Quizzes & Puzzles24 mins ago
Well What Would You Do In The Circumstances?
37 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.This question has been asked before, and I was ripped for saying I would send it back.
I think it's up to each person to decide what is right for them, but I couldn't keep something I hadn't paid for.
Saying that, I would want the supplier to send me packaging and collect the parcel when it suits me.
I think it's up to each person to decide what is right for them, but I couldn't keep something I hadn't paid for.
Saying that, I would want the supplier to send me packaging and collect the parcel when it suits me.
Baldric
/// And your point is? ///
That you are so busy correcting easily made typo mistakes, that you fail to notice what you yourself have typed.
Still not with it, well let me give you a clue
"If you receive goods you have not ordered and which haven’t been sent by mistake"
Fact, those goods were sent by mistake
/// And your point is? ///
That you are so busy correcting easily made typo mistakes, that you fail to notice what you yourself have typed.
Still not with it, well let me give you a clue
"If you receive goods you have not ordered and which haven’t been sent by mistake"
Fact, those goods were sent by mistake
What does Fred say? I say that the recipient is bound to return the goods and not keep or dispose of them or do anything which deprives the sender of them. There is no legal difference between someone receiving a £500, 000 diamond necklace by mistake of the sender and their receiving a Play Station by mistake. The sender is entitled to sue for the return of the goods and there would be no defence. They have given the option of having the recipient volunteer to return them , because that is like a letter before action i.e. do this or we sue, and it is cheaper than suing. However the company will sue because they don't want to set a precedent by not doing so.
Although, utility companies have the unpleasant habit, possibly protected by some clause in the small print (and probably unenforceable as 'an unfair contract term') whereby they treat a double payment as credit against your next bill. The absurdity of this is simply seen. Suppose someone with a bill of £40,000 to pay wrote the cheque out with others, one of which was for the utility, and absent mindedly put the utility as the payee rather than HMRC or the solicitor conveying their new house to them. What would the utility company say then? And how long do you think they would stay out of the courts ?
My Son ordered a PlayStation 4 online when they were released the other day, the order would not go through properly so he cancelled it and bought one elswhere. Suddenly 2 PlayStation's turned up, including one from the company where he cancelled the order, they sent it as a gift for him due to his order falling to be processed correctly, I think these devices are selling for £400+. So he now has 2 ps4's so he put one on ebay and it sold that same day for over £800. Apparently people couldn't get them easily due to all shops being sold out. I have never even seen a play station let alone use one or desire one. I found it a very strange thing for a company to do!