Sent xbox one by mistake

Mister_aaa

Advice: The thing that someone asks others when they already know the answer, but don't like it.

powerful_Rogue

pitkin2020 wrote: »

its not about scamming at all, blimey you buy a car and its faulty everyone tells you caveat emptor yet a company who should know what they are sending out doesn't its scamming.

Caveat emptor would apply to purchasing secondhand car from a private sale. Not exactly relevant to this situation.

Of course its about scamming. The OP was send an expensive item in error and is looking for any kind of loophole to keep it.

Cant have it both ways - you purchase something incorrectly online, you have the law to enable you to send it back for a refund. The company cant turn around and say "Tough luck, you should have known what you wanted to buy".

Likewise, the company have made an error. Id like to think we live in a world where people have enough morals to contact the company and ask them to arrange collection. Reading some of the replies in this thread, its starting to look like a lot of people lack said morals.

FiremanDave

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Caveat emptor would apply to purchasing secondhand car from a private sale. Not exactly relevant to this situation.

Of course its about scamming. The OP was send an expensive item in error and is looking for any kind of loophole to keep it.

Cant have it both ways - you purchase something incorrectly online, you have the law to enable you to send it back for a refund. The company cant turn around and say "Tough luck, you should have known what you wanted to buy".

Likewise, the company have made an error. Id like to think we live in a world where people have enough morals to contact the company and ask them to arrange collection. Reading some of the replies in this thread, its starting to look like a lot of people lack said morals.

If you don't like it why keep winding yourself up?

Just ignore the thread.

powerful_Rogue

FiremanDave wrote: »

If you don't like it why keep winding yourself up?

Just ignore the thread.

Im not winding myself up. I actually find it rather amusing the lengths people will goto to try and keep something they dont have a legal right to.

peachyprice

FiremanDave wrote: »

And?

How do you know someone got the £50 item and not the Xbox they ordered?

I don't, but then I, or you, don't know that they didn't either.

Either the wrong item was picked or the parcel was incorrectly addresses, I would say it's 50/50.

pitkin2020

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Caveat emptor would apply to purchasing secondhand car from a private sale. Not exactly relevant to this situation.

Of course its about scamming. The OP was send an expensive item in error and is looking for any kind of loophole to keep it.

Cant have it both ways - you purchase something incorrectly online, you have the law to enable you to send it back for a refund. The company cant turn around and say "Tough luck, you should have known what you wanted to buy".

Likewise, the company have made an error. Id like to think we live in a world where people have enough morals to contact the company and ask them to arrange collection. Reading some of the replies in this thread, its starting to look like a lot of people lack said morals.

Exactly, the company made the error the emphasis is on them.
Morally it is different but like I said if the company over charged you and you didnt notice they are unlikely to contact you in a few weeks when doing their tax returns!!

unholyangel

JReacher1 wrote: »

No they don't. 99.99% is a made up figure. Even if it was true then there is obviously room for error (.01%).

They are aware of what stock they have bought
They are aware of what stock they have sold

Identifying that the wrong item of stock was in a parcel sent 4 years previously is very unlikely. I would go as far as to say that its 99.99% certain they will get away with it (if they hear nothing in the next 1-3 months because as PeachyPrice says someone else may report it if they got the wrong item not the XBox!).

Also they won't get into trouble. They will just be made to pay for the item. Its up to the OP if they want to gamble or not. They have been made aware of what the risk is and they can now decide what they do. You rabbiting on about stock control systems at "most big companies" is basically completely irelevant and seems like you just want to show off about your personal (inaccurate) knowledge......

No, its not, its actual figures.

Again, just showing you don't actually know anything about it.

FiremanDave

peachyprice wrote: »

I don't, but then I, or you, don't know that they didn't either.

Either the wrong item was picked or the parcel was incorrectly addresses, I would say it's 50/50.

That's the extent of your knowledge though isn't it? Best guess. :rotfl:

I see you chose not to give us the benefit of your knowledge on this one.

peachyprice wrote: »

That's good enough for them to win in court.

FiremanDave wrote: »

For who to win in what court?

pitkin2020

unholyangel wrote: »

No, its not, its actual figures.

Again, just showing you don't actually know anything about it.

as its ACTUAL figures you can back it up then with documented evidence, or is it in fact like 75% of facts are made up.

Few companies will have 99.9% accuracy on their stock figures simply because of human interaction and the mistakes they make!!

JReacher1

unholyangel wrote: »

No, its not, its actual figures.

Again, just showing you don't actually know anything about it.

Hmm

99.99% associated with the stock control systems of "Most Big companies"

Is an actual figure......

Its clearly a made up figure associated with no actual companies. How you think anyone would take that statement and base any decision on it is mind boggling!

Still thats the problem with this forum. People make statements of vague statistics with actually no evidence to back it up. They then get all sensative when its rightly pointed out to be rubbish!

You're basically trying to claim that there is a 99.99% chance that the company who supplied the Xbox one in error to the OP will discover their mistake and charge him.

That is clearly not true.....