5 ms·

You'll have to clarify what "by accident" means. The FTC's rules on "unordered merchandise", linked else-thread, seem pretty unambiguous.

• eridius 8y ago
  If they meant to send it to someone else but put your address on it, that's an accident. Which is to say, if the package has your address on it but someone else's name, you can't keep it (in fact, if it's delivered by the USPS then I believe even just opening it is a crime as it's someone else's mail). If they intended for you to receive it but believed you were expecting it (and understood that you'd have to pay for it), then I expect that would also qualify. In order to count as "unordered merchandise" it seems reasonable that the sender must be aware that it was unordered.
  • dangrossman 8y ago
    The law is not determined by what you find reasonable, but by what the legislation says. See: 39 U.S. Code § 3009 - Mailing of unordered merchandise https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/39/3009 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/39/3009 If you're mailed merchandise that you did not expressly request or consent to, it becomes your property to do with as you will, and you cannot be billed for it. There are no exceptions for accidents.
    • eridius 8y ago
      What I "find reasonable" only applied to the sentence that contained it. Receiving accidental packages has nothing to do with "reasonable". If you receive a package that was not intended for you, that's an accident, and you are not entitled to that package. That's my core point. If you receive a package that is intended for you, but it was a bona fide mistake on the company's part, you'd have to ask a lawyer as to whether that counts as "unordered merchandise" or not. I certainly wouldn't simply assume it is.
      • dragonwriter 8y ago
        > If you receive a package that was not intended for you, that's an accident, and you are not entitled to that package. That's my core point. If it was addressed to you, whether intended or not, the law expressly states it is yours; the relevant code section has no mental state precondition.
        • eridius 8y ago
          That's simply not true. An accidental package is not "unordered merchandise". If it's got your address on it, but someone else's name, it's not your package and you're not entitled to it (in fact, you can't even open it). If it's got your name and address on it, but the company meant to send it to someone else named dragonwriter instead of you, it's also not your package and you're not entitled to it. If you order item A and the company accidentally sends you item B instead, that's not "unordered merchandise", that's a mistake, and you're not entitled to treat item B as a gift.
          • JoeAltmaier 8y ago
            Is that a moral distinction? Then both are right. It's not 'yours', but the law says otherwise. The reason is, the common con game where criminals would send expensive items to someone, often a recently deceased person, and demand payment. The surviving family would assume that good ol' Dad had ordered it and pay up. The item was usually junk but with a high price tag. So the con had little to lose. Anyway, items mailed to you without being explicitely ordered are yours to keep, legally.
            • hopler 8y ago
              If they paid voluntary for a worthless item, than that's a totally different situation from what the law protects against.
              • JoeAltmaier 8y ago
                Not making my self clear. The unordered item, traditionally a bible with the deceased's name in gold lettering (so it cannot reasonably be returned) is delivered with a wildly optimistic price tag. In the hope that the suckers will pay up without question.
    • hopler 8y ago
      No, the law is what judges and juries say it is, and intent matters. The laa is clearly referring to sales practices, not shipping errors. Holding a package intended for someone else may well be theft (depending on particulars), just as keeping something that fell in the street is theft.