Order cancelled by seller but item received

Manxman_in_exile

y3sitsm3 said:

photome said:

y3sitsm3 said:

photome said:

y3sitsm3 said:

is_66 said:

Sandtree said:

Jumblebumble said:

Ergates said:

So, legally you have to pay them as you owe the money.  

I really do not see how the OP owes them anything or needs to do anything as they have already paid
A contract was entered into.
The op paid and the goods were delivered .
Surely at that moment the goods became the property of the OP. 
The company cannot simply decide to unwind the contract and would I suspect be given short shrift in a small claims court.
The issue is that if this was behaviour was acceptable all commerce would come to a halt as no one would know where they stand

The OP speaks of a refund after the order was cancelled... though I am guessing they've not yet received it based on the text (but not 100% clear)

They have now responded to my email, where I stated that I received the items, therefore no longer require a refund. I checked after and found that the refund went through and I got my money back. The business responded by stating that the order was in fact cancelled on their behalf but due to other issues it was still delivered to me and that they have now processed the refund.

I concluded from this that I am able to keep the products even though I have been refunded. They did not state otherwise in their reply. 

Did you actually ask them if they were yours to keep?

Given the fact the retailer knows they have delivered the product and refunded, why would the OP need to ask, the retailer has had the opportunity to request payment or the return of goods

The OP asked specific questions that were answered by some CS rep paid minimum wage to answer those questions and only those questions.  They're not really encouraged to "think outside the box."

So my question stands, did the OP actually ask them whether they were theirs to keep, because it not being mentioned doesn't mean they are.

And my reply still stands, the OP told them what happened ,the retailer acknowledged it..why should they keep asking questions ? As I said it’s down to the retailer to decide what happens next

...
The OP seems to be under the impression that the retailer not askign for the items back during an email conversation with an underpaid and overworked CS rep is an indirect acknowledgement that they're theirs to keep.

I'm simply saying that no such inference should be made.

y3sitsm3 said:

is_66 said:

y3sitsm3 said:

photome said:

y3sitsm3 said:

photome said:

y3sitsm3 said:

is_66 said:

Sandtree said:

Jumblebumble said:

Ergates said:

So, legally you have to pay them as you owe the money.  

I really do not see how the OP owes them anything or needs to do anything as they have already paid
A contract was entered into.
The op paid and the goods were delivered .
Surely at that moment the goods became the property of the OP. 
The company cannot simply decide to unwind the contract and would I suspect be given short shrift in a small claims court.
The issue is that if this was behaviour was acceptable all commerce would come to a halt as no one would know where they stand

The OP speaks of a refund after the order was cancelled... though I am guessing they've not yet received it based on the text (but not 100% clear)

They have now responded to my email, where I stated that I received the items, therefore no longer require a refund. I checked after and found that the refund went through and I got my money back. The business responded by stating that the order was in fact cancelled on their behalf but due to other issues it was still delivered to me and that they have now processed the refund.

I concluded from this that I am able to keep the products even though I have been refunded. They did not state otherwise in their reply. 

Did you actually ask them if they were yours to keep?

Given the fact the retailer knows they have delivered the product and refunded, why would the OP need to ask, the retailer has had the opportunity to request payment or the return of goods

The OP asked specific questions that were answered by some CS rep paid minimum wage to answer those questions and only those questions.  They're not really encouraged to "think outside the box."

So my question stands, did the OP actually ask them whether they were theirs to keep, because it not being mentioned doesn't mean they are.

And my reply still stands, the OP told them what happened ,the retailer acknowledged it..why should they keep asking questions ? As I said it’s down to the retailer to decide what happens next

Where did I say they should?

The OP seems to be under the impression that the retailer not askign for the items back during an email conversation with an underpaid and overworked CS rep is an indirect acknowledgement that they're theirs to keep.

I'm simply saying that no such inference should be made.

I really don't think it is that complicated, as I said previously the email I sent them did NOT require a great deal of ready comprehension at all, so if they wanted the products back they would have stated. I think they wouldn't be hired in the first place If they are unable to comprehend simple customer enquiries. I think on my part I've done what I needed to do.  

Did you ask them if they wanted their goods back?
...

 Oh no...

I think I'm going to have to agree with you again.

I would NOT assume I could keep the goods in question without having clearly asked them if I could and they had said "yes".

powerful_Rogue

I also agree. Belt & braces, ask them directly what they want to happen now to the goods.

Ergates

powerful_Rogue said:

I also agree. Belt & braces, ask them directly what they want to happen now to the goods.

Agree.

I certainly *does* sound like they're letting you keep the goods - *but* until they have explicitly and unambiguously said so I wouldn't assume anything.

On the other hand, if they do ask for the goods back or payment at the full original price (i.e.without the discount price) I'd negotiate with them - this is their mess up and it's caused you hassle

Ergates

Jumblebumble said:

y3sitsm3 said:

photome said:

y3sitsm3 said:

is_66 said:

Sandtree said:

Jumblebumble said:

Ergates said:

So, legally you have to pay them as you owe the money.  

I really do not see how the OP owes them anything or needs to do anything as they have already paid
A contract was entered into.
The op paid and the goods were delivered .
Surely at that moment the goods became the property of the OP. 
The company cannot simply decide to unwind the contract and would I suspect be given short shrift in a small claims court.
The issue is that if this was behaviour was acceptable all commerce would come to a halt as no one would know where they stand

The OP speaks of a refund after the order was cancelled... though I am guessing they've not yet received it based on the text (but not 100% clear)

They have now responded to my email, where I stated that I received the items, therefore no longer require a refund. I checked after and found that the refund went through and I got my money back. The business responded by stating that the order was in fact cancelled on their behalf but due to other issues it was still delivered to me and that they have now processed the refund.

I concluded from this that I am able to keep the products even though I have been refunded. They did not state otherwise in their reply. 

Did you actually ask them if they were yours to keep?

Given the fact the retailer knows they have delivered the product and refunded, why would the OP need to ask, the retailer has had the opportunity to request payment or the return of goods

The OP asked specific questions that were answered by some CS rep paid minimum wage to answer those questions and only those questions.  They're not really encouraged to "think outside the box."

So my question stands, did the OP actually ask them whether they were theirs to keep, because it not being mentioned doesn't mean they are.

Why does anyone imagine that the OP wants to spend their time for which they will not be  paid  in chasing this up? I certainly would not do so.

photome said:

y3sitsm3 said:

photome said:

y3sitsm3 said:

is_66 said:

Sandtree said:

Jumblebumble said:

Ergates said:

So, legally you have to pay them as you owe the money.  

I really do not see how the OP owes them anything or needs to do anything as they have already paid
A contract was entered into.
The op paid and the goods were delivered .
Surely at that moment the goods became the property of the OP. 
The company cannot simply decide to unwind the contract and would I suspect be given short shrift in a small claims court.
The issue is that if this was behaviour was acceptable all commerce would come to a halt as no one would know where they stand

The OP speaks of a refund after the order was cancelled... though I am guessing they've not yet received it based on the text (but not 100% clear)

They have now responded to my email, where I stated that I received the items, therefore no longer require a refund. I checked after and found that the refund went through and I got my money back. The business responded by stating that the order was in fact cancelled on their behalf but due to other issues it was still delivered to me and that they have now processed the refund.

I concluded from this that I am able to keep the products even though I have been refunded. They did not state otherwise in their reply. 

Did you actually ask them if they were yours to keep?

Given the fact the retailer knows they have delivered the product and refunded, why would the OP need to ask, the retailer has had the opportunity to request payment or the return of goods

The OP asked specific questions that were answered by some CS rep paid minimum wage to answer those questions and only those questions.  They're not really encouraged to "think outside the box."

So my question stands, did the OP actually ask them whether they were theirs to keep, because it not being mentioned doesn't mean they are.

And my reply still stands, the OP told them what happened ,the retailer acknowledged it..why should they keep asking questions ? As I said it’s down to the retailer to decide what happens next

Because, as it stands, the retailer has up to 6 years to come back and ask for payment.  In the long run, it is probably in the best interest of the OP to nudge the company a bit to get a definitive answer one way or the other *now*, rather than in 5 years time have some bean-counter go through the books and start chasing them for a purchase they probably won't even remember.

How long do you think it would take to write such an email?  2 minutes?