If a package arrives at your house by mistake, you can keep it.. OR NOT.

[Laerrus]

That's karma.

He should have been honest with the shipping company about that not being his TV in the first place.

[Endus]

Make up your mind. Either it was Amazon or it wasn't. If the delivery company screwed up delivering a package why would Amazon get to say if it can be kept or not? Are you seriously claiming that the Delivery company got a TV out of thin air and put a label on it to some random person? Where the hell did that second TV come from?

If Amazon shipped two TVs to two different people, and the delivery company gave both to Customer A and none to Customer B, and Customer A calls Amazon and they say it's fine, then Customer A has done nothing wrong. The seller agrees that both TVs they shipped are his to keep.

It's the delivery company that's in breach of contract and is liable to make it right to Customer B by replacing the TV they misplaced.

The only way this can be considered "theft" is in one of two instances;

1> The TVs had shipping labels on them which clearly stated the name and address of the recipient (IME, unlikely with large items like this, but easy to prove if it's true).

2> The second larger TV wasn't shipped by Amazon at all. (Again, easy to prove, if true.)

If both were shipped by Amazon and without specific names listed on the labels, just tracking info, the delivery service is entirely in the wrong here and likely to get charged for filing a false police report.

[rhorle]

If it has a different persons name on it, you would be correct. If someone literally hands you a package (without a name on it, or with your name on it) and tells you that this is yours, please sign for it.... (How is that stealing)

Because it is? Using that logic anyone can hand off stolen things. And yet we know that fences exist because it is a crime to have stolen property even if it was given to you. You can be charged if you refuse to give back the property.

I'm saying Amazon shipped several TVs. The shipping company F'ed up and gave the man an extra TV that was supposed to go to someone else. Amazon would have a say because they legally own the property.

That only applies if Amazon sent the guy two televisions. We know from the article that the delivery company is the one that mistakenly gave him two TV's. It isn't Amazons call to say that any package given to a person is legally fine to keep. They can make the call if they sent two TV's to the guy. But we know this wasn't the case. Amazon did not send two to the guy. They sent one TV.

[McFuu]

This happened to my friend recently, bought a rtx2080 and when the box got there there was a gtx770 in it. Amazon essentially told him to get fucked. It's amazing what companies go through when the shoe is on the other foot.

This also doesn't feel like a criminal matter to me. It's not theft, if the company delivered a smaller TV and refused to give you the proper one, you would have to sue them. There would be no kicking down the door and arresting the CEO. I expect there is something else at play here, or id expect the police to be named in a suit shortly.

[Endus]

Because it is? Using that logic anyone can hand off stolen things. And yet we know that fences exist because it is a crime to have stolen property even if it was given to you. You can be charged if you refuse to give back the property.

Again, there'd have to be an original theft for this to apply. Unless this guy misrepresented himself to the delivery driver ("yeah, I'm Madge McGee and also the other name you gave"), that wouldn't apply here.

That only applies if Amazon sent the guy two televisions. We know from the article that the delivery company is the one that mistakenly gave him two TV's. It isn't Amazons call to say that any package given to a person is legally fine to keep. They can make the call if they sent two TV's to the guy. But we know this wasn't the case. Amazon did not send two to the guy. They sent one TV.

We don't know this.

If Amazon shipped both TVs that were dropped at his house, Amazon is the one who gets final say. It doesn't matter if one was meant to go to a different customer; that's the delivery company's liability, not the customer's.

[rhorle]

Bit in bold is where you insert something new into your analogy that completely changes the situation.

Are you daft? A TV that is not supposed to be given to you is being delivered to the wrong address. I can't believe you would even argue something that is basic level thinking.

[quote]It doesn't say anyone else shipped the TV, either. The only shipper we have identified here was Amazon. And he did say he contacted them and they said not to worry about it. [quote]

So you have never heard of customer service saying something incorrect? Reading from a script? Come on. You can't be that gullible. Amazon also can't make a call on a screw up by the delivery company. Amazon isn't some God that can pass judgement for all packages in the world. I can't believe you would even make that claim.

Yes. This is the point. If the delivery company lost the package, they're liable for replacing it. They don't want to pay for the TV they misplaced, so they had this guy charged.

You just said the delivery company is never held ownership so can't go after him. Yet when I say they are responsible for packages you claim that was the point all along. When you detox from the drugs you are on come back to this discussion. You can't keep anything given to you just because you want to.

- - - Updated - - -

It's the delivery company that's in breach of contract and is liable to make it right to Customer B by replacing the TV they misplaced.

So amazon has no right to say what to keep if they are not the ones in breach of a contract? That would be like saying I can't be held responsible for stealing money from the bank because my dog said I could have it.

- - - Updated - - -

Again, there'd have to be an original theft for this to apply. Unless this guy misrepresented himself to the delivery driver ("yeah, I'm Madge McGee and also the other name you gave"), that wouldn't apply here.

Signing for two tv's instead of one when you know you ordered only one seems like a misrepresentation. It doesn't matter if Amazon shipped both TV's. We know that they didn't ship both TV's to him. Because one was delivered to him by mistake. That is all that matters. It wasn't intended for him. He kept it. He refused to give it to police when they questioned him. He ignored calls (and presumably voicemails) from the shipping company to discuss the matter.

A customer can not keep all items delivered to their house just because. That is why it is theft. You have to allow a reasonable attempt to recover the product. It happens all the time. UPS will come back up the wrongly delivered package when notified. That is considered reasonable. If you refuse to hand it over you can be charged with theft. Having to deliver it yourself or drive 100 miles to nearest ups facility is not considered reasonable.

[sosleapy]

That’s probably true in a lot of cases but my guess is a 87 inch tv is something they are going to want to come back and pick up.

74 to 87 is like an 800 dollar difference. Just depends if the company wants to deal with it. I've had some that are like we messed up enjoy and some that are like no we need it back so it could have been a crap shoot. I would have called right away myself.

[rhorle]

f you receive merchandise you didn’t order or request, it’s yours to keep, so long as it clearly isn’t a delivery error (ie: it’s your neighbor’s package). Although you are not legally obligated, you may wish to notify the sender that you intend to keep the merchandise as a gift to avoid possible problems, such as the sender trying to bill you for the merchandise.

https://www.mass.gov/guides/a-massac...#item-delivery

He is guilty of theft by his own states law. Even the FTC rule makes an exception for unintended packages. He clearly indicates he knew it was a delivery error. When the police questioned him he didn't want to incriminate himself so he was informed it wasn't legal and decided to still keep it.

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/f...age-52005.html

He can not be found guilty for receiving the wrongly delivered package. He can be found guilty if he refused to return it because. At that point it he is converting it to his property. He even admits he knew it wasn't his and was wrongly delivered.

[Endus]

You just said the delivery company is never held ownership so can't go after him. Yet when I say they are responsible for packages you claim that was the point all along. When you detox from the drugs you are on come back to this discussion. You can't keep anything given to you just because you want to.

Just because you don't have ownership does not mean you don't have legal liability. If I buy something from Amazon that is then delivered to me, the chain of ownership goes from Amazon, to myself. The delivery company never has ownership, even if they temporarily have possession.

[Hilhen7]

Amazon wouldn't own the TV at that point. The legal owner would be the guy who ordered the TV and the delivery service would be in custody of it until it is delivered to the proper owner. Amazon's legal responsibility for the product ended the moment the Delivery company signed for the goods.

Title passes once the item is delivered, this is why the seller is responsible if the goods never reach the purchaser. If amazon's legal responsibility ends the moment the delivery company signs for the goods the customer would have no recourse if the goods are never delivered. Amazon legally still owns the product until it is properly delivered and could allow the person who received it to keep the TV since it is their property.

Also if Amazon does not own the goods they can not have it insured during the shipping process. You can't have an insurance policy that covers a product that you have no rights to...

Under your rules Amazon could ship your package by mistake to the south pole, and when you complain they would have no responsibility to compensate you.

Because the UCC’s default position (further discussed later in this chapter) is that title shifts when the seller has completed delivery obligations, and because the parties may agree on delivery terms, they also may, by choosing those terms, effectively agree when title shifts (again, they also can agree using any other language they want). So it is appropriate to examine some delivery terms at this juncture. There are three possibilities: shipment contracts, destination contracts, and contracts where the goods are not to be moved.

https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_...k-of-loss.html

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.mass.gov/guides/a-massac...#item-delivery

He is guilty of theft by his own states law. Even the FTC rule makes an exception for unintended packages. He clearly indicates he knew it was a delivery error. When the police questioned him he didn't want to incriminate himself so he was informed it wasn't legal and decided to still keep it.

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/f...age-52005.html

He can not be found guilty for receiving the wrongly delivered package. He can be found guilty if he refused to return it because. At that point it he is converting it to his property. He even admits he knew it wasn't his and was wrongly delivered.

The deciding factor is if amazon shipped both TV's and if they really said it was okay to keep the item. Everything else is irrelevant.

[d00mGuArD]

What the cops did is a major dick move but there are many unknowns in this case and the story is different based on who you ask. First of all, when the police "Questions" you and you comply voluntarily and you say you don't know, you are not under jeopardy especially if they confirmed that you were not under investigation so you are not misleading or impeding anything. Keep in mind that this is not a case of a mail addressed to someone else coming to you and you opening it, it is just mismatched orders.. It is not your responsibility to know if your order is not accurate. If you found a box at your door with someone else's name and number on it, that would a different case and actually a serious mail fraud case if you opened it knowingly.

HOWEVER, the other side claims that they tried to contact the guy and resolve the issue but he left them at "SeeN" pretty much.. The guy didn't get lucky, he tried to get away with it even after the mistake was known so the shipping company's case has merit here.

- - - Updated - - -



Yea sadly he could be charged with "Stealing" and based on the worth of the TV it could be grand larceny.. which is a hilarious sitcom plot line for something that appeared at your door

Memmo said that he originally bought and paid for a 74-inch flat-screen TV on Amazon, but when the 86-inch arrived, delivered by a third-party shipping company, he chose not to return the larger model.

Step one: He bought and paid for 74", and received 86". There is no mention that it was someone else's. Unless I missed it.

He added, “Amazon said I had nothing to worry about. I made no wrong decisions at that point.”

Step two: He contacted the company he bought the TV from, and the vendor said "nothing to worry about"

Seems legit to me.

Where did you see it had someone else's name on it?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah personally I have listened to people make arguments on both sides of the issue of whether or not if an item gets delivered to the wrong address if you are allowed to keep it.

It was not in the wrong address. It was not someone else's. He ordered TV 74" and paid for it. But 86" arrived. No?

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Step one: He bought and paid for 74", and received 86". There is no mention that it was someone else's. Unless I missed it.

He received both the TV he ordered and the 86". The OP cut that part out of the article he quoted.

The shipping company claims that Memmo signed for the incorrect delivery, which Memmo disputes. He also said that he never informed them he was someone he is not. According to Freetown Police Department, they were informed by the delivery service that two televisions had been delivered and one was delivered by mistake. “The delivery service contacted police after several unsuccessful attempts to recover the television. Police then visited the residence where they spoke with the male in an effort to recover the television. Unfortunately, he refused to cooperate,” the FPD said.

[God Save The King]

According to the comments:

Typical Yahoo story that is missing half the facts. Local news indicates TWO TVs were delivered and when the shipping company contacted him to come and get one of them, he refused. When cops got involved, he refused to work with them either. Finally a search warrant was issued and the large TV was recovered and he was arrested.

See, Yahoo News, how easy this is? Am I'm not even a writer!!!

and:


This is a TERRIBLY written article. A major omission is that he received TWO TV's, not just the larger model. He was arrested because the shipping company is claiming he signed for the two TV's knowing that wasn't correct and was thus pretending to be someone else (which he denies). He also did not answer or return numerous phone calls regarding the mistake.That being said, unless it can be proven he forged the signature of the intended recipient with the intent to commit fraud... this isn't going anywhere.


TLR the dude is a scumbag

I've received two double shipment in the past. Both times Amazon has told me not to worry about it. When a shipping company contacted me, I let them know what Amazon told me and haven't heard from them since on either.

This might be more of a California law, but I bugged a college friend who went into property rights and knew about a situation like this. Basically if something is shipped/mailed to you legally, and you accept ownership of it, it is yours. A company can ask for it back and it's totally up to you to give it to them. They, assuming people don't know their rights (which most do not) will threaten legal action or involve the police to force compliance. If you stick to your guns however, you'll be fine.

For the person in the thread earlier who said "what if I just send you drugs", it's all about accepting ownership. If you open it and it's drugs, you can reject the package and contact the police/post office. But if you take it into your home and keep them, then ownership is yours.

You can't mail someone $100 in cash, then go demand it back because you "didn't mean to". It's theirs. You can sue them in hopes of scaring them into giving it back, but in the end you'd lose.

Edit:

Here's an article I found about it (note, I only read it, did not fact check it)
@Endus might like that article. Sounds like you do not even have to double check by federal law. If it shows up, it is yours.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

According to the comments:

Typical Yahoo story that is missing half the facts. Local news indicates TWO TVs were delivered and when the shipping company contacted him to come and get one of them, he refused. When cops got involved, he refused to work with them either. Finally a search warrant was issued and the large TV was recovered and he was arrested.

See, Yahoo News, how easy this is? Am I'm not even a writer!!!

and:


This is a TERRIBLY written article. A major omission is that he received TWO TV's, not just the larger model. He was arrested because the shipping company is claiming he signed for the two TV's knowing that wasn't correct and was thus pretending to be someone else (which he denies). He also did not answer or return numerous phone calls regarding the mistake.That being said, unless it can be proven he forged the signature of the intended recipient with the intent to commit fraud... this isn't going anywhere.


TLR the dude is a scumbag

Actually, the Yahoo article does mention that he got two TV's...The OP just cut that part out of what he quoted.

In the OP:

The shipping company claims that Memmo signed for the incorrect delivery, which Memmo disputes. He also says that he never informed them he was someone he is not.

In the actual article:

The shipping company claims that Memmo signed for the incorrect delivery, which Memmo disputes. He also said that he never informed them he was someone he is not. According to Freetown Police Department, they were informed by the delivery service that two televisions had been delivered and one was delivered by mistake. “The delivery service contacted police after several unsuccessful attempts to recover the television. Police then visited the residence where they spoke with the male in an effort to recover the television. Unfortunately, he refused to cooperate,” the FPD said.

Edits like that can really reveal the agenda of the OP.

[The One Percent]

Just because someone leaves a door unlocked, doesn't mean you aren't a thief for walking in and stealing shit.

[rhorle]

The deciding factor is if amazon shipped both TV's and if they really said it was okay to keep the item. Everything else is irrelevant.

It doesn't matter. A wrongly delivered item under law can not be kept if an attempt to recover the item is made. Amazon did not send both TV's to the guy. Amazon sent 1 to the guy. They would not say that it is okay to keep an item they sent to someone else but was given to them by mistake. Amazon can't make that call.

- - - Updated - - -

Just because you don't have ownership does not mean you don't have legal liability. If I buy something from Amazon that is then delivered to me, the chain of ownership goes from Amazon, to myself. The delivery company never has ownership, even if they temporarily have possession.

Temporary possession with liability is still ownership. The chain of custody is Amazon, Delivery company, Yourself.

- - - Updated - - -

I've received two double shipment in the past. Both times Amazon has told me not to worry about it. When a shipping company contacted me, I let them know what Amazon told me and haven't heard from them since on either.

If the package is sent to you get to keep it. A company can not make you pay for it. The difference is that in this case the extra TV was not sent to the guy. Was not intended to go to the guy. The delivery person mistakenly included it in the delivery. You are not legally allowed to keep that in most states. Massachusetts, where the events in this article took place, is one of those states.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

End of the day, A judge issued a warrant for the police to come and take the TV... kinda makes all our armchair lawyer debates moot.

[God Save The King]

End of the day, A judge issued a warrant for the police to come and take the TV... kinda makes all our armchair lawyer debates moot.

Probable cause is a much lower threshold than beyond a reasonable doubt. Plus it is not as if you hold a full trial with all the evidence for a warrant. You more or less explain that a company is saying that someone stole a television from them, and have reason to believe it is in their home. Judge says yes and you collect the TV. Plenty of warrants are issued that result in no conviction because the police were either wrong or there was no actual crime committed.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Probable cause is a much lower threshold than beyond a reasonable doubt. Plus it is not as if you hold a full trial with all the evidence for a warrant. You more or less explain that a company is saying that someone stole a television from them, and have reason to believe it is in their home. Judge says yes and you collect the TV. Plenty of warrants are issued that result in no conviction because the police were either wrong or there was no actual crime committed.

Probable cause being that he was in the possession of a TV that he had no legal right to be in possession of. Whether that results in a conviction is immaterial. In all likelihood...this gets settled by the dude simply returning the TV and the charges get reduced or dropped entirely.

[God Save The King]

The difference is that in this case the extra TV was not sent to the guy. Was not intended to go to the guy. The delivery person mistakenly included it in the delivery.

Ehhh doesn't say that in the article. "The shipping company claims that Memmo signed for the incorrect delivery, which Memmo disputes. He also said that he never informed them he was someone he is not. According to Freetown Police Department, they were informed by the delivery service that two televisions had been delivered and one was delivered by mistake"

No where does it imply that the package was not addressed to him. If it was, the case is open and close, it is his. If it wasn't addressed to him, still open and close, it's opening someone else's mail & theft.

- - - Updated - - -

Probable cause being that he was in the possession of a TV that he had no legal right to be in possession of. Whether that results in a conviction is immaterial. In all likelihood...this gets settled by the dude simply returning the TV and the charges get reduced or dropped entirely.

if it was addressed to him, he has every legal right to keep it under FTC regulations. Otherwise he did break the law.