I mean, sure, Amazon, cheers?

Out of curiosity, I brought this up to a good friend who happens to be a lawyer. The extras are Amazon's goof, considered unordered/unsolicited and by FTC regs, a gift. Even though I received extras of the same ordered item, the extras are not part of that solicited order, they are as appropriately described, unsolicited. Same item or not. I'm not obligated to do anything and advised just to accept the luck. He also said that if anyone feels uncomfortable, you can always contact Amazon for a return, but not required to do so at all.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯​

Of course, don't take this as legal advise on the internets yada yada yada......lawyering stuff.....
 
mope54 said:
What "I'm on about" is that you are misunderstanding the reference from the FTC you are citing here. He ordered one and received more than one by accident, which is different from "unordered."
Click to expand...
The extra identical units are considered unordered and unsolicited, even if they are of the same order. or so I've been told by the relevant professionals. It was described to me in simplistic terms, like getting an extra nugget in a food order. They could ask for it back, but won't out of the hassle involved and that fact that I don't need to. Take that for what you will.
 
Just take it a step further and submit a ticket that you didn't get your package.
 
Whach said:
The extra identical units are considered unordered and unsolicited, even if they are of the same order. or so I've been told by the relevant professionals. It was described to me in simplistic terms, like getting an extra nugget in a food order. They could ask for it back, but won't out of the hassle involved and that fact that I don't need to. Take that for what you will.
Click to expand...
Your friend may be an attorney but that doesn't mean they practice or are familiar with the laws relevant to this discussion--I certainly wouldn't give someone advice on laws regarding taxes or estates, which are each complex matters in their own right with attorneys who specialize in their respective categories. While I do practice law in this particular field, one doesn't need to be an attorney to read and understand the relevant statutes and case law. That said, I wasn't giving you (or anyone else) legal advise in this thread but merely correcting a misinterpretation that you, many people responding, and your friend have regarding what unsolicited means. Generally speaking, free legal advice is worth the amount you paid for it...unless your friend is also willing to post your bond if anything goes sideways based on their opinion.

EDIT:
Sources:
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title39-section3009&edition=prelim
"(d) For the purposes of this section, "unordered merchandise" means merchandise mailed without the prior expressed request or consent of the recipient. (emphasis added).

OP ordered a drive and received multiples. The multiples were a shipping mistake--not "unordered" merchandise. Someone put 10 in the box instead of 1 just like if a grocer handed you the wrong bag as you were leaving the store effectively replacing the milk you intended to purchase with 10 steaks. In some states, failing to notify the proper owner or refusing to return the merchandise constitutes a crime of theft. For example, cf. larceny in New York:

(b) By acquiring lost property.

A person acquires lost property when he exercises control over
property of another which he knows to have been lost or mislaid, or to
have been delivered under a mistake as to the identity of the recipient
or the nature or amount of the property, without taking reasonable
measures to return such property to the owner;

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/155.05 (emphasis added)

Here is the FTC's position on this: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Unordered-Merchandise.pdf:

"From the foregoing, it should be clear that it is unlawful to send any bill or dunning communication for unordered merchandise (i.e., merchandise sent without the prior expressed request or consent of the recipient) (emphasis added).

Again, OP ordered a drive from Amazon. Amazon sent too many drives--they didn't just send a package to OP without OP's request or consent, which is what the following cases cited by the FTC involve:

"PAR. 4. In the course and conduct of .their business, respondents ship greeting cards to many persons who have neither requested nor consented to the shipment of respondents' greeting cards to them. Respondents also ship greeting .cards to many persons who have specifically requested that respondents not ship greeting cards to them."

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Sunshine-Art-Studios.pdf

"PAR. 8. Respondents have engaged in the deceptive and misleading practice of causing shipments of said preparation to be sent to persons located in various States of the United States who have not ordered such merchandise and to persons located in various States of the United States who have notified respondents not to ship such merchandise, and attempt, or cause to be attempted, the collection of the price thereof."

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/Golden-Fifty-Pharmaceuticals.pdf

Other places where "mistakes" render commonly held beliefs about retail/purchaser relationships moot: price mistakes, advertisements, and bait & switch claims. Just because a retailer mistakenly leaves up a sign with the incorrect price past a sale, or more commonly whatever automated system listing pricing creates an error in price or stock, doesn't mean the retailer must honor it (albeit with the caveat that some states have laws more strict than others in this regard). Most people on this board are familiar with those exceptions, which is why I include them here.

I think the obvious tell here is that neither OP, nor anyone else suggesting that he just keep the merchandise, are willing to contact Amazon and alert them of this mistake, which would 100% clear the shipment for keeps if OP bothered to do so and Amazon, as they so often do, just tell him to keep the shipment. Now, I'll reiterate that this situation has basically a chance of 0% to wind up in a courtroom but just as a simple thought experiment...if it did and you were sitting on the jury, this particular fact of the case would sit on your conscious until it became a clanging indicator of guilt. Any reasonable person would have to think, "why didn't you just call them up and tell them of the mistake?" The answer, of course, is that he wants to justify keeping the extra drives. And who can blame him? They're expensive but that doesn't justify, imo, immoral/unethical and/or illegal behavior.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top