to double check before committing oneself to a course of action.

I taught mine how to get one for nothing? I got a good bargain on my washer as well. How bad am I! I must be morally untouchable! Or is it that because you didn't get one at that price that you spitefully want to prevent others from doing so. There are many who just can't be happy for other peoples good fortune, good sense or ability to perform an act better than another. Sour grapes!

Why is it that because it wasn't sold for the full £399 that it is somehow wrong? Sounds like too many have been taught to pay the price as asked, not to question and blindly accept what you're told. How sad is that! Personally I didn't grow up only in Britain so haven't been as affected by the indoctrination your elites.

Opinions are great aren't they, they need absolutely nothing to support them but a sense of ones own self-righteousness.

Gekite

Dungbeetel wrote: »

I'm with KidMoe in response to that.

Then like them, I suspect that you failed to understand what was actually said and the context it was delivered in.

So someone managed to buy a laptop for £3.99 big deal.

KidMoe

Gekite wrote: »

NO other person has been 'screwed', it was a business transaction and it certainly wasn't for any personal gain. Alan purchased the laptop, not me! Alan purchased the laptop at the price agreed at checkout. And there are many lessons that can be learnt from such as this. One such is that it is better too measure twice before cutting - that is to double check before committing oneself to a course of action.

How has Alan not gained from the dishonest action? He's got a laptop at a discount of £390 odd pounds, despite initially intending to pay £399. He's deliberately taken advantage of a innocent mistake. The only lesson (such as it is) to be learnt from this is that dishonesty to the detriment of others is acceptable.

Gekite wrote: »

I taught mine how to get one for nothing? I got a good bargain on my washer as well. How bad am I! I must be morally untouchable! Or is it that because you didn't get one at that price that you spitefully want to prevent others from doing so. There are many who just can't be happy for other peoples good fortune, good sense or ability to perform an act better than another.

There is a world of difference between haggling on price and accepting what could not be a more glaring mistake. Haggling involves both purchaser and seller to agree on the price. It's nothing to do with spite, it's about knowing the difference between theft and honest bartering. You clearly do not. If Alan was to offer to sell me the laptop for say, a tenner, I would do so and then return it to the shop.

Gekite wrote: »

Why is it that because it wasn't sold for the full £399 that it is somehow wrong? Sounds like too many have been taught to pay the price as asked, not to question and blindly accept what you're told. How sad is that! Personally I didn't grow up only in Britain so haven't been as affected by the indoctrination your elites.

It's wrong because the item was being offered at 399, and not 3.99. It's quite simple. Again, this is not the same as haggling a price down legitimately.

Gekite wrote: »

Opinions are great aren't they, they need absolutely nothing to support them but a sense of ones own self-righteousness.

I like to think of it as the difference between being a decent person or a common thief. Once again, if Alan takes the laptop at the reduced price he is a shoplifter in my eyes. Wrap it up in 'victimless-crime' cotton wool if you like, when it comes down to it an actual person, not the business is going to be held responsible and will suffer accordingly.

vsdallow

Alan knew the price of the laptop was £399 and should have mentioned this at the till instead of keeping quiet. :mad: I have a shop myself and would be really gutted if somebody did this kind of trick to me & my business. Alan should give the laptop back, or pay the proper price. Sorry if I sound nerdy, but there you go!