It was a gift. Quit dunning me for it!

The BBQ Pit
1

My son has (er, had, at this point) a subscription to Trains magazine.

About 3 months ago, they sent a DVD in the mail. It was touted as an introduction to a series of train-related DVDs and “we hope you’ll like it and want to subscribe to this series where we’ll send you a new one every month or two at the low price of 10 bucks and if you don’t want this one you can return it in this postage paid envelope but if you do want it it’s 9.95 and that’ll subscribe you to the nifty new one every month or so”. Or words to that effect.

Now, when someone sends you something like that unsolicited, it’s legal to consider it a gift. One cite. Another cite.

Well, a month or so later we got a reminder and request to return the DVD if we didn’t want to subscribe. Hm, I dunno, let’s see… purveyor of unsolicited train-related DVD, versus autistic train-obsessed teenager. Which do you think won out? (hint: it was not the purveyor).

And tonight we got another reminder. There was a form with 2 places to check:
[ul]
[li]Yay! I want it and every other one you ever make and here’s my money!![/li][li]No thanks, I’m sending the DVD back![/li][/ul]
Somewhere on the paper it did say “this was unsolicited so you have no obligation”. However, nowhere on the paper was there any info on how to notify them to QUIT BILLING ME YOU MORONS. So I guess I get to print out the relevant page from the USPS (link above) with the relevant sections highlighted and a note saying “quit billing us or the next one gets sent to the postmaster and by the way you fools, we are sure as HELL not resubscribing to the magazine after this stunt”.

:::deep breath:::

I can see them sending the DVD to try to get the kid hooked.

I can see them sending one “maybe you forgot?” notice.

But two notices? That starts to become harassment.

I wonder if the notice really had a “business reply mail” thingy on it (it’s downstairs and I’m too lazy to go look). I wonder if I have a spare cinder block…

2

Sorry, but I have a differing view. A business relationship between you and they was already established, by way of the magazine subscription. Entities who have already successfully sold you things are interested in selling you more things. They didn’t, after all, send identical copies of said DVD to everybody on your street, did they?

IMO, you’re being a shit. If you wanted to keep the DVD and screw the company, that’s your bent moral compass. But don’t try to make us feel sorry for your kid, and you, because you’ve found a way to justify (to yourself) keeping something that you should have sent back.

Had you merely kept it when you had no intention of paying, you’re just being dishonest. Now you’re being whiny, and trying to trump up justification for your dismal ethical platform. Fail.

3

Let’s say you make a car payment every month. Is it ok for them to just send you another car and then demand payment for it afterwards?

4

Neither she nor her son (as I read it) asked to be sent a CD on approval. The company decided that she or her son would be a potential customer, and sent an UNSOLICITED item of merchandise. Legally, the company doesn’t have a leg to stand on, and the company knows this. The company is just gonna have to eat the cost of this CD.

Now, had the company sent a letter, explaining about this new, exciting series, and had Mama Zappa and/or her son subscribed to the series, or even asked for the trial CD, then I’d say that MZ was obliged to pay up. But the company is simply trying to guilt her into paying for something she didn’t agree to buy.

5

“Bent moral compass” my ass.

The company engaged in a marketing strategy that, no matter which of their stated options she took, was going to cause the OP some inconvenience. Either she forks over money for a product she never asked for, or she has to package it back up and go out of her way to send it back.

Sending someone unsolicited products does not make it incumbent upon that person to follow your instructions regarding those products. The fact that the company’s own mailing told the OP that she was under no obligation makes clear that the company knows the score. I’ll bet they even have actuarial types who calculate what percentage of targets are likely to fork out for these unsolicited mailings, and what percentage the company is likely to lose to people who don’t want to play their game. The company took a gamble; they lost.

6

Placing the product in a postage paid envelope, and placing same in your mailbox causes one “some inconveniece”? I’ve been writing ‘return to sender’ on unopened, unsolicited mailings for years, and never thought of it as problem.

7

By your logic if I ever buy anything, that vendor can then send me other products I did not ask for and expect payment because we have a business relationship? I bought a slurpee at a 7-11 in Manilla 3 years ago, if they start sending me Slim Jims and I don’t return them, I’m the one at fault and I have a broken moral compass?

8

You could always send it back with “FOAD, Unsolicited Goods-Mailing Scum!” written all over it in indelible marker.

Not that I’d do that.

I’d just keep it and tell them to jam their subscription up their ass, same as the OP.

9

“Selling me a thing” means a vendors offers something for sale, I propose a means of currency, we agree, and an exchange of goods for remuneration occurs. Do you see that happening here?

10

I happen to buy those disks. The publisher has sent me ‘reminders’ of payment for the disk delivered just 3 days before.

11

I agree with most of this. (I wouldn’t say your are being a “shit”)

If you don’t want to pay for it, return it. It seems like you are trying to justifying being able to keep it for free. No you didn’t ask for it but if you want it, pay for it. If not, return it. It seems to me that it is the right thing to do.

12

Do you also include a bill for the ink you used, and the time you spent doing all that?

13

You can keep what is sent unsolicited to you, or toss it like I normally do. Doing business with somebody does not allow them to send items and then demand payment for non contracted items. One thing to note, is most of these unsolicited items expect you to pay shipping back. Once you do ship the item back, they put you down as accepting the terms because you shipped it back which the contract stated was accepting the terms.

A worse practice is printing on your bills that you are enrolled in additional things, unless you indicate you don’t want the new services. It is plain not allowed in Wisconsin. I would hope this is illegal in all states.

14

I don’t see how there are any real ethical obligations towards a company whose business model is founded upon making it more hassle for the consumer not to buy than to buy. If they want their DVD back, they can come and get it, frankly. I place this strategy in the broad category of unethical pressure tactics, and support any action that makes them less economical for companies to pursue.

As detailed in the OP’s second cite, this is a fairly classic case of companies abusing consumer ignorance. Ethics can go hang; they’re trying to pressure people into buying things they don’t want, and didn’t ask for. If sending stuff to unsuspecting people then badgering them to pay for it becomes uneconomic due to the actions of well-informed people like the OP, so much the better. A “business relationship” is not carte blanche to establish an opt-out DVD spamming service.

ETA: From the OP’s second cite (the USPS):

The company is breaking the law. Why should the OP lift a finger to make their pressure tactics cheaper?

15

There’s also wear and tear on shoe treads, plus personal mileage depreciation, use of sunscreen on the way to the box…this adds up.

I agree with the OP though.

16

If a company mails me a standard solicitation - without any sort of preview merchandise - I’m free to simply throw it out. Why is this any different?

I might have thrown out the DVD because I didn’t feel like being bothered. Had I done that, would people still be urging me to pay for it? The fact that my son watched this one (once, so far; I think he may have lost it since then) to me doesn’t really change the fact that it was an unwanted item. I don’t feel like remembering to dig it up and stick it in an envelope and mailing it off.

I have purchased several major appliances from Sears. As such, I have a business relationship with them. Since the appliances include a freezer and a dishwasher, they might rightly surmise I have an interest in cooking. If they decide to have a small-household-item-of-the-month club, they’d probably send me a solicitation for it and I might be interested. I would then have the choice to either send off to join it, or toss the solicitation.

If they were to include, say, a spatula in the solicitation, they do so with the full knowledge that I may return, throw out or keep and use that spatula. This does not give them any legal right to insist I pay for this thing I didn’t ask for. They know that, I know that, they know I know that…

It benefits nobody if I throw out that spatula (or DVD). It benefits only the postal service if I return the spatula (or DVD) as the vendor realistically isn’t going to send it out to someone else. I could make the case that it actually harms the vendor because they have to take the time to process the incoming mail, and decide to do with the returned item.

It benefits the vendor if I pay for the spatula (or DVD). It really benefits them, in fact, because if I pay, they take that as a request to purchase the service, and they get to send me more in the future. With those future shipments, I am obligated to pay for (or return) those future shipments because I’ve just contracted to do so. And of course I would feel morally obligated to do so. Since the products are things I would not have otherwise purchased, we could say this harms me.

To a minor extent, it benefits my kitchen (or kid) if I simply keep the spatula (or DVD) as explicitly allowed by law and perhaps use the item on occasion.

So - 4 options (throw out, return, keep-use-pay-subscribe, keep-don’t-pay), the choice is fairly simple: the one that benefits me versus the one that benefits the company.

17

From the US Postal Service Web Site

18

Many years ago I received a book in a manner similar to the OP. About three weeks later I received a reminder that if I didn’t want the item I should return it.

I returned their reminder in their envelope with a note that said the item was on my front porch and they could pick it up at their convenience.

Never heard back.

19

Marketing firms have a name for people like Foxy40 and danceswithcats.

They call them “chumps”.

Being “a shit” isn’t refusing to return unrequested crap. Being “a shit” is returning it and encouraging the unscrupulous butthole merchants to continue shady sales tactics.

What I do is to load the empty return mailer with junk and send it back. I want to make the solicitor to spend money on the postage and handling. Not to be a shit, but to discourage them from that kind of marketing.

20

By this logic, if one gives you a fugly lamp, you are required to display said fugly lamp in your living room forever and ever.

Mama Zappa did not order the DVD. It arrived, in essence, as junk mail. Instead of throwing it away, she decided to keep it. She could have used it as a a coaster…but she was under no obligation to pay for something she did not order.

I received some bodice-ripping romance novels in the mail along with a fairly hefty wine glass. I donated the books and kept the wine glass.