Ok...this is for anyone who wants to respond, but more along the lines for those who would know best. I More than likely SRoss, since he is a judge.<br><br>Here is the setup in my friend's situation...I just copied and pasted: (this is from www.orangeinsider.com and I needed some outside opinion)<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p><br> Yesterday, I got two boxes from the UPS yesterdays. Both were addressed from my parental units. This was anticipated because today is my birthday. So I open the boxes. One is a nice desk chair from Office Max. Second box contains the sony camera, also from Office Max. I am the very happy man. I had not expected such an expensive present. Certainly this is within my parents means, but they don't spend that much on presents normally. I don't really know digital cameras so I am thinking maybe this is like $300 or $500 camera. Then I look on the internets and I see that this costs like $1000 and I am like wow, this must be the very very nice camera. And of course I have taken it out of the box and all and looked at all of the parts and the buttons and such. It has a cord with power on one end and USB on other so I plug it in to charges. Then I leave it and go look at the reviews and stuffs onlines. I am the happy guys.<br><br>Then I gets the emails from my moms todays. She is like, we sent you the 3 presents, but other two just shipped today so you're not going to get them by today. This is puzzling because I already have the two presents. Then I see the message on the answering machine from the Office Max. They say they sent camera to wrong person and they want to come pick up today so they can deliver to right person. Of course they cannot just deliver to other person because I already opened everything and I think I probably threw away some of the plastic packaging too. I didn't actually use it though. So anyway, they want me to call them back though I have not yet. So for the moment I have the nice cameras but not for long and now I am sad. <p><hr></blockquote><p><br>So a couple of guys respond by saying that he should keep it as it is Officemax's problem/mistake and possession is 9/10th of the law and such as that. I even made a joke reply of saying "what camera" LOL<br><br>But this one guy has even gone so far as to insist that keeping it would be no problem....but I maintain that he has to send it back as it's not his, he didn't pay for it (camera costs +1000 dollars!) and that he could possibly (not will, but possibly) be held for the charge of the camera if he kept it. (His signature is on the document from the carrier )<br><br><br>what do you all think? Legally...what are his options? <br><br>
Very short answer.......They know you have it. Give it back.<br><br>Sounds real simple, but the argument to keep it won't wash. He has been "unjustly enriched" and it would be simple to prove who has the greater right of possession. Also, it could (with a stretch) be enterpreted as a conversion (theft.) if he insisted on keeping it. Yes, he could play dumb and say "what camera?" but, I know you don't have friends like that, right?<br>If they hadn't found out the track of the package, he might have been faced with a moral dilemma. My guess is that you would have done the right thing anyway. Tell your friend that you admire his honesty.<br><br><br>
Cool, thanks for the quick response. He did give it back but this 17 year old keeps insisting that he didn't have to.<br><br>Aside from morality, let's say he didn't have to sign for it and denied knowledge of it, could he have kept it? Is there any example where he could have?<br><br>I should have posted those questions along with the above..but forgot.<br><br>I know my opinions but it's nice getting an outside impartial one. <br><br>I know about the conversion thing..we call it Theft of something..perhaps Deception...here. <br><br>
In my mind, it's all about morality! I find the increasing depravity in people's minds, especially as it pertains to legal issues, abominable.<br><br>The fact still remains we, the consumers, are paying an average of 10% extra to cover retail losses and thefts. Wouldn't it be grand if we lived in a society that offered a 10% discount for honesty?<br><br>Although I'm not a religious invidual, there is a rule (commandment) I strictly adhere to; "Do unto others..."! Why can't EVERYONE?<br><br>Cheers all!<br><br>[color:red]Alec</font color=red>
Oh I agree about the morality issue..I just wanted to cover all bases as this 17 year old apparently has no morals!! <br><br>And uh..Do unto others...I don't think that's a commandment....hmmm..let me check <br><br>ok..here is what he (the kid) responded with earlier:<br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Yes, actually, because they sent it to him, he becomes the owner. It was their mistake... and if he had kept it, it would be his property, and not just any property of his.. property in his possession. It was signed off to go to his residence, it was delivered, it was signed for, and it was taken into possession. Then they figure out they've sent him the wrong thing... too bad. There is no legislature saying that if a company makes a mistake and actually SENDS you an item, free and clear, that you have to give it back to them when they ask. This wasn't a "CD of the month" club or a "bill me later" subscription, he didn't steal it, he wouldn't have to lie about having gotten it or not, and, possibly most importantly, he never agreed to pay for this item or even knew that he would be getting it, or possibly, having to pay for it.<br><br>This isn't like "money falling out of an armored truck" because that is not only stealing from the scene of a crime, but that is just plain STEALING. It's one thing to actively go out there and take money either off of an armored truck, or take advantage of an armored truck, and then run away and keep it. It's another thing to have a company deliver YOU an item free and clear, and then request that you give it back because they made a mistake. "You made a mistake? I don't think so. It was delivered to my residence without any warning or any stipulation from you, as well as no agreement whatsoever from me, and it is now in my possession. Sorry.. your mistake is your problem, not mine." <-- If you couldn't tell, that is what I would have said.<br><br>And your silly claim about it being immoral to not give it back.. I disagree, but the point isn't whether it's moral or not, because who gives a [censored]? The issue is whether or not it should have been returned, and part of your rebuttal is that it should be returned because you feel it was immoral. Well, I'm sorry, sir, but everyone's morals are not dictated by your own, and community values don't make laws. I think it's immoral that the employees at OfficeMax took advantage of poor Eric in order to right their wrong. What do you think of that? <p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Now I hate bringing other forums into different ones, but I needed some fresh opinions. thanks!
Loc: Alexandria, VA
and community values don't make laws.<br><br>Hmmm ... I'd like to know where he thinks laws come from, then =)<br><br>In certain parts of the world, it's the law that you get your hand chopped-off in a public proceeding if you are convicted of thievery - something we would never do here, because the values of our society are different from those ... OTOH, we have capital punishment in this country, the implementation of which varies greatly from state to state, depending on the percieved values of the respective constituencies ...<br><br>For better or worse, laws are all about values ... the idea that laws just spring-forth from a moral vacuum is rediculous ...<br><br>As for whether or not it is legal to retain the camera, I'll defer to the good judge's opinion =)<br><br>At the very least, a $1,000 camera probably wouldn't be worth the cost of any potential litigation unless the case was a slam-dunk certainty in my favor, which it doesn't seem likely to be ...<br><br>FWIW,<br><br>=)<br><br>***matt<br><br>
I way I think about it is "It don't belong to you return it" no matter what the means of how you got it. In this case the 500 dollar carmera belongs to him and the 1,000 belongs to someone else, think about the person who is waiting for the 1,000 camera.<br><br>There have been cases where banks have sent people checks in the mail or even deposited money into their accounts by mistake. The people felt that "wow what a wind fall" and they spent the money. The bank sued them for repayment and won. The point is the money did not belong to them and they knew the money was not theirs and yet they tried to profit off someone elses mistake.<br><br>As for Office Max they will have to offer a discount to the real owner of the camera for an open box or simply replace the camera with a new un-open one. Office Max should also offer a gift certificate to your friend for his troubles aswell, after all he is a victum aswell he did not ask for this drama and he really felt it was a gift from his parents.<br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.