> Given the police's complete inaction vigilantism was inevitable.
This makes me wonder: who is responsible for the lost package? I would expect, if the deliverer can't prove they delivered the package (because they didn't get a signature), they're responsible for the loss and need to pay for the loss.The recipient certainly can't help that someone left a package outside. If the loss is for the recipient, then I can certainly understand the vigilantism, but that's a pretty awful system.
I'm glad I can usually pick up my packages at my neighbours'.
Is there any legal jurisprudence about this? It feels to me like the delivery service should be responsible.
The sender and the sender's agent (shipping company) own the package until it is delivered. That's why the sender insures it and insurance payments go to the sender.
But often it is more complicated than that, because there's a commercial contract between the sender and the recipient that also has to be taken into account.
I'd call it a legally grey area, with the commercial sender often likely filing an insurance claim and re-sending the lost merchandise.
Really I think that's more a customer service nicety than anything the company would be legally required to do. Seems like everyone has done their part to fulfill their obligations once the package hits your doorstep.
IANAL - but I'd suppose they could sue you and may even win but it's not going to do much for their public image in the best case and the worst case they get prosecuted for theft.
> A booby trap may be defined as any concealed or camouflaged device designed to cause bodily injury
It doesn't apply.
I wonder if an industry of decoy packages will spring up, maybe "sticky" or "smelly" glitter. Or heck just go full ink bomb.
I wonder where the law stands on this? Can you really be liable if someone steals your property then causes property damage using it?