Well, that's very nice.

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Mugshot

Cracking a solo.
Once again, the circumstances in the OP are NOT theft.
Maybe not, however, it would appear that the goods were not unsolicited with any sort malice on the part of the vendor, so your suggestion that the goods should be kept in order to deprive the vendor of them to either teach them a lesson or because they wont notice anyway is a despicable attitude.
 

Dirtyhanz

Veteran
Location
Cheshire
The Op has asked are advice on a moral question we will all see that question differently I am not judging anyone
People make mistakes
When I make a mistake I liked to be corrected so I try not to do it again I sell and buy a lot on cycle chat and have done for nearly 10 years I have never been let down as a seller or a buyer it's about trust
Trust I give people as a buyer and trust people give me as a seller we are a community that loves cycling and talking about cycling but this does not give us a moral advantage so only the OP can make what he believes to be correct
 

Drago

Legendary Member
At the moment the recipient decides to dishonestly appropriate it the matter becomes a theft.

However, in an age where it's deemed acceptable to claim thousands for non existent whiplash injuries I doubt many folk would morally regard it as dishonest.
 

Brandane

Legendary Member
Location
Costa Clyde
I told you up thread. It is theft if sent twice and kept without notifying in England. So, is it dufferent to that in Scotland?
I told you upthread, several times now. By definition, the circumstances in the OP in Scots law, are not theft. Theft in Scotland is a crime at common law consisting of the felonious taking and appropriating the property of another without lawful authority or the consent of the owner. If someone shoves something through your letter box, you haven't taken it. That being an essential element of the crime makes it a non starter in a Scottish court. The owner of the property may well be able to pursue it through the civil courts but that's a different matter.
 

Mugshot

Cracking a solo.
I told you upthread, several times now. By definition, the circumstances in the OP in Scots law, are not theft. Theft in Scotland is a crime at common law consisting of the felonious taking and appropriating the property of another without lawful authority or the consent of the owner. If someone shoves something through your letter box, you haven't taken it. That being an essential element of the crime makes it a non starter in a Scottish court. The owner of the property may well be able to pursue it through the civil courts but that's a different matter.
So?
 

Stinboy

Über Member
I told you upthread, several times now. By definition, the circumstances in the OP in Scots law, are not theft. Theft in Scotland is a crime at common law consisting of the felonious taking and appropriating the property of another without lawful authority or the consent of the owner. If someone shoves something through your letter box, you haven't taken it. That being an essential element of the crime makes it a non starter in a Scottish court. The owner of the property may well be able to pursue it through the civil courts but that's a different matter.

Why do you persist in trying to turn this into a point of law? It seems to be causing you a fair degree of frustration.

It doesn't matter what legal jurisdiction applies, whether it be Scotland, England ( 'the centre of the universe'? - ffs), Wales or Chile. Just because something is legal (or not) doesn't make it right. Your arguments seem to centre around the fact that if it's legal, it's ok and even if it were not legal, there is some vague level (which you refuse to expand upon) that makes it ok.

And you seem incredulous that others (including me) take exception to this and have the temerity to diasagree with you - to the point of being being abusive.

If every member of any society held these views - do you think things would be better or worse?
 

alicat

Squire
Location
Staffs
I have just wasted five minutes of my life reading about so-called grown ups deliberately causing and taking offence over somebody else's greed over some unsolicited goods. More fool me.
 

Mugshot

Cracking a solo.
I have just wasted five minutes of my life reading about so-called grown ups deliberately causing and taking offence over somebody else's greed over some unsolicited goods. More fool me.
Are they better or worse than so-called judges?
 
OP
OP
Shortandcrisp

Shortandcrisp

Über Member
One word - bloody hell! Sorry, that's two words. Apologies.

Is it my responsibility to inform the vendor of his error (morally/legally or whatever!) or is it merely the case that I should keep the gloves as sent and wait for his response?

Stands back to avoid getting blood on his collar.
 
Top Bottom