I ordered a shirt online, but the shop accidentally sent me two - do I have to send one of them back? DEAN DUNHAM replies
I ordered a shirt online, but the shop accidentally sent two. Do I have to tell them?
R. E., via email.
Dean Dunham replies: When you receive goods that you did not order, they are classed as either 'unsolicited goods' or 'goods sent by mistake'.
The distinction is very important as this will dictate the legal position.
Items that firms send to you, but you didn't order, are classified as unsolicited goods. In these circumstances, the law, The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, says you have a right to keep them.
You, therefore, have no legal obligation to send unsolicited goods back to the company or to pay for them.
If you receive a demand for payment for unsolicited goods or services, you can ignore it – sending one is a criminal offence.
But it's a different story altogether if items are sent to you by mistake, which is the case here with the extra shirt.
In these circumstances the law recognises a mistake has been made and the goods remain the sole property of the trader.
This means you will have no legal right to keep the extra shirt you have received and have to either pay for it or send it back.
However, the trader's mistake should not leave you out of pocket, so the onus is on it to arrange and pay for the goods to be returned.
So, when you receive goods in error, my advice is to notify the trader as soon as possible in writing and ask it to arrange for them to be collected from you. You should provide a reasonable deadline for the collection to take place, say seven to
14 days, and tell it that after this date you will dispose of the goods or charge it storage. At this stage, depending on the value of the goods, some traders will tell you to keep the goods.
Finally, a word of warning. If you decide to ignore my advice and simply keep the goods regardless of the trader's wishes, it will be able to use a principle called 'unjust enrichment', which occurs when one party unfairly benefits at another's expense, and the law requires restitution to correct the imbalance.
It typically arises in situations where a person receives money, services or goods mistakenly or without a valid legal basis, and in these situations the courts nearly always side with the trader.
Paid builder a deposit - but he wont start work
I've paid a deposit to a builder – now he can't start for three months. Am I entitled to my deposit back?
A. T., via email.
Dean Dunham replies: It depends on what you agreed and the specific terms of the deposit. If you have a written contract with the builder, you should be able to find the answer within that.
Look to see what the contract says about the completion date and if it provides the builder with any excuses to delay.
If you have no written contract, which is usually the case, you will have to think about what was said between you and the builder in relation to the start and completion date, and what promises were made to you. Any such promises will, therefore, form an oral contract.
In the absence of a written or oral contract, the default position will be what is reasonable.
This means if you went to court over the matter, the judge would consider if it was reasonable for you to wait three months for the work to commence and if it would have changed your decision to instruct the builder had you known from the start that he could not start work for that long.
However, courts will be your last resort, especially because this route will likely take nine to 12 months – sometimes longer – which defeats the object when you are disputing a three-month delay.
You should, therefore, try to negotiate with the builder to see if an amicable solution can be reached.
As part of this, you could ask the builder to commit to new start and completion dates in writing.
Also ask him to agree a written term in the contract so that if he misses the start date, you can have a full refund and terminate the contract – and if he misses the completion date, there will be a financial penalty.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
8 minutes ago
- The Independent
Winter fuel payments: Am I eligible and how much can I get?
In the latest U-turn after months of backlash, the government has announced a massive expansion of who will receive winter fuel payments. After weeks of speculation over what the changes would look like, it has now been confirmed that 9 million pensions will be eligible for the payment - a huge uplift from the 1.5 million pensioners who received the payment in winter 2024-25. Here, The Independent looks at how the new system will work and who will be affected by the uplift. How many people did the winter fuel payment cut affect? The winter fuel payment is a state benefit previously given to all pensioners to help with energy costs during the coldest months of the year. The decision to means-test the previously universal payment was one of the first announcements by Rachel Reeves when she became chancellor after Labour's landslide election victory last year, and it has been widely blamed for the party's collapse in support. The government has insisted the policy was necessary to help stabilise the public finances, and meant that the payment would only go to those on low incomes who received specified benefits such as pension credit. This meant the number of pensioners receiving the payment was reduced from 11.4 million to 1.5 million. Several charities, MPs and unions criticised the decision, with some blaming it for the party's disappointing local election results. In November, it was revealed that the government's own figures indicated it would force 100,000 pensioners into poverty in 2026. How was the payment linked to pension credit? Only those who claim pension credit were able to receive the winter fuel payment in winter 2024. Those who are above state pension age and have an income of less than £218.15 a week, or less than £332.95 as a joint weekly income with your partner, are eligible for pension credit. However, despite the government's campaigns and an increase in claims after the July 2024 announcement, it is estimated that half a million eligible people fail to claim the benefit. How will the new system work? The government has increased the threshold at which people over the state pension age become eligible for the payment, meaning that anyone with an income of or below £35,000 will receive it this winter. The government estimates that the new threshold will ensure that more than three quarters of pensioners in England and Wales - around 9m people - will receive the benefit. It is estimated that around 2 million pensioners in England and Wales have taxable incomes above £35,000 and will therefore be exempt. The payment of £200 per household, or £300 per household where there is someone over 80, will be made automatically this winter, meaning no pensioner will need to take any action in order to receive the payment. Those with incomes above the threshold will see the payment automatically recovered via HMRC, or they have the option to opt out. However, details of how this will work are yet to be confirmed. Ministers estimate the change will cost the taxpayer £1.25bn in England and Wales, saving around £450m compared to when the winter fuel payment was universally available. The Treasury has not yet set out how it will pay for the uplift, but has insisted the costs will be accounted for at the autumn budget and incorporated into the next OBR forecast. They have also promised it will not lead to permanent additional borrowing.
The Independent
8 minutes ago
- The Independent
Sales rise for Zara owner Inditex but pace of growth slows ahead of summer
The owner of Zara has reported rising sales in recent weeks but a slowdown in the pace of growth as the fashion giant staves off the impact of economic uncertainty on global consumer confidence. Inditex, which is Europe's largest fashion retailer, said store and online sales between May 1 and June 9 rose 6% compared with the same period last year. Spring and summer collections were being received well by shoppers, it said. Sales between February and April" data-source="Inditex"> It nonetheless reflected slower sales growth than the same time last year – when sales leapt 12% higher ahead of the peak summer months. Sales over its latest quarter, between February and April, rose to 8.3 billion euros (£7 billion). This was 4.2% higher than the same period a year ago, at constant currency rates, but slightly fell short of analysts' expectations for the quarter. Spain-based Inditex, which also owns the Pull & Bear, Massimo Dutti, and Stradivarius brands, said the 'optimisation' of its stores was ongoing in a bid to improve productivity. At the end of the latest quarter, it operated 5,562 shops around the world – more than 100 fewer than the 5,698 it had last year. Concerns that consumer confidence in global markets, particularly the US, has been impacted by economic and trade uncertainty have risen in recent months. US President Donald Trump's tariff plans led some economists to cut the outlook for global growth. Meanwhile, power outages in Spain and Portugal – key markets for Inditex – caused major disruption, bringing much of the countries' systems to a standstill for a short period.
Daily Mail
12 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Labour splashes the cash… but who's going to pick up the bill? Brits warned of looming tax hikes as Rachel Reeves lays out 'unrealistic' spending plans TODAY
Rachel Reeves will splash the cash today as fears mount that Brits will need to pick up the bill later. The Cabinet is set to sign off the spending review before the Chancellor announces the details in the Commons at lunchtime. She will allocate huge sums to departments for the coming years, after loosening the government's borrowing rules at the last Budget. But although Ms Reeves will boast that her new approach means Labour can spend a staggering £300billion more over the next five years than the Tories planned, critics have warned she does not know where the money is coming from. The generous fiscal envelope set last Autumn has been put under massive pressure by the economy slowing down and Donald Trump 's trade war. There are demands to pump far more cash into defence, while Ms Reeves has already made an humiliating U-turn on winter fuel allowance cuts and is facing a Labour revolts on other benefits curbs. That has led analysts and political rivals to argue that more tax increases are 'inevitable' - although the funding gap will not crystalise until the next fiscal package. The tax rises in the Budget last year were the biggest on record for a single fiscal event. Public sector productivity has been making almost no progress despite investment The backdrop to the decisions has been looking increasingly grim, with Labour trailing Reform in the polls. Figures yesterday showed unemployment rising, and a survey found just 12 per cent of Brits believe Ms Reeves is doing a good job. Ministers have described the spending plans – equal to an extra £8,100 for every taxpayer in Britain – as 'the end of austerity'. In her announcement later, Ms Reeves will admit voters do not feel like they have more money in their pockets as Labour prepares to mark one year in office. But she will insisting she is 'renewing Britain'. 'This Government's task – my task – and the purpose of this spending review is to change that, to ensure that renewal is felt in people's everyday lives, their jobs, their communities,' she will say. Last week, Ms Reeves refused to rule out any further tax increases. Spending will be skewed heavily towards the NHS in an attempt to cut waiting lists further. Defence is set to be another big winner after Sir Keir Starmer committed to spending 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027. Allies of Angela Rayner were last night claiming victory in her bid to secure more cash towards meeting Labour's target of building 1.5 million new homes by the next election. The Deputy PM, who is responsible for housing policy, had a series of bust-ups with Treasury ministers and No 10 over the issue. The Treasury had proposed a modest increase in the social housing budget from £2.3 billion a year to £2.5 billion. But government sources last night said Ms Rayner had secured a £39 billion settlement over ten years. The Treasury said it was the biggest boost to social housing in a generation. But the growing cost of servicing the UK's debt mountain means other areas of spending, including the police, face a budget squeeze in future years. The Tories branded Ms Reeves the 'Spend Today, Tax Tomorrow Chancellor'. Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said: 'Labour is spending money it doesn't have, with no credible plan to pay for it. 'That means more borrowing, more debt, and, inevitably, more tax rises in the Autumn Budget. Don't be fooled. We can't afford Labour.' In recent days, the Chancellor and Prime Minister have repeatedly claimed that Labour has 'fixed the foundations' of the economy, despite rising inflation and cuts to official growth forecasts. Yesterday's stark employment figures underline the real-world impact of Labour's tax and spend approach. They revealed UK payroll numbers have shrunk by 276,000 over the past seven months. In May alone, payrolls fell by 109,000 – the worst month since the pandemic. Meanwhile the unemployment rate has climbed to 4.6 per cent, the highest in nearly four years. Experts pinned the blame on Ms Reeves's £25 billion raid on employer National Insurance, which was announced in the October Budget and took effect in April. Payroll numbers fell every month since the Budget.
