Can I keep it?

anewman

Wow so when I accidentally sent someone on Ebay a priceless vase worth £3 million rather than the cheapie worth 50p they bid on I sent unsolicited goods? No wonder when I asked for it back they weren't having any of it!

Jokes aside, I would keep it. If they ask for it back ignore them, and see how guilty you feel whether you send it back or not, then if they follow up the request for the item to be returned with a credible threat, seriously consider returning the item.

As has already been said many flat screen plasmas come with separate speakers designed for the model. A home cinema system would be much more substantial and would have an amp type thingy (called a receiver).

avondale

Personally my thoughts on it is that it's theft, one of the ways of committing theft is to keep the property, stating the obvious lol, obviously in these circumstances there are mitigating factors in that you say item was addressed to you . Personally it's totally down to you, a quick phone call to them might just solve the issue.

Plushchris

How can it be theft????


So if I were to send you something, in your eyes could I then call you a theif??

Ridiculous!


The next thing you will be suggesting is the postman/delivery driver should be getting done for handling stolen goods!

Plushchris

From Dictionary.com....

theft
–noun
1. the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny.
2. an instance of this.
3. Archaic. something stolen.



Hmmm, nothing there about having stuff delivered :rolleyes:

ni4abargain

So tell us sarahabutair, what have you done???? The suspense is killing me.....

LisaT186

I have to say I'd call the company, simply because someone may have made an error and put your name and address on the box instead of the next label and some poor cusomter is sitting around waiting for their home cinema system! If the goods are 'lost' they may have to wait ages for a replacement and they were looking forward to it!

ohdearme_2

I don't know why people are quoting the Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971 as the paragraphs you are quoting were amended by The Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000

In particular

"Amendments to the Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971
22. - (1) The Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971[12] is amended as follows.

(2) Omit section 1 (rights of recipient of unsolicited goods).


As this is NOT Inertia Selling - its a mistake by the company, the following DOES NOT APPLY as 24B and 24C would imply the goods could be kept.

"Inertia Selling
24. - (1) Paragraphs (2) and (3) apply if -

(a) unsolicited goods are sent to a person ("the recipient") with a view to his acquiring them;

(b) the recipient has no reasonable cause to believe that they were sent with a view to their being acquired for the purposes of a business; and

(c) the recipient has neither agreed to acquire nor agreed to return them.

(2) The recipient may, as between himself and the sender, use, deal with or dispose of the goods as if they were an unconditional gift to him.

(3) The rights of the sender to the goods are extinguished."


Anyway, this should come under the Theft Act of 1968, as the goods are "belonging to another".

"Where a person gets property by another’s mistake, and is under an obligation to
make restoration (in whole or in part) of the property or its proceeds or of the value thereof, then to the extent of that obligation the property or proceeds shall be regarded (as against him) as belonging to the person entitled to restoration, and an intention not to make restoration shall be regarded accordingly as an intention to deprive that person of the property or proceeds."

It would be a criminal offence to keep the goods, punishable by up to 7 years in jail, and ignorance of the law in no defence.

If I were you, I'd call the company and find out whats going on. Worst that could happen is you'd have to have the goods picked up.

Stevee wrote: »

If someone does turn up and you happen to be out.........

Then you'd better make sure the next time you are actually there, as this would just be compounding your problems.

Big_Momma_3

I am a small business owner and have to say that it makes me sad to see that we just don't live in a day when honesty (the kind where you don't have to ask the public to verify your actions as correct) is few and far between.

Our business has sent items incorrectly (down to human error, courier error or just because we do not have a state of the art ordering system) - and more often than not they do not get returned. It costs us a great deal.

We once sent out £400 worth of stock and it never got returned. I did not get paid that month, as we just couldn't (as a growing business) afford to absorb the loss. It just seems crazy to me that in general we don't view businesses as 'people' - and that we exploit mistakes to get gain.

Ho hum - I guess at the end of the day, one more failed business is not going to make you lose sleep. I just hope I can teach my children to act with integrity. Ultimately we all have to act how we feel is best, and we each live with the consequences.

Plushchris

ohdearme wrote: »

Anyway, this should come under the Theft Act of 1968, as the goods are "belonging to another".

"Where a person gets property by another’s mistake, and is under an obligation to
make restoration (in whole or in part) of the property or its proceeds or of the value thereof, then to the extent of that obligation the property or proceeds shall be regarded (as against him) as belonging to the person entitled to restoration, and an intention not to make restoration shall be regarded accordingly as an intention to deprive that person of the property or proceeds."

It would be a criminal offence to keep the goods, punishable by up to 7 years in jail, and ignorance of the law in no defence.

While I can see what you mean, how are you under obligation to make restoration when they have sent the item to you?

I guess the law can be read in two ways, I personally cannot see how the OP would be under any obligation to restore the goods.

The word "and" is the deciding factor here, "Where a person gets property by another’s mistake, and is under an obligation to
make restoration"

The goods have been delivered and maybe even signed for.

The laws people are quoting here would mean that nobody should throw out anything that comes through the post as if the sender requested it back and you didnt supply it, you would then be considered a theif.

I better get that credit card application I got through the post this morning out of the bin then in case they ask for it back.

ohdearme_2

Plushchris wrote: »

I personally cannot see how the OP would be under any obligation to restore the goods.
The word "and" is the deciding factor here, "Where a person gets property by another’s mistake, and is under an obligation to make restoration"

Receiving the goods is clearly an unjust enrichment, restoration means restitution, which is a remedy for unjust enrichment.