Uunfranked stamps query ?

anotheruser

Flyonthewall wrote: »

I would not use the in-store voucher again. I'd wonder why the cashier had given me a worthless voucher back as you can only use it once and I'd just throw it away.

But what if you could use it again, but the voucher was supposed to be retained?

Here's a good example:

I have been using a voucher for a few days now. The voucher is worth £1.89, but the product just so happens to be on special offer for £1.20 meaning I get about 60p spare. So if I add a chocolate bar to my basket, then I get it for free.

The voucher doesn't say "no photocopies", so I photocopied it and have been using the photocopies. The voucher doesn't say "can only be used once" or "only one per transaction" even. It simply states I must buy the product the voucher is for.

If I used the original (cut out from a magazine) then it would have been retained, but it's possible to use the voucher again as I have proven. I didn't want to cut a hole in my magazine so opted to photocopy instead. Of course if the voucher said "no photocopies" then I wouldn't have bothered.

That isn't fraud as I am not breaking any terms on the voucher and it's not my fault the product is on promotion.

But hey, I accept your opinion - you think using a stamp that has already been used, despite it being un-franked is fraud.

The way I see it is if they missed it or couldn't be bothered to ensure it was franked then they obviously don't care too much about it.
If they were losing millions a year because of it, they would fund a better franking machine surely?

But then you must remember, this is a money saving website after all!

ballisticbrian

But hey, I accept your opinion - you think using a stamp that has already been used, despite it being un-franked is fraud.

It's not an opinion, it's the law.

The way I see it is if they missed it or couldn't be bothered to ensure it was franked then they obviously don't care too much about it.

This way of blaming the other party for your indifference to wrong-doing is a form of self justification which I find particularly abhorrent.

campdave

anotheruser wrote: »

But hey, I accept your opinion - you think using a stamp that has already been used, despite it being un-franked is fraud.

It is fraud. It's not a matter of opinion.

What you do or would do in various convoluted scenarios is up to you, but none of them change the fact that reusing stamps is illegal.

lovinituk

anotheruser wrote: »

But hey, I accept your opinion - you think using a stamp that has already been used, despite it being un-franked is fraud.

Try telling this guy it isn't fraud ...

http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Magistrate-resigns-admitting-postal-fraud/story-13259457-detail/story.html

Flyonthewall

anotheruser wrote: »

But what if you could use it again, but the voucher was supposed to be retained?

Well I'd never know it could be used again because I wouldn't try to use it.

anotheruser wrote: »

Here's a good example:

I have been using a voucher for a few days now. The voucher is worth £1.89, but the product just so happens to be on special offer for £1.20 meaning I get about 60p spare. So if I add a chocolate bar to my basket, then I get it for free.

The voucher doesn't say "no photocopies", so I photocopied it and have been using the photocopies. The voucher doesn't say "can only be used once" or "only one per transaction" even. It simply states I must buy the product the voucher is for.

If I used the original (cut out from a magazine) then it would have been retained, but it's possible to use the voucher again as I have proven. I didn't want to cut a hole in my magazine so opted to photocopy instead. Of course if the voucher said "no photocopies" then I wouldn't have bothered.

That isn't fraud as I am not breaking any terms on the voucher and it's not my fault the product is on promotion.

Finding a way to cheat the system doesn't make it right.

anotheruser wrote: »

But hey, I accept your opinion - you think using a stamp that has already been used, despite it being un-franked is fraud.

It's not my opinion. That is the law. There aren't exceptions and finding loop holes doesn't change things.

anotheruser wrote: »

The way I see it is if they missed it or couldn't be bothered to ensure it was franked then they obviously don't care too much about it.
If they were losing millions a year because of it, they would fund a better franking machine surely?

But then you must remember, this is a money saving website after all!

Odd ones being missed is bound to happen with such a large amount of mail, it doesn't mean they don't care or they need better machines and it certainly doesn't mean you can ignore the law.

There's a difference between saving money and breaking the law/scamming people or companies.

If I have a voucher I'll use it (only once if that's all it's meant for), I shop around for the cheapest price and I find the best deals, I research things, I use cashback sites and reward sites and I save a lot of money and get all the items I want at the best price possible. I do not, however, break the law to save some money.

RFW

anotheruser wrote: »

Here's a good example:

Let's bet you're still completely missing the point...

anotheruser wrote: »

I have been using a voucher for a few days now.

Yes, completely. A voucher is not the same as a stamp.

anotheruser wrote: »

The voucher is worth £1.89, but the product just so happens to be on special offer for £1.20 meaning I get about 60p spare. So if I add a chocolate bar to my basket, then I get it for free.

The voucher doesn't say "no photocopies", so I photocopied it and have been using the photocopies. The voucher doesn't say "can only be used once" or "only one per transaction" even. It simply states I must buy the product the voucher is for.

If I used the original (cut out from a magazine) then it would have been retained, but it's possible to use the voucher again as I have proven. I didn't want to cut a hole in my magazine so opted to photocopy instead. Of course if the voucher said "no photocopies" then I wouldn't have bothered.

That isn't fraud as I am not breaking any terms on the voucher and it's not my fault the product is on promotion.

Well done you. The company are using a promotion, probably in association with the retailer. You may be getting one over on them or they may just be using it to retain/obtain customers. It's called marketing.

anotheruser wrote: »

But hey, I accept your opinion - you think using a stamp that has already been used, despite it being un-franked is fraud.

It's not a thought or an opinion, it's a fact based in law.

anotheruser wrote: »

The way I see it is if they missed it or couldn't be bothered to ensure it was franked then they obviously don't care too much about it.

As someone else stated above that's not a good argument. If you find a wallet in the street you may very well take all the cash out of it and dump it in the nearest dustbin, that too is against the law.

anotheruser wrote: »

If they were losing millions a year because of it, they would fund a better franking machine surely?

Most companies have theft/shrinkages built in to their business model. You're one of the reasons RM keep raising prices. Just because a supermarket has £x allowed per year to cover theft doesn't mean you can walk in and nick a TV every time you feel like it.

anotheruser wrote: »

But then you must remember, this is a money saving website after all!

I'm sure lots of us could come up with money saving schemes to operate outside the law. Have you started a thread on which products weigh the same that you can smuggle through self service checkouts to save a few quid?

anotheruser

Gosh, look at you all up in arms because one person (not even me!) wants to re-use a measly stamp.
I admire your protection of Royal Mail and it's finances.

I particularly enjoy the fact people quote the same part and say the same thing, even though the poster before them already said it therefore seemingly adding nothing to the conversation.
Then "thanking" the other posters for saying the same thing.

But really, you're telling me you've never gone over the speed limit when driving? Ever? You've never knowingly broken the law in one way or another?
I guess you also class this as stealing too? Quick, call the cops - they're stealing Argos pens!

I've said this many times before, people break the law every day, the speed limit thing is a great example of how the police commonly accept people will do over 70. I personally think it is wrong but I don't care too much about it as it won't change.

You need to put this example into perspective. Nobody will be arrested, charged, or even cautioned for the odd stamp re-use here and there. I certainly don't see it as "smuggling [goods] through self service checkouts" as that is outright stealing. There's different tiers of breaking the law, those which are commonly accepted (like speeding) and those which are not (smuggling goods through self-checkouts). Yes in a perfect world we would all abide by the law to the letter but wake up and see that law breaking (on a small, measly, nobody cares scale) goes on and is accepted by society.
And no, I don't speed. I own a 1967 Beetle which I rarely go over 60 in, let alone 70!

But live and let live and all that...

Feel free to reply but I've wrote all I have to say on the subject so it will go unread by me for sure.

Flyonthewall

anotheruser wrote: »

Gosh, look at you all up in arms because one person (not even me!) wants to re-use a measily stamp.
I admire your protection of Royal Mail and it's finances.

You said you reused them and you are arguing that it's fine to do so. The OP was using unused one that they'd originally stuck on another envelope.

It's not about caring about RM and it's finances, it's about us not wanting to break the law and commit fraud.

anotheruser wrote: »

But really, you're telling me you've never gone over the speed limit? Ever? You've never knowingly broken the law in one way or another?

Going over the speed limit isn't fraud or scamming anyone. You can't compare every law to this or try and get someone to confess to breaking some law to try and justify that you reusing stamps is fine.

anotheruser wrote: »

I've said this many times before, people break the law every day. You need to put this into perspective, I wouldn't suspect anyone will be arrested for the odd stamp re-use here and there. I certainly don't see it as "smuggle through self service checkouts" as that is outright stealing.

That doesn't mean you should join them in breaking the law.

So to commit fraud by reusing vouchers and walking out with stuff free (or stupidly cheap) is fine but smuggling stuff out is stealing and wrong? Interesting.

anotheruser wrote: »

Feel free to reply but I've wrote all I have to say on the subject so it will go unread by me for sure.

If you say so.