Refused contract - still received phone

thomaslemon01

Hi - really need some advice.
I applied for a phone onlineon 12 month contract through an agent - but contract wwith orange. I then recived a text message and an email to say refused due to bad credit- fair enough...
3 days later I receive a phone with a sim card saying if i put the sim card in the phone I am under contract --I have not done this.

I have tried to contact the company 6 times - never any reponse or reply from them. ( I have copies of all emails i have sent them).

Where do I stand, should I use the ahndset and throw the sim and think myself lucky - or do i contact them

I personally think its reallybad not to reply - its their mistake, they are out of pocket etc.

Money_Grabber13579

Personally I would try and contact them again, and if there is no response within a reasonable period of time, feel free to use away! Probably without the sim card though. Not sure what a reasonable period of time is though, but for legal purposes, I think it's a year!

What company is it?

samba

Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Protection_(Distance_Selling)_Regulations_2000

"Unsolicited Goods. Where goods are sent to a consumer (this requirement is redundant here) with no contract stipulating delivery, the "recipient may [...] use, deal with, or dispose of the goods as if they were an unconditional gift to him"[14] and "[t]he rights of the sender to the goods are extinguished"[15]. This is to prevent companies purporting to be entitled to monies whereby an individual receives goods and uses them. Note: this provision merely amends the Unsolicited Goods Act which provided that to be unsolicited goods, they had to be deliberately sent to the recipient with the intention that they used them. Goods sent in error are thus not unsolicited, but remain the property of the sender unless they are actually used. Title passes if the sender fails to recover them within three months."

If you use the phone then you are liable to pay for it - otherwise if it they don't collect it within 3 months then it's yours. However, I beleive you must make all reasonable efforts to inform them of the error first ( which you have done).

fwor

samba wrote: »

Taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Protection_(Distance_Selling)_Regulations_2000

"Unsolicited Goods. Where goods are sent to a consumer (this requirement is redundant here) with no contract stipulating delivery, the "recipient may [...] use, deal with, or dispose of the goods as if they were an unconditional gift to him"[14] and "[t]he rights of the sender to the goods are extinguished"[15]. This is to prevent companies purporting to be entitled to monies whereby an individual receives goods and uses them. Note: this provision merely amends the Unsolicited Goods Act which provided that to be unsolicited goods, they had to be deliberately sent to the recipient with the intention that they used them. Goods sent in error are thus not unsolicited, but remain the property of the sender unless they are actually used. Title passes if the sender fails to recover them within three months."

If you use the phone then you are liable to pay for it - otherwise if it they don't collect it within 3 months then it's yours. However, I beleive you must make all reasonable efforts to inform them of the error first ( which you have done).

samba - did you check the Distance Selling Regulations to confirm that the phrase "Title passes if the sender fails to recover them within three months" appears in it? I think the wiki may be plain wrong there, and this term does not appear anywhere in it.

If that's true then the item is not the OP's after 3 months.

bingo_bango

Sorry to rain on the naysayer's parade here, but unsolicited goods are treated as belonging to the consumer IMMEDIATELY they arrive. It is an offence for the trader to pursue payment for them under the Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971 (BERR guidance), but as the OP placed an order for them, it cannot now be claimed that they are unsolicited. Either you inform the trader that you have received them or you may receive an unexpected bill! Make sure you do it in writing.

samba

fwor wrote: »

samba - did you check the Distance Selling Regulations to confirm that the phrase "Title passes if the sender fails to recover them within three months" appears in it? I think the wiki may be plain wrong there, and this term does not appear anywhere in it.

If that's true then the item is not the OP's after 3 months.

Well if you believe the wiki to be wrong then feel free to edit it

sporedude

Wikipedia for law sources? Lol.

Jon_01

sporedude wrote: »

Wikipedia for law sources? Lol.

From the school of 'if it's on the internet it must be true".

sporedude

Lol! Cant believe people use that site for a source of information on laws. Its as reliable as a chocolate hard drive.