News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The 'brushing' scam that's behind mystery parcels. Parent comment

Re:The 'brushing' scam that's behind mystery parcels by sandworm101 on Tuesday September 08, 2020 @04:52PM (#24413193)
There are different rules for people who have ongoing relationships with companies, mostly so that one party doesn't profit from an obvious mistake.

For instance, say you are a store that orders a 1/2 pallet of coke products every week. Then one week the driver leaves a full pallet by accident. Do you get that extra pallet for free? What if you forget to place the order, but the company for whatever reason sends the usual 1/2 pallet anyway? Should you have to pay for that delivery if you use it? These preexisting relationships create situations different than the mystery package on the doorstep.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The 'brushing' scam that's behind mystery parcels by ericmay on Tuesday September 08, 2020 @05:00PM (#24413312)
You’ll have to look into it some more if you’re interested, but I expect this mostly pertains to Americans receiving mail or packages at their homes.

It may be the case that a supplier who delivers something you didn’t request (in your case here) can’t make you pay, but they’d probably terminate any relationship with you.

So I’m only really going off of what the FTC says. In a case of an existing relationship if Amazon Subscribe and Save sends me an extra unit, then no I don’t have to pay for that. It doesn’t matter if I’ve been buying from them in the past.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The 'brushing' scam that's behind mystery parcels by sandworm101 on Tuesday September 08, 2020 @05:38PM (#24413769)
UCC - § 2-606. What Constitutes Acceptance of Goods.

"(1) Acceptance of goods occurs when the buyer (c) does any act inconsistent with the seller's ownership; but if such act is wrongful as against the seller it is an acceptance only if ratified by him."

UCC isn't law in every US state, but is common.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The 'brushing' scam that's behind mystery parcels by TheCoelacanth on Tuesday September 08, 2020 @06:13PM (#24414170)
Accepted as meeting the seller's obligation under the contract[1]. It's not saying that a buyer incurs new contractual obligations simply by accepting delivery of goods that weren't part of their original contract.

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/2-601

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The 'brushing' scam that's behind mystery parcels by sandworm101 on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @07:54AM (#24420011)
The false delivery is offer, making the recipiant a party to the new contract which they acc2pt by taking the goods.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The 'brushing' scam that's behind mystery parcels by ericmay on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @11:20AM (#24421985)
Are you referring to this in an individual customer aspect? Because it seems that the FTC states quite clearly this is not the case. If a company sends you something you didn't ask for and it's addressed to you, you get to keep it as a free gift. The FTC even uses the exact language "free gift".

This may change somewhat if it is a business transaction, but I think it's quite clear if you get a package addressed to you that you didn't order, there's no contractual obligation.

As an example, if you have ever worked in retail sometimes you get truck shipments of things and there can be extra items you didn't order. Maybe the delivery driver said "hey this was sent to you". Accepting delivery of that doesn't mean you have to pay for it.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The 'brushing' scam that's behind mystery parcels by himinlomax on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @04:36AM (#24418750)
Business to business transactions have different rules than when an end consumer is involved, usually, because of the asymmetry. Businesses typically have orders of magnitude more cash than the average consumer, so forcing them to lose a few thousand dollars to get their act together is nothing, whereas it could be a disaster for a private person.
[ Parent | on HN ]