This Amazon booze loophole thing
Discussion
Haven't seen this discussed elsewhere. Feel free to direct accordingly if it has.
Some of my more internet-astute associates have been taking advantage of a loophole in the regulations surrounding the purchase and return of alcohol on Amazon. A few months back, one of them ordered £400 worth of spirits for a wedding, not knowing that his mate had done the same thing. He contacted the seller to arrange a return. They refunded the money but said that he could keep the booze.
To cut a long story short, it appears that there are regulations that prohibit unlicensed individuals sending alcohol through the post but the rules of selling via Amazon dictate that sellers must refund buyers if they wish to return a purchase. I 'think' this is the legal situation. Either way, it seems you can order a shed load of booze, say you no longer need it, get refunded but get to keep it.
They've done this a couple of times.
Now the question is a moral one. I'm fairly certain that it's not theft because you offer to return the goods - it's the company's choice to decline the goods be returned to them. But entering into an arrangement with the intent of seeking gain as a result of the loophole...is that not 'wrong'?
Some of my more internet-astute associates have been taking advantage of a loophole in the regulations surrounding the purchase and return of alcohol on Amazon. A few months back, one of them ordered £400 worth of spirits for a wedding, not knowing that his mate had done the same thing. He contacted the seller to arrange a return. They refunded the money but said that he could keep the booze.
To cut a long story short, it appears that there are regulations that prohibit unlicensed individuals sending alcohol through the post but the rules of selling via Amazon dictate that sellers must refund buyers if they wish to return a purchase. I 'think' this is the legal situation. Either way, it seems you can order a shed load of booze, say you no longer need it, get refunded but get to keep it.
They've done this a couple of times.
Now the question is a moral one. I'm fairly certain that it's not theft because you offer to return the goods - it's the company's choice to decline the goods be returned to them. But entering into an arrangement with the intent of seeking gain as a result of the loophole...is that not 'wrong'?
StevieBee said:
Haven't seen this discussed elsewhere. Feel free to direct accordingly if it has.
Some of my more internet-astute associates have been taking advantage of a loophole in the regulations surrounding the purchase and return of alcohol on Amazon. A few months back, one of them ordered £400 worth of spirits for a wedding, not knowing that his mate had done the same thing. He contacted the seller to arrange a return. They refunded the money but said that he could keep the booze.
To cut a long story short, it appears that there are regulations that prohibit unlicensed individuals sending alcohol through the post but the rules of selling via Amazon dictate that sellers must refund buyers if they wish to return a purchase. I 'think' this is the legal situation. Either way, it seems you can order a shed load of booze, say you no longer need it, get refunded but get to keep it.
They've done this a couple of times.
Now the question is a moral one. I'm fairly certain that it's not theft because you offer to return the goods - it's the company's choice to decline the goods be returned to them. But entering into an arrangement with the intent of seeking gain as a result of the loophole...is that not 'wrong'?
Yes, I would say morally the compass would be facing the wrong way.Some of my more internet-astute associates have been taking advantage of a loophole in the regulations surrounding the purchase and return of alcohol on Amazon. A few months back, one of them ordered £400 worth of spirits for a wedding, not knowing that his mate had done the same thing. He contacted the seller to arrange a return. They refunded the money but said that he could keep the booze.
To cut a long story short, it appears that there are regulations that prohibit unlicensed individuals sending alcohol through the post but the rules of selling via Amazon dictate that sellers must refund buyers if they wish to return a purchase. I 'think' this is the legal situation. Either way, it seems you can order a shed load of booze, say you no longer need it, get refunded but get to keep it.
They've done this a couple of times.
Now the question is a moral one. I'm fairly certain that it's not theft because you offer to return the goods - it's the company's choice to decline the goods be returned to them. But entering into an arrangement with the intent of seeking gain as a result of the loophole...is that not 'wrong'?
Yes, it's morally wrong to intentionally buy the alcohol and submit a refund with the intention of gaining free alcohol. I'm sure whoever does thinks they're clever or trying to get one over Amazon. But fact is, they're making an excuse for being a scumbag.
If it is an honest mistake, then fair enough.
If it is an honest mistake, then fair enough.
ThunderSpook said:
Sounds like theft if your intention is to obtain goods without paying for them. The loophole just allows you to do the theft easily. If it’s a genuine mistake then that’s different, but I’d you are doing it with the purpose of getting it for free then it’s definitely theft.
I agree. Its theft if deliberate. Regardless of a "loophole" in someone's T&C. My car has a loophole which means I can do more then the posted speed limit. I still break the law if I do so, though...alorotom said:
thats crazy ... can imagine now that its been "outed" that loophole will close super quick!
Loads of people will exploit it and then *plop* Amazon will stop allowing the trade of alcohol. Then people will be sad because Amazon have stopped allowing sales of alcohol and they'll blame Amazon for it.StevieBee said:
Some of my more internet-astute associates have been taking advantage of a loophole
You could've just written: "Some of my friends are dreadful scummers."Naturally, I'm fully expecting; "Well, it's Amazon's fault for allowing it." rather than people knowing the difference between right and wrong and dismissing it all because they'll gain something.
Rawwr said:
alorotom said:
thats crazy ... can imagine now that its been "outed" that loophole will close super quick!
Loads of people will exploit it and then *plop* Amazon will stop allowing the trade of alcohol. Then people will be sad because Amazon have stopped allowing sales of alcohol and they'll blame Amazon for it. And whinge and start an epetition.Amazon can opt to suggest not returning an item. I've ordered a gaming mouse in the past and it didn't work on my PC for whatever reason. They sent another, said I could keep this one. Tried it on a friend's machine - worked fine, so he kept it.
Sound ridiculous to me.
I have a couple of gin subscriptions and last month one of the deliveries included the incorrect bottle - they said either;
a) I kept the one they had sent and I get a discount next month or;
b) They send out a replacement and I'd send back the one sent in error via their courier.
I opted a as it was only a small bottle and quite like the one sent in error anyway.
But the point is, having the bottle sent back to them via courier didn't seem to be an issue. So surely you would go to this trouble for £400 worth!!!
I have a couple of gin subscriptions and last month one of the deliveries included the incorrect bottle - they said either;
a) I kept the one they had sent and I get a discount next month or;
b) They send out a replacement and I'd send back the one sent in error via their courier.
I opted a as it was only a small bottle and quite like the one sent in error anyway.
But the point is, having the bottle sent back to them via courier didn't seem to be an issue. So surely you would go to this trouble for £400 worth!!!
This doesn't sound right - I ordered a Smirnoff gift set from Amazon that arrived with some damage - I've already returned it and ordered a replacement. No mention of keep it or you can't return it.
Loads of other companies sell alcohol online too and they don't seem to have any trouble accepting returns.
Loads of other companies sell alcohol online too and they don't seem to have any trouble accepting returns.
StevieBee said:
To cut a long story short, it appears that there are regulations that prohibit unlicensed individuals sending alcohol through the post
Laithwaites and the like seem to have no issue with shipping booze via perfectly normal couriers.Either your mates are spinning you a yarn, or this particular seller has some incredibly lax return procedures and is going titsup very shortly. If they ARE ordering with the intent of then lying to get it for free, then definitely theft or fraud.
ks 
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff