12 ms·
Some will point out (and some have!) that I could have quite easily saved myself a lot of time, hassle, and lost earnings at this point by just quietly holding
by apostacy 9y ago
Some will point out (and some have!) that I could have quite easily saved myself a lot of time, hassle, and lost earnings at this point by just quietly holding on to the extra Switch and saying nothing to Nintendo about it. It certainly would have saved me a lot of stress, but it was morally not something I’d ever consider.
That's his mistake right there. He was under no moral obligation to fix Nintendo's mistake for them. Nintendo had made a string of mistakes up to this point, and one of their mistakes was in his favor.
If you truly have a guilty conscience, then just throw the extra package out, because it is abandoned property.
I've had this happen occasionally. Just know that you are not responsible for stuff like this. My Dad had a similar experience, where spent weeks trying to get a company to honor a warranty, and in the end they sent him two replacement hard drives instead of one. I actually interpret this as a kind of karma. Sometimes good things land in your lap, don't reject them.
- wbhart 9y agoQuite often the reason for receiving two items is that the first got stuck somewhere in transit, the customer complained so the company sent out a second item, and eventually both turn up. It seems reasonable under those circumstances for the company to ask for the second one back (politely of course, threatening the customer is never right).
- apostacy 9y agoI disagree. The company is now imposing on you for something that is absolutely not your responsibility. They have money set aside for losses like this. It sounds like Nintendo should ask the courier company to fix things, not you. In a way, he is also a victim of the courier company's bad service, except that the mistake was in his favor. And also, think about what that implies. How far are you supposed to go if they screw up? What if they do it again, with something more valuable? You can't apply human morality to large corporations. If someone on Etsy or Ebay made a mistake like that, then yes of course you should ship it back. But corporations of that size are just systems. They will not be hurt or offended if you don't return it, and they won't be gracious if you do.
- Boothroid 9y agoJust checked UK law. If you receive an extra item as part of a replacement for a broken item or similar and use it the sender has the right to demand payment for the extra item. The correct course of action is to contact the sender who can then choose to collect at their own expense. I was surprised by this - I thought it would constitute unsolicited goods but it does not due to the extra item having been sent as remedy for a broken item. If someone sends you something out of the blue and then demands payment it is unsolicited goods and you have the right to keep it.
- sametmax 9y agoSo if my IT system messes up and sends you 10 TV, you have to pay for it or get out of your way to fix it ?
- wbhart 9y agoNo, but you might be required to make reasonable accommodations to allow them to fix it, or minimise the cost of repairing it for them (at their expense). As I understand it, you couldn't just pick the most expensive solution and charge it to them, or obstruct every attempt they made to rectify the problem, simply because you were annoyed/inconvenienced. You may also be required to do other things to minimise the losses they have to compensate you for.
- wbhart 9y agoSorry, I think I misunderstood your example. I read 10 TV as 10 Teravolts, i.e. they blew up your IT infrastructure with a massive electrical surge. Obviously I also mixed up who was sending the 10 TV and who was receiving. You can safely ignore my nonsensical reply. Yes, fortunately for you, if your IT system messes up and sends 10 TV (whatever that is), they cannot just keep the 10 TV. They are required to compensate you for them/it if they want to keep them/it.
- martin-adams 9y agoIn that scenario, I think it would be you would need to make reasonable effort to collect the item, otherwise you abandon it. If the customer refuses you to collect it, then you can demand payment. But as the above comment says, you would have had to send the item as part of an existing engagement, such as a purchase or replacement.
- thechao 9y agoThe story seems like it’s set in the UK; what you’re saying is true to in the USA, but is it true in the UK?
- grecy 9y ago> That's his mistake right there. He was under no moral obligation to fix Nintendo's mistake for them......If you truly have a guilty conscience, then just throw the extra package out, because it is abandoned property. Do you really want to live in a world where everyone does this? Imagine you are a small start-up where every penny counts and make the odd mistake here and there and people take advantage of that, destroying you. Or imagine people are kind and help point out your mistake and give back your ~$500 device. You get to decide which world you live in, because you are creating it.
- wolco 9y agoDestroying you is harsh. Startups make mistakes all of the time if this is a constant issue it is probably better the issue is visible and can he fixed before scaling.
- pjc50 9y agoI think this kind of thing really does depend on whether you're dealing with a small startup or even an individual human that you're screwing over, or a giant implacable machine like a multinational corporation. There's no obligation to be nice to the machine, it can't recognise it, and it won't be grateful to you.
- sametmax 9y ago+1. The machine analogy is excellent. You have moral obligation to humans. You may decide to have moral obligation to society if you like the one your in and want it to grow. But you have zero obligation toward a souless entity. It's a robot. Optimized for profiting from a service it failed to perform adequatly.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Sean1708 9y ago> He was under no moral obligation to fix Nintendo's mistake for them. I'm not convinced this is true (well it may be true morally but I don't think it's true legally). IIRC duplicate shipments are not considered Unsolicited Goods and in the UK you are legally required to inform the sender and return them if the sender requests. Edit: This article[0] seems to suggest the same, but the Citizen's Advice link is broken. Edit 2: This article[1] is better and includes a proper source[2]. [0]: http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/30294748/can-you-keep-stuff-delivered-by-mistake http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/30294748/can-you-keep-... [1]: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25330615 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25330615 [2] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/2334/pdfs/uksi_20002334_en.pdf http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/2334/pdfs/uksi_20002...
- nielsole 9y agoIn Germany there is the concept of Unterschlagung: illegally taking hold of an object owned by someone else. Translates to embezzlement, but that's not quite it, I'd say. So here I am pretty certain you would have to contact Nintendo.
- abandonliberty 9y agoWho is responsible for the cost of returning the goods?
- Sean1708 9y agoI believe it's the sender.
- thieving_magpie 9y agoWhat? That sounds absurd. I've had this happen many times to me over the years and I always let them know. I help send it back and everything is fine. How wasteful that would be to throw it out. Personally I do feel like it's a moral obligation to make an attempt to send it back.
- macspoofing 9y ago>He was under no moral obligation to fix Nintendo's mistake for them. He was under no legal obligation. But it was the moral thing to do.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- kazagistar 9y agoMorality only applies if it applies bidirectonally, and corporations couldn't give two shits about morality.
- tiglionabbit 9y agoThrowing it away would make me feel even worse. I wouldn't want it to be wasted. I'd feel better about giving it to a friend. What he really should have done was get it delivered or picked up at his workplace so he wouldn't have to stay home waiting for the courier.