Found mis-delivered parcel after receiving refund - must I tell the store? A parcel ordered through a store was meant to be delivered to me on Saturday 30th. It wasn't. Going through the delivery firm's customer service, they couldn't determine where it had been delivered to and considered it a missing parcel. This led to the store submitting a refund to me and a fine to the delivery firm. I have now canvassed the places it could have been miss-delivered to and found the parcel. Do I have to notify the store? If I do, do I have to agree to them cancelling the refund?
If you have received the item, and continue to let the store believe you haven't, then you are obtaining money under false pretenses, which is pretty much the definition of fraud.
Is this legal? Generally yes, unless it unlawfully exceeds the scope of the license. Also, if it is, how can I check if it's permitted by the original store's EULA? Read the whole EULA, focusing on terms related to resale, assignment, and transferability.
Assuming you have an assured shorthold tenancy, it's not the landlord himself that can evict you. The process is that he serves you notice, and if you don't move by the time the notice period ends, then he has to go to court in order to obtain a court order to end the tenancy. The landlord must demonstrate to the court that he has properly served notice to the tenant. This is a bit of a grey area, but this article suggests that, to avoid ambiguity, the landlord should either use recorded delivery (which would provide proof as to whether or not the tenant received it), or deliver it by hand with an independent witness present. In the case of a section 21 "no fault" eviction, the only defence a tenant has is that the correct procedure has not been followed. So it is in the landlord's interest to ensure that notice has been received beyond any doubt.
If the stranger was aware of the reward offer at the time of the return you have a legally binding contract - you made an offer to the world, money for return of the phone, and they accepted it by returning it. If they were ignorant of your offer and returned the phone then there is no contract and you do not have to pay: albeit at the cost of being a jerk. Of course, if they obtained your phone unlawfully (e.g. by stealing it) the contract is void.
Can the address details be found on Companies House? If the seller is non-responsive the buyer must seek help from their bank and/or the authorities. In general a &quot;Faster Payment&quot; cannot be stopped or reversed. Unlike a debit or credit card payment a &quot;Faster Payment&quot; does not have &quot;chargeback&quot; or &quot;section 75 protection&quot;. The buyer must contact their bank as soon as possible - there is a process the bank can follow with the recipient's bank but there is no guarantee the money will be returned. Normally the recipient must consent to having the payment reversed. If the buyer thinks they have been the victim of fraud they should contact their bank, which should contact the appropriate authorities. As a practical matter the buyer should be prepared to 'chase' their bank to find out what is happening with their report (because the bank may not be proactive about informing the buyer). Alternatively the buyer can contact Action Fraud. In terms of &quot;buyer's remorse&quot;, the buyer must try to establish which legal jurisdiction applies to their contract with the seller. If the buyer and seller are UK-based, the good or service bought after June 2014 via a website, phone, text message or mail order may be covered by the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013. Some things e.g. bets, lottery tickets, bus tickets, plots of land are not within the scope of those regulations (but may be covered by other law). If the sale is covered by those regulations, the seller was obliged to provide certain information including their geographical address and contact details and details of the buyer's right to cancel before the sale was completed. The buyer has a right to cancel 14 days after being informed by the seller of the right to cancel (the &quot;14 day cooling off period&quot;) - if the seller does not ever inform the buyer of the right to cancel then this right to cancel lasts for 12 months. The buyer is not obliged to provide a reason. There are certain goods and services where this right to cancel and get a refund varies or does not apply. A refund for a service might be reduced by the value of the service the buyer has used so far. Goods or services where there is no right to a refund include tickets to events, personalised items, health or hygiene products where the buyer broke the seal or digital content the buyer downloaded. If the seller is non-responsive the buyer could contact: the citizen's advice service in their region (they can refer the complaint to Trading Standards) their local Trading Standards office - the buyer should look for the office's contact details on their local authority's website the Ombudsman Services if the seller is overseas, the UK International Consumer Centre may be able to help. The buyer should be prepared to provide a description of the circumstances, the available details about the seller, what the buyer has attempted so far, and what the buyer wants to achieve (e.g. a refund). There is lots of guidance online (e.g. the citizen's advice organisations and Which? magazine) about how to complain and what kinds of evidence to collect. The website resolver.co.uk might also be helpful in terms of guidance and keeping a diary. (The buyer might consider contacting a newspaper, magazine or specific journalist about their experience - some well-known media outlets run articles about individual consumers' problems and sometimes help to get a satisfactory resolution.)
You are conflating the crime against the state of possession stolen goods with the common law tort against the owner for conversion. To your questions: How would this proceed? It seems like it would be very difficult to prove (short of getting public surveillance footage) that I even bought the item. If you read the second paragraph of the page you linked it says: In many jurisdictions, if an individual has accepted possession of goods or property and knew they were stolen, then the individual is typically charged ... If the individual did not know the goods were stolen, then the goods are returned to the owner and the individual is not prosecuted. Proof of the crime involves a "beyond reasonable doubt" standard of evidence of both the fact that you have the goods and that you knew they were stolen. If you become aware that they were stolen (e.g. the police tell you) and try to keep them then you have just committed the crime. Proof of the tort requires a "balance of probabilities" standard of evidence that you have the goods and that they belong to someone else; your knowledge that they were stolen is immaterial. In the first instance, the police would probably knock on your door, tell you why they were there and ask if the version of the story they have from the thief is essentially true. What happens next depends on your response: "Yes, I knew it was stolen; you better arrest me and I will plead guilty." This will play out as you expect. "Yes, I didn't know it was stolen, I will go and get it for you." You return the goods, give a statement and may have to act as a witness in the prosecution of the thief. You are down $1,000 but are now older and wiser. "No, I have no idea what you are talking about." Well, you have now committed the crime of hindering a police investigation and have also committed the crime of possessing stolen goods - you can no longer claim that you didn't know the goods were stolen; the police have told you they are. What happens next depends on if the police believe you or the thief. Surely they couldn't/wouldn't get a warrant to search my house? Want to bet? They certainly have enough to get a search warrant if they want one (probably). Whether they seek one probably depends on the value of the goods, how busy they are and how much you pissed them off. Could I be prosecuted if I didn't know it was stolen? Not if you return it as soon as practicable after being made aware that they were. The scam This seems like a lot of work for a very small return - spend your time worrying about things that are more likely to happen. Good Title All of this is tied up with the concept of good title. Basically, you cannot gain good title to property from someone who does not have good title themselves; if you buy goods from a thief you do not own them. For example, if A has good title to the goods, B steals them and sells them to C who sells them to D then A still owns them and can demand their return from D, D could demand the return of their money from C and C could do likewise with B but as far as A is concerned it doesn't matter that C &amp; B have lost money; that is simply too bad for them.
Possibly The game company has almost certainly excluded liability under the contract you entered. There may be some consumer protection that you have that they cannot exclude - I don’t know enough about German law to meaningfully comment. Notwithstanding, if you were to initiate legal action against the, as yet, unknown wrongdoer, you could subpoena the relevant records from the game company with a court order. No matter what privacy or other protections the other person has, the game company must obey the order or be in contempt. Without such an order the game company is right that they can’t disclose details of other users. As a practical matter, it will cost several hundred € to initiate legal action and several thousand to pursue it to the end. And you might lose. A better response is to treat the lost €80 as a relatively cheap life lesson - many people lose a lot more learning to recognise scams.
If the landlord gave you a key, and you can not give it back to him he has every right to charge you for correcting the oversight. I put to you that if you can't provide it back to him, he can't be certain that it has not fallen into the wrong hands, and he would be prudent to change the lock - and indeed, he may not even have another copy of the key in which case he really does not have a lot of alternatives. If you look at the section on "Claims for Damages or Loss" pdf there is a section B - Damage which confirms that Loss includes less tangible impacts including "loss of a service or facility provided under the tenancy agreement" Section C of the same document goes on to assert that "The purpose of compensation is to put the person who suffered the damage or loss in the same position as if the damage or loss had not occurred". There is arguably a question of the amount of loss suffered, and they can't sting you for punitive damages, but they can charge you a reasonable amount to get a new key cut (or possibly to replace the lock) - but that was not your question, and would probably arise if the amount he charges was unreasonable in the circumstance. Depending on if he has already taken action - and if not, how much the bill would be - promptly remedying the breach by finding and returning the key or equivalent action might save you some money.