I ordered 4 pairs of shoes online. I received 3, 1 if which was damaged.

A few days later I called to complaint about the missing shoe and the damaged shoe. They tell me nothing they can do about the damaged shoe, but will pay me back for the undelivered shoe and that they knew already as the stock had actually run out and the return was already in process.

The transaction went through today, I received payment for all 4 shoes…

So basically I got 2 shoes plus a damaged shoe for free

  • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
    0·
    5 days ago

    I think about what I would want, if our roles were reversed.

    If I was being paid minimum wage to toss shoes in a box and ship them to you, and I made this mistake in your favor, I would prefer that you enjoy it and don’t inform my employer of my error.

  • Perspectivist@feddit.uk
    0·
    6 days ago

    From a purely moral standpoint it seems rather obvious that the right thing to do is to contact them and let them know about the mistake. I’m quite literally unable to come up with an opposing argument.

    • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
      0·
      5 days ago

      An easy opposing argument would be if they’ve done wage theft. Which near every large company has. Or if they’ve used unethical business practices (ditto)

      • Perspectivist@feddit.uk
        0·
        5 days ago

        You’re shifting the question from “what’s the right thing to do?” to “does this company deserve honesty?” - which isn’t a counterargument, it’s a dodge. The idea that the company probably committed wage theft is pure speculation, and even if true, it wouldn’t justify dishonesty in return. That’s moral relativism, not ethics. The question here is simple: do you knowingly keep money that isn’t yours? Everything else is just rationalizing what one already wants to do.

        • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
          0·
          5 days ago

          I’m responding to you asking for a purely moral stance, with a possible counter argument. I’m not suggesting to take without checking, I’m suggesting check and it’s very likely they have.

          , it wouldn’t justify dishonesty in return

          It would justify not going out of your way to return money to them.

          That’s moral relativism, not ethics

          There’s no such thing as morals or ethics that are not relative. Stating that has no meaning. When discussing morals, you must be willing to debate the morals foundations themselves. Are you?

          • Perspectivist@feddit.uk
            0·
            5 days ago

            It would justify not going out of your way to return money to them.

            I disagree. A moral universalist view would hold that taking what isn’t yours is wrong, full stop. You can argue there are degrees to it - that stealing from a cancer patient causes more harm than stealing from a megacorporation - but something being less bad than the alternative still doesn’t make it good or right. From a purely moral standpoint, the right thing to do is to let them know they overpaid. Treat others as you’d want to be treated yourself.

            • ILoveUnions@lemmy.world
              0·
              4 days ago

              … Do you know what moral relativism vs moral universalism are?

              Those morals are your opinion. They are not fact. Arguing them as fact is already questionable.

              There is multiple positions on morals. there is no such thing as a moral which is universally a standard of morals.

  • Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.netEnglish
    0·
    6 days ago

    If it’s a mom and pop store, then the right thing to do is notify them.

    If it’s a corporation, fuck their soulless bullshit.

    • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      0·
      5 days ago

      A mom and pop store are less likely to send a damaged piece. They actually care about their customers.

  • Paragone@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    6 days ago

    Depends on YOUR relationship with your Eternity/karma/sow-reap-Law:

    How would you want others to treat you, were your places reversed?

    That’s what you need to do, to be upright in your own soul.

    _ /\ _

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 days ago

    Treat capitalists as you find them. Forget morality. What is advantageous and legal is automatically good. What is advantageous and illegal is a cost/benefit calculation.

  • Libb@piefed.socialEnglish
    0·
    6 days ago

    Contact them to at least let them know about the error regarding the refund. If they are not morons, they should let you keep the money. And if they ask you to send the money back, at the very least you will know you have done the right thing.

  • Hegar@fedia.io
    0·
    6 days ago

    If the seller has enough capital for a customer service phone line, you have no ethical duty to let them know about two pairs of shoes.

    The manufacturing cost of two pairs is negligible - there’s no way it can meaningfully affect them at all. Whereas an extra 4 pairs worth of retail price could meaningfully affect you. Even if you only spend it on yourself, you create more happiness in the world by not saying anything.

    If you feel guilty or really don’t need the money, you can always treat a loved one, spend it on fair trade or independently made shoes or clothes, or find an anti-sweat-shop group to donate to.

  • zxqwas@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 days ago

    If they notice the poor guy processing your order will probably be yelled at, maybe fired.

  • my_hat_stinks@programming.dev
    0·
    6 days ago

    On your end there’s not much to consider here. You can let them know they refunded the entire order, chances are they’ll just write it off. If they ask you to send it back it should be entirely at their expense, do not pay to send it back.

    On their end there’s more going on. It sounds like they charged you for an item they knowingly did not ship then claimed the refund was already in progress when you complained. They also gave you a damaged item and claimed to be unable to refund that, which in most developed countries would be a breach of consumer regulations. This sounds an awful lot like that company is attempting to scam people.

  • ace_garp@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 days ago

    They may be trying to avoid the situation where you leave a negative review, which would cost them more than the cost of the shoes.

  • SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
    0·
    6 days ago

    I could contact them and pay them, for 2 or 3 shoes.

    I could forget about it.

    I could donate the cost of 2 shoes somewhere I want. Theres a charity here that helps women victim of domestic abuse, particularly acid attacks. Or somewhere else.