Moral conundrum please help

I would keep it.

But if they contacted me inquiring about it, I would allow them to have it back.

However;
Steveocee said:
I'm keeping this quiet as it "shouldn't" matter but I'd probably also get mocked for buying it.
Click to expand...
It matters. The whole legal situation hinges on what it was in the box. You don't want to go to jail do you OP?
 
CHokKA said:
I can't believe that you're asking this question rather than just doing the right thing. It is obvious by the tone of your post that you believe it to be morally wrong to keep the item, and are just trying to justify your reasons to do so. At the end of the day you haven't paid for the item, they've made a mistake, and everyone makes mistakes. No matter your treatment beforehand with them being a little slow in responding (there could be any number of reasons for this, not just them messing you about), it doesn't give you the right to keep something that you haven't paid for.

So, do the right thing, contact the company, let them know they've made a mistake, let it be on your terms to return the item, and maybe they'll give you something as a gesture of thanks? I can't believe the sense of entitlement of people these days. As soon as a mistake is made, it's like it's the end of the world, when really, it isn't at all. You don't deserve to keep something you haven't paid for. It's simple and even if the law doesn't state it, morally, that's theft.
Click to expand...

I believe it's morally wrong to keep the item against the seller's wishes, I however think it's reasonable for the OP to wait for the seller to get in touch, and not put any time in to making sure the seller is sorted out.
 
spoffle said:
So as above, as it stands, they are unsolicited goods.
Click to expand...

But are they unsolicited goods when they were originally due to be sent out as part of a contract between the seller and the buyer, that was then cancelled but sent in error? Does that still fall within the unsolicited goods category?

Regardless, as you've already pointed out, the argument here is from a moral standpoint rather than a legal one, and for a morally wholesome human being, I'd say that the right thing to do in this situation is rather obvious.
 
I'd send it back... those RealDolls are probably fun but I imagine you can't really do much with two of them at the same time. It'll take up too much storage space anyhow.
 
spoffle said:
I believe it's morally wrong to keep the item against the seller's wishes, I however think it's reasonable for the OP to wait for the seller to get in touch, and not put any time in to making sure the seller is sorted out.
Click to expand...

But why wait for them to realise their mistake and then get in touch? He knows they've made a mistake, it's not like sending them an email is a really difficult thing to do. With todays technology you can send an email whilst taking a dump. It's a few lines of text, so what's the point in waiting other than in the hope that the seller doesn't notice and you get to keep the item in the end?

Not informing them of their mistake is just as bad as the intent of keeping an item that doesn't belong to him. I see no reason whatsoever to not contact the company to let them know he has something they've sent in error.
 
Email they offering for them to pick it up, but inform them you will have to rent out a spare bedroom at £400 per calendar month for it to stay it until the courier arrives.

Failing that you are open to consider adoption.




*not serious





(Really... just contact them - if they don't get back to you & you've tried to send it back, keep it)
 
spoffle said:
Just to get it straight, it's theft if the seller requests its return and he refuses.

Otherwise, it's unsolicited good until that point.
Click to expand...

Is it unsolicited goods tho?I thought it was only unsolicited goods if a seller sent good randomly not goods you ordered and were sent by mistake/what happened to op.
 
spoffle said:
So as above, as it stands, they are unsolicited goods.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I really cant be bothered debating over semantics and pedantry.

The thread is about morality, and morally it is taking something which does not belong to you with no intention of giving it back to the rightful owner. In other words, stealing.

Whether that is the correct legal construct terminology to apply or not is irrelevant because this is not a thread about legality.
 
BuffetSlayer said:
Fair enough, I really cant be bothered debating over semantics and pedantry.

The thread is about morality, and morally it is taking something which does not belong to you with no intention of giving it back to the rightful owner. In other words, stealing.

Whether that is the correct legal construct terminology to apply or not is irrelevant because this is not a thread about legality.
Click to expand...

My point was, it's not about legality, so don't use legal terms.

It's not stealing as it's a legal construct, why not just say you find it morally distasteful? As that gets to the point without corrupting the meaning of words.
 
Cheers gang.
You've all given me food for thought and I've made a decision.

Do you think OCUK would allow me to sell pre-teen anime dolls that are gained immorally in the members market? (Joke before you all start hammering me)
 
Unsolicited goods usually accompany an invoice requesting payment, I think the fact that you ordered the item originally probably shows some intent even if this order has been cancelled. I would think it falls in to a vendor error rather than unsolicited goods (which I believe you are allowed to keep under certain conditions). Either way I think that you should drop them a polite email informing them of their error and asking them to organise collection at your convenience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom