Moral conundrum please help

Contact them and let them you have the item and that you won't pay for postage but are willing to return.

I recently bought a steelcase leap off ebay. I didn't receive it so the seller brought one around personally as he is in London. turned out to be the ex director of uk steelcase. Week later the original chair was delivered and i contacted them right away and he said i could keep it up due to the trouble with delivery. So now i have two steelcase leap, trying to sell one, but no luck so far. I now have 3 chairs in my little house as my old one won't even go for free on freecycle. I almost had a third steelcase leap delivered as well as they came around to drop it off but i was not in. Turns out the ordered i cancelled with another seller still sent the chair. Would have been left with 4 chairs lol.
 
Steveocee said:
Never mind my moral compass, I think you need to try thinking before you speak, so far you are the only person who has jumped the gun with their response, did you even bother reading the whole thread? I fully appreciate this is a delicate situation where I am questioning other peoples opinions to try and form my own morally correct opinion of what to do.
Click to expand...

There's not really any morally correct opinion to form. If you're a person that believes in doing the right thing, your immediate reaction would be to contact the supplier informing them that they've made a mistake, not to post up on OcUK to see if people would keep the item because that's what you wanted to do in the first place. I can't believe that if you already knew that the right thing to do would be to get them to collect it, that you'd post up here asking that. You were simply seeking validation in your belief that you're entitled to keep the product. So from that point of view, your moral compass doesn't work.
 
CHokKA said:
There's not really any morally correct opinion to form. If you're a person that believes in doing the right thing, your immediate reaction would be to contact the supplier informing them that they've made a mistake, not to post up on OcUK to see if people would keep the item because that's what you wanted to do in the first place. I can't believe that if you already knew that the right thing to do would be to get them to collect it, that you'd post up here asking that. You were simply seeking validation in your belief that you're entitled to keep the product. So from that point of view, your moral compass doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Yawn.
 
I'd drop them an email and tell them to arrange collection at a time convenient to you. I wouldn't go out of my way any more than that. I certainly wouldn't be chasing up couriers, making phone calls, or spending any time or money that I would then have the hassle of trying to recoup.
 
Burned_Alive said:
Except he bought this item, it just took longer than expected to arrive.

It is in no way unsolicited goods.

OP should inform the seller that the item has now arrived and give him reasonable opportunity to have it collected.
Click to expand...

Correct, unsolicited goods do not include vendor 'mistake', so something that was ordered, cancelled then delivered is not unsolicited goods.

You are obliged to inform them of their mistake regardless of any moral conundrum you may have about keeping something that isn't yours just because you were unhappy with their service.
 
If it were me, I'd contact the seller, no question about it. I don't care what the legal position is, I'd feel bad for keeping it.
 
spoffle said:
He did, but has since broken the contract by cancelling the purchase and requesting a refund.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant, doesn't make them unsolicited.

Code: 
6 Interpretation.

(1)In this Act, unless the context or subject matter otherwise requires,—

    “acquire” includes hire;

    “send” includes deliver, and “sender” shall be construed accordingly;

    “unsolicited” means, in relation to goods sent to any person, that they are sent without any prior request made by him or on his behalf.

Prior request was made, whether it was subsequently supposed to be ignored or not doesn't really matter, a prior request has been made nonetheless.

edit - my mistakte, the DSR regs now effectively supersede what I quoted above, however the wording of the relevant part changes only slightly:

Code: 
“unsolicited” means, in relation to goods sent or services supplied to any person, that they are sent or supplied without any prior request made by or on behalf of the recipient.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom