![]() |
|
![]() | ||
|
Subject:
Package not paid for, kept, will not return to shipper
Category: Reference, Education and News > General Reference Asked by: 4thepeople-ga List Price: $10.00 |
Posted:
16 Jun 2004 11:20 PDT
Expires: 23 Jun 2004 08:35 PDT Question ID: 361997 |
Basically I need to know the legal ramifications of a product ordered from California to Minnesota. MN orders item, MN cancels item, CA refunds money but CA ships item inadvertantly, CA notices shipping discrepancy then demands product back from MN (prepaid shipping) Need to know.... 1> Legal answer to this, does MN get to keep my product because I made a mistake and shipped out product? 2> I requested my product back, isn't MN keeping stolen property if it isn't paid for? 3> What legal or otherwise recourse do I have to get my product back? NEED THIS ASAP Thanks |
![]() | ||
|
There is no answer at this time. |
![]() | ||
|
Subject:
Re: Package not paid for, kept, will not return to shipper
From: fstokens-ga on 18 Jun 2004 15:00 PDT |
I'm not a lawyer, so I have to use logic, which doesn't always apply to legal matters. It seems to me that if the contract was cancelled (and cancellation accepted by both parties), then CA has effectively shipped "unsolicited merchandise" to MN. In other words, CA has sent a gift to MN. In this case, clearly the moral and honorable thing would be for MN to return the item, but I doubt that CA has much legal standing to enforce a return. :( |
Subject:
Re: Package not paid for, kept, will not return to shipper
From: mathtalk-ga on 18 Jun 2004 17:20 PDT |
I, too, am not a lawyer. I don't think "stolen merchandise" is a fair characterization here. However I'd explore the possibility of filing an action in small claims court in MN, seeking the lawful return of the property to sender. Certainly a good lawyer could make an argument that "unsolicited merchandise" is a gift, but in the facts given an agreement was dissolved at some point, and the delivery of the merchandise was an error in fulfillment, not an unsolicited gift. Ownership of the item was not intended to be transferred. I would act promptly to seek relief. I do believe that if the return of the merchandise is not sought within a relatively brief period, then it weakens the right of recovery. A registered letter to the non-customer, followed by the small claims court filing would be in order. regards, mathtalk-ga |
If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you. |
Search Google Answers for |
Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy |