Free Mavic Pro - What to do?? Need Advice.

[The Fat Controller]

There's really no thought needed, no 'would I should I?'. If you do the right thing you can sleep easy at night.

 

[poak_99]

I cannot see any difference between my post and post #14 in either content or context. Plus the after-the-event "I was going to return it anyway" doesn't ring true with the original post. I won't be commenting further, or partaking further, but I'm still not impressed.

Wow.... Then why did you even comment.

 

[poak_99]

Just an update for the douche knocker that keeps being rude about my story. Part of the issue and I left out some major details was I bought the Drone after I had appendix surgery, to give me something to do while I recovered.

I ended up back in the hospital the day after I opened it and found out I had two. I had a lot of time to think about it in the hospital, wrote this post, and a lot of time to read your posts. Im not going to lie, the thought crossed my mind to give it to a friend... but I had always had the intention to bring it back. I thought the moral dilemma would bring up good conversation on this form which is why I wrote the post, and it obviously has.
When I did bring a drone back I made it explicitly clear to the manager that the store employee did not **** up. I showed him the label on the Fly more box that showed the contents of the box which did not include a drone.
I asked the manager to ensure his employees were properly trained to know what this high-dollar item included, and told him he should probably contact the supplier to update the label properly.
After a brief discussion about the labeling the manager asked me if I needed anything in the store. I said no but he said it was the least he could do. Have been shopping for a second monitor for my PC at home and ended up picking up the cheapest one in the store because I actually felt guilty. At the checkout he handed me a gift card.

So to the guy who thinks he's never made a mistake and lives on the high horse above all of us, keep your trap shut unless you know the whole story.

Glad to see there's such a positive community and good moral people out there thanks for responding to my post.

 

[Wipster]

I went to a local retailer 2 weeks ago to buy the Mavic Pro Fly More Bundle as it was $200 off.
The sales rep came out with a big brown box and proceeded to cash me out.
While waiting I noticed the label on the box read: box contents - and listed all the fly more bundle items but did not list a mavic pro. I mentioned it to the sales rep. He looked at the box, left to the back and came out with a Mavic Pro in a white box.
So i take both home and to my suprise, I open the Fly more bundlebox and there is the white box with the mavic pro inside.
So... I now have a spare mavic pro sitting on my desk.

1. Should I return it?
2. Should I keep it for spare parts?
3. Should I sell it? - I worry about them tracing the mavic s/n back to the store and going after the buyer.

I'm normally a very honest man, but... ugg this is a tough one. The store screwed up, not me.?

What to do? Advice?

Return it

 

[Garfieldg]

Many people are assuming that the OP commits theft if he keeps the item. In UK law at least it is not quite so clear. For the offence to occur all elements of the offence must be proven I.e. Dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. There was no dishonesty at the time and no appropriation - the store handed it over willingly and without coercion. Theft, therefore, hasn’t occurred. There is a moral issue, of course, but in my view no obligation in law.

 

[Jimbo40]

Many people are assuming that the OP commits theft if he keeps the item. In UK law at least it is not quite so clear. For the offence to occur all elements of the offence must be proven I.e. Dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. There was no dishonesty at the time and no appropriation - the store handed it over willingly and without coercion. Theft, therefore, hasn’t occurred. There is a moral issue, of course, but in my view no obligation in law.

Well you said it, "at the time".
But once the discovery was made that the property was transferred to another without the owners knowledge or consent the story has changed. The owner now has a right to his property, and if the receiving party withholds it and says, too bad so sad, he is stealing it. He has obtained it without giving consideration to the rightful owner. It is not his right to keep it because someone made a mistake. He intends to keep what he did not lawfully obtain,and deprive the owner of his property. Theft.
So it is pretty easy to understand.

 

[Garfieldg]

Well you said it, "at the time".
But once the discovery was made that the property was transferred to another without the owners knowledge or consent the story has changed. The owner now has a right to his property, and if the receiving party withholds it and says, too bad so sad, he is stealing it. He has obtained it without giving consideration to the rightful owner. It is not his right to keep it because someone made a mistake. He intends to keep what he did not lawfully obtain,and deprive the owner of his property. Theft.
So it is pretty easy to understand.

It’s a civil remedy - ‘making off without payment’ was created to deal with the issue of appropriation in a petrol station where an attendant puts fuel in the vehicle then makes off. No appropriation so not theft. When the OP realised he had it then yes he should return it and the rights of ownership always lies with the original owner but does not make the OP a thief.

 

[Intransit]

I went to a local retailer 2 weeks ago to buy the Mavic Pro Fly More Bundle as it was $200 off.
The sales rep came out with a big brown box and proceeded to cash me out.
While waiting I noticed the label on the box read: box contents - and listed all the fly more bundle items but did not list a mavic pro. I mentioned it to the sales rep. He looked at the box, left to the back and came out with a Mavic Pro in a white box.
So i take both home and to my suprise, I open the Fly more bundlebox and there is the white box with the mavic pro inside.
So... I now have a spare mavic pro sitting on my desk.

1. Should I return it?
2. Should I keep it for spare parts?
3. Should I sell it? - I worry about them tracing the mavic s/n back to the store and going after the buyer.

I'm normally a very honest man, but... ugg this is a tough one. The store screwed up, not me.?

What to do? Advice?

Give it back.

 

[Intransit]

It’s a civil remedy - ‘making off without payment’ was created to deal with the issue of appropriation in a petrol station where an attendant puts fuel in the vehicle then makes off. No appropriation so not theft. When the OP realised he had it then yes he should return it and the rights of ownership always lies with the original owner but does not make the OP a thief.

What about morally?

 

[Garfieldg]

I said ‘when he realised he had it then he should return it’. My point is the store’s error doesn’t make him a thief.

 

[poak_99]

You guys obviously haven't read the whole thread. It was returned.

 

[wytnyt]

i had amazon email me saying my package had got lost,they credited my account,i told them i received the package but they said to keep the refund.,everybodys happy

 

[Sac D]

The store's insurance will cover it

If it was a $50,000 car, insurance would cover it as well. But that's not the point, nor the moral of the story. I guess you have identified how you would handle the situation.

 

[Fireproof]

Haha wow. I posted this question out of curiosity, to see what people would say and I'm extremely impressed by the response. I had no intention of ever keeping it. I returned the drone today. . The best buy manager was absolutely taken a back by my honesty. Got a free computer monitor which I needed and a $50 gift card.

Good for you! That was the right thing to do!

 

[aerialpatagonia]

Now i want to get a store manager like that in my city. And a clerk like that also. And the money to buy a brown boxed mavic bundle.

Good for you. I need a new monitor too..

 

[CCTjohn]

Stopped reading half way through these comments. They are all about the same sentiment but one thing really bothered me.

Dude gets told to do the right thing or Karma would punish him . When he does the right thing and Karma rewards him he gets criticized...

Good job OP for doing the right thing!

 

[GlenT]

Many people are assuming that the OP commits theft if he keeps the item. In UK law at least it is not quite so clear. For the offence to occur all elements of the offence must be proven I.e. Dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. There was no dishonesty at the time and no appropriation - the store handed it over willingly and without coercion. Theft, therefore, hasn’t occurred. There is a moral issue, of course, but in my view no obligation in law.

Surely in the UK if a bank deposits a million dollars into your account accidentally, you can't just go and spend it?
Here's good quote from Ty Doyle, Partner at litigation boutique. JD Stanford.
"You would be committing theft. At common law, theft is defined as (1) the removal of an object that is capable of being stolen, (2) without the consent of the owner, and (3) with the intention of depriving the owner of it permanently. While we may treat levels of theft differently (stealing the Mona Lisa would be punished more harshly than stealing a Snickers bar), theft occurs any time you take something that does not belong to you with the intention of keeping/using the property for your own benefit. There is no "degree of difficulty" requirement in theft; a theft made easier by another's mistake or lack of attention is still theft".

 

[elwyn5150]

Surely in the UK if a bank deposits a million dollars into your account accidentally, you can't just go and spend it?

In Australia, a banking error allowed a foreign student to spend millions of dollars using overdraft. She returned some items and she tried to leave the country but they charged her with various things. Eventually charges were dropped.
Charges against Christine Lee for $4.6 million Westpac overdraft dropped

 

[GlenT]

In Australia, a banking error allowed a foreign student to spend millions of dollars using overdraft. She returned some items and she tried to leave the country but they charged her with various things. Eventually charges were dropped.
Charges against Christine Lee for $4.6 million Westpac overdraft dropped

The criminal charges were dropped in that case, but the Supreme Court made orders for forfeiture of property to recover the money. She wasn't allowed to keep what the bank accidentally put in her account.
She is a classic example of a self indulgent greedy little good for nothing princess, spending millions on hand bags and shoes.