Stolen Card on Ebay

[flavius]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Um, if someone sent you something by mistake and you sold it you'd be converting someone else's property to your own. Similarly, if a bank mistakenly puts $1 million in your bank account and you withdraw it and keep it, you're committing a crime. This isn't an opinion, this is a fact.

The difference there though is the card shipped to this person was obviously in his name and address, otherwise it wouldn't of ended up at his doorstep. I'm assuming he was a customer of the auction house and they somehow switched up who won what auction.

So this means the auction house intended for him to receive the card, and he is fully entitled to keep it. You can't ship something to someone then say it is stolen property when the act of shipping it is giving the item to them...

If a bank puts additional money in your account then that is because of a database error that was not consented to. This issue would be resolved pretty fast and if you withdrew the money before it was fixed, you would go into debt and owe the bank money.

The point here is that this is a mistake on the auction house's end and the receiver of the card is a jerk, but not a completely illegal criminal in the most basic definition. Who knows what could happen if he was taken to court though..

[Jlighter]

Originally Posted by flavius

So this means the auction house intended for him to receive the card, and he is fully entitled to keep it. You can't ship something to someone then say it is stolen property when the act of shipping it is giving the item to them...
.

Going by that same logic, if my voter registration gets sent to the wrong address they can vote in my place for the next election.

[flavius]

Originally Posted by Jlighter

Going by that same logic, if my voter registration gets sent to the wrong address they can vote in my place for the next election.

No because your name would still be on the registration. This is an error on UPS's (or whatever shipping company) part and not whoever issues the registrations.

In this case, the auction intended for say "bob" to receive the card because they filled out the mailing envelope with bob's information and gave consent to give him the item, shown by the fact presumably the mail came in his name and address. For bob, this item was a free gift and nothing more.

The auction house made an internal mistake, and they cannot force whoever they sent to the card to, to go run to the post office and ship it back.

Bob didn't initiate this "crime", the auction house did. Are you going to take him to jail because he got a package in the mail and decided to sell the contents? I'm sure SCL has contacted him, but again, he did nothing legally wrong. If bob initiated this "crime" by hacking into SCL's network, then (aside from hacking) that would be a crime because his intention was to defraud someone else. This is an error on the auction house's part.

I'm not a lawyer or anything but I have had similar experiences in the past and I think the line between ethics and legalities is a very thin one, so I could be wrong I suppose. This is just my opinion.

Bryan

[novakjr]

flavius. Check the laws on "unjust enrichment"...

Again, I'm not sure who's out on this. I think it's the auction house. Because I believe they would be responsible for both reimbursing the buyer, and the seller for the money's lost by their mistake. If the buyer doesn't get refunded, then I believe he would be the rightful claimant in a case. If the buyer get reimbursed, but the seller doesn't get paid, then I believe he would be the claimant in a case. And if SCL both pays out the seller, and re-imburses the buyer, then they would be the ones ultimately out the money, and they would become the claimant...

[chris]

I do not know if the seller received the card from SCL or if they purchased the card from the receiver of the shipment. Either way we will likely know on Monday if SCL divulges who they believe to be the recipient. However I do know SCL has reached out to the possible recipient and have gotten no response/answer. All I know is that I won a card at auction and the card was accidently sent to the wrong winner and they are not responding to SCL. I never stated anything about legal action. I just wanted to let everyone know that the card I won is now for sale by a seller who did not win or pay for this card. The seller is likely the receiver of a shipping mix-up by SCL. I have spoke to SCL and they have been nothing but very professional and apologetic. I know they are doing everything they can to recover the card for me. This has gone much further than I ever expected. After reading all your posts I do not know if there is anything technically illegal or not. SCL has told me they will offer me a refund if they cannot locate the card for me. I believe the seller is likely the recipient of the card from SCL as they have not responded to my messages plus they have grossly exaggerated the cards condition in their description.

Chris Buckler

[Jlighter]

Originally Posted by flavius

No because your name would still be on the registration. This is an error on UPS's (or whatever shipping company) part and not whoever issues the registrations.

In this case, the auction intended for say "bob" to receive the card because they filled out the mailing envelope with bob's information and gave consent to give him the item, shown by the fact presumably the mail came in his name and address. For bob, this item was a free gift and nothing more.

The auction house made an internal mistake, and they cannot force whoever they sent to the card to, to go run to the post office and ship it back.


Bryan

The buyer won and paid for the card. If paid through PayPal there would be a email. If paid through check there would be a paper trail. The invoice most likely stated the correct buyers name, who it was sent to is irrelevant.

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure the only form of mail recognized by a court of law is registerd mail.

[Jacklitsch]

When is someone going to require Flavius to post his full name like the rest of us?

Steve Murray

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Jacklitsch

When is someone going to require Flavius to post his full name like the rest of us?

Steve Murray

If you click on his name it is in his signature there. He and I pm'd about it a few times today. It's not perfect but I am fine with that.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Originally Posted by flavius

No because your name would still be on the registration. This is an error on UPS's (or whatever shipping company) part and not whoever issues the registrations.

In this case, the auction intended for say "bob" to receive the card because they filled out the mailing envelope with bob's information and gave consent to give him the item, shown by the fact presumably the mail came in his name and address. For bob, this item was a free gift and nothing more.

The auction house made an internal mistake, and they cannot force whoever they sent to the card to, to go run to the post office and ship it back.

Bob didn't initiate this "crime", the auction house did. Are you going to take him to jail because he got a package in the mail and decided to sell the contents? I'm sure SCL has contacted him, but again, he did nothing legally wrong. If bob initiated this "crime" by hacking into SCL's network, then (aside from hacking) that would be a crime because his intention was to defraud someone else. This is an error on the auction house's part.

I'm not a lawyer or anything but I have had similar experiences in the past and I think the line between ethics and legalities is a very thin one, so I could be wrong I suppose. This is just my opinion.

Bryan

Sir or ma'am,

Do you reckon the receiver of the card knew if he or she should have received the card? You're articulating reasons to do the wrong thing here.

[HRBAKER]

We need a new card for Monopoly:

"Auction House Error in your Favor"
"Do Not Return, feel free to Sell or Consign"

[Clutch-Hitter]

That Field of Dreams thread Moonlight Graham said he was working on is going to be good! I love that movie! Well, I like it...a little. Couldn't find it.

[teetwoohsix]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzhpB1X-6ok

Sincerely, Clayton

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

We need a new card for Monopoly:

"Auction House Error in your Favor"
"Do Not Return, feel free to Sell or Consign"

Thank you, Jeff; I needed a good laugh.

[scooter729]

Ummm, this link might state a little bit about the seller's ethics and whether he knew what he might have been selling:

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/...d47c6de33.html

[I Only Smoke 4 the Cards]

The basic concept of theft (Florida) is this: (1) you took something that wasn't yours (2) you did so with the intent to deprive the true owner of his use of the item.

(1) The card didn't belong to the seller and he knew it.
(2) Selling the card deprives the true owner of its use.

Legal reasoning aside selling something that doesn't belong to you is just wrong.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by flavius

Bob didn't initiate this "crime", the auction house did. Are you going to take him to jail because he got a package in the mail and decided to sell the contents? I'm sure SCL has contacted him, but again, he did nothing legally wrong. If bob initiated this "crime" by hacking into SCL's network, then (aside from hacking) that would be a crime because his intention was to defraud someone else. This is an error on the auction house's part.

Classic, now the auction house is the one that initiated a "crime" by MAKING A MISTAKE while the one receiving the package did no wrong keeping the item after he MADE THE DECISION to keep ill gotten gains!

[JohnP0621]

I posted the story about my son returning the wallet becuase I am hoping that the seller of the card sees what doing the right thing is vs making a fast dishonest buck. I hope that he didnt pass hIS behavior down to his son who is listing the items for him while he is supposidly out of the country.. We all make mistakes but the key is to learn from them and pass down the right ways to our kids.Or At Least Try To.

Regards
John P

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by flavius

The difference there though is the card shipped to this person was obviously in his name and address, otherwise it wouldn't of ended up at his doorstep. I'm assuming he was a customer of the auction house and they somehow switched up who won what auction.

So this means the auction house intended for him to receive the card, and he is fully entitled to keep it. You can't ship something to someone then say it is stolen property when the act of shipping it is giving the item to them...

If a bank puts additional money in your account then that is because of a database error that was not consented to. This issue would be resolved pretty fast and if you withdrew the money before it was fixed, you would go into debt and owe the bank money.

The point here is that this is a mistake on the auction house's end and the receiver of the card is a jerk, but not a completely illegal criminal in the most basic definition. Who knows what could happen if he was taken to court though..

I think it applies in cases of mis-delivery. I'm not sure if the packing and shipping process also counts as delivery though. But I'd be inclined to think that with SCL being the auction house, that they never factor into the "ownership", only the "possession" of the item. And I think that would make them part of the delivery process involved in the card changing "ownership".

I'm no attorney though, just a lowly Ironworker...

[buymycards]

Kevin is out of the country until Feb 18th so I'm guessing he won't respond for a while.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by flavius

The difference there though is the card shipped to this person was obviously in his name and address, otherwise it wouldn't of ended up at his doorstep. I'm assuming he was a customer of the auction house and they somehow switched up who won what auction.

So this means the auction house intended for him to receive the card, and he is fully entitled to keep it. You can't ship something to someone then say it is stolen property when the act of shipping it is giving the item to them...

If a bank puts additional money in your account then that is because of a database error that was not consented to. This issue would be resolved pretty fast and if you withdrew the money before it was fixed, you would go into debt and owe the bank money.

The point here is that this is a mistake on the auction house's end and the receiver of the card is a jerk, but not a completely illegal criminal in the most basic definition. Who knows what could happen if he was taken to court though..

Clearly you're not a criminal lawyer nor did you stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Jeff everyone is entitled to an opinion about how the states define crimes.

[calvindog]

True, true, how could I forget. What would statutory crimes be without personal interpretation and unilateral determination?

[Buythatcard]

I know that this has nothing to do with the issue but has anyone noticed that the description of the card is talking about Hughie Jennings and not Ty Cobb?

[Bugsy]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Clearly you're not a criminal lawyer nor did you stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Don't forget the legal precedent set in the landmark Finders v. Keepers case

[Eric72]

I am currently taking a class on Business Law. Below is a quote from the textbook which I find appropriate here. Please know that I am not throwing daggers at anyone. I am merely weighing in on where I stand regarding the issue of what is ethical versus what a person is legally required to do.

"Ethical behavior is based on more than meeting minimum legal requirements. It invariably involves a higher, moral standard."

When I mistakenly wind up with something that's not mine, and it can realistically be returned to its rightful owner, I will give it back...every time. Whether discovering that the lid from my neighbor's trash can blew over onto my lawn or finding someone's wallet on the ground in a parking lot, I make sure the item finds its way back to where it belongs.

In this particular case, to anyone receiving somebody else's baseball card in the mail, just give it back. It's the right thing to do. Period.

Best Regards,

Eric

[wazoo]

Originally Posted by Eric72

I am currently taking a class on Business Law. Below is a quote from the textbook which I find appropriate here. Please know that I am not throwing daggers at anyone. I am merely weighing in on where I stand regarding the issue of what is ethical versus what a person is legally required to do.

"Ethical behavior is based on more than meeting minimum legal requirements. It invariably involves a higher, moral standard."

When I mistakenly wind up with something that's not mine, and it can realistically be returned to its rightful owner, I will give it back...every time. Whether discovering that the lid from my neighbor's trash can blew over onto my lawn or finding someone's wallet on the ground in a parking lot, I make sure the item finds its way back to where it belongs.

In this particular case, to anyone receiving somebody else's baseball card in the mail, just give it back. It's the right thing to do. Period.

Best Regards,

Eric

Amen to this. Great post Eric.