Zavvi threatens shoppers after accidental PS Vita deliveries

[Lord Method Man]

A good work friends of my wife's was terminated due to a large difference in her till which was never found.

 

So from that you extrapolated that anyone receiving excess money from a bank error is entitled to keep it?

 

:huh:

[Shadrack]

Not sure if this applies, but I found this on when ATMs output more money than they should due to some malfunction:

http://www.lovemoney.com/news/scams-and-rip-offs/consumer-rights/11335/what-to-do-when-atms-give-you-the-wrong-money

 

 

As Detective Superintendent Col Dyson of the New South Wales fraud squad warned,

?People should realise that, even though an ATM has dispensed cash, they are not entitled to that money and are committing a criminal offence if they keep it.?

 

That was in the UK.

 

Interesting debate.  Everyone seems to be expressing their "gut feelings" here or their own personal experiences.  That's all fine and dandy, but doesn't really say anything definitely.  Someone would have to dig up a court case that was similar in the UK and see what the outcome was to really tell. 

 

Regardless what is right/wrong or legal/illegal, Zavvi is definitely losing face here, no doubt.

[Shadrack]

So from that you extrapolated that anyone receiving excess money from a bank error is entitled to keep it?

 

:huh:

 

Its the old: My personal experience applies 100% to everything tactic ;).

[MightyJordan]

That was in the UK.

Actually, that specific part you quoted was from Australia. The rest of the article does apply to the UK though; something similar did happen here before where an ATM was giving out double the money requested, but the outcome was the same: the "extra" money withdrawn simply came out of their accounts later on when they realised the error.

[Shadrack]

If the bank doesn't know where the money went, how could they even attempt to get it back :huh:?  There's a large difference between the bank not getting the money back because they don't know where it went and you get the keep the money simply because the bank made a clerical error.

 

I suspect if you walk out the door "accidentally" with $10,000 from a Bank, and they know who it was based on security video in the US you'll have someone knocking on the door asking for it back.  I suspect if you don't give it back they will probably arrest you.  That's just based on what I've always heard.  Finders =/= keeper.  I've never had such an opportunity...

[Shadrack]

Actually, that specific part you quoted was from Australia. The rest of the article does apply to the UK though; something similar did happen here before where an ATM was giving out double the money requested, but the outcome was the same: the "extra" money withdrawn simply came out of their accounts later on when they realised the error.

 

Oh I see.  Good catch.

[The_Observer]

I don't think that's true. You're not entitled to something because it got sent to you. Its not your property and if you don't return it, you can be hit with legal action.

 

While i feel this is correct, i would advise them to supply post and packaging, to return the device. Also now that these devices are opened, can they be resold as new device.

[MightyJordan]

Also now that these devices are opened, can they be resold as new device.

No, they can be resold, but not as new; they'll likely be sold as used over on their eBay store

[Joe User]

You are right what am I thinking. I have no personal experience in the matter or know anyone who has had this done to or have been fired for this. Google has the final say.

A good work friends of my wife's was terminated due to a large difference in her till which was never found. No one ever gets away with it. It was her head teller but no personal or close experience with the issue. Google knows all carry on.

 

I suggest you actually take about 5 seconds to read what I wrote. Feel free to go on some rant about 'Google knowing all' if it makes you feel better. You could make it your signature catch phrase. 

[Joe User]

If the bank doesn't know where the money went, how could they even attempt to get it back :huh:?  There's a large difference between the bank not getting the money back because they don't know where it went and you get the keep the money simply because the bank made a clerical error.

 

Every bank in the US has a camera aimed at the teller. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the UK as well. It's just a matter of reviewing the footage and matching the times to the transactions by that teller.

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

Every bank in the US has a camera aimed at the teller. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the UK as well. It's just a matter of reviewing the footage and matching the times to the transactions by that teller.

 

Where are you getting that every bank has a camera aimed at every teller specifically? I know that isn't true. Hell, the reality is that most security cameras are really poor quality. This isn't CSI with infa-zoom and no pixelation. Moreover, even if a bank did have per teller cameras that certainly doesn't mean you can identify exactly the transaction that occurred in each instance. Do they make a point to flash each piece of money and paper work in front of their theoretical personal camera?

 

Cameras are for keeping the place secure, not for policing your staff's ability to count.

[Joe User]

Where are you getting that every bank has a camera aimed at every teller specifically? I know that isn't true. Hell, the reality is that most security cameras are really poor quality. This isn't CSI with infa-zoom and no pixelation. Moreover, even if a bank did have per teller cameras that certainly doesn't mean you can identify exactly the transaction that occurred in each instance. Do they make a point to flash each piece of money and paper work in front of their theoretical personal camera?

 

Cameras are for keeping the place secure, not for policing your staff's ability to count.

 

Have you been in a bank in the past 10 years? There are cameras everywhere, usually there is one mounted behind each teller aimed at the transaction window.  Even if you can't identify each transaction with 100% clarity, it's usually enough to use to match to the transaction log. Also, we're not talking about a missing dollar, we're talking about big mistakes, if the teller is counting out 10 extra bills it's going to be noticed. 

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

Have you been in a bank in the past 10 years? There are cameras everywhere, usually there is one mounted behind each teller aimed at the transaction window.  Even if you can't identify each transaction with 100% clarity, it's usually enough to use to match to the transaction log. Also, we're not talking about a missing dollar, we're talking about big mistakes, if the teller is counting out 10 extra bills it's going to be noticed. 

 

So your proof is: "did you go to a bank in the past 10 years?" sounds about right. I have a question for you: how many banks do you stake out regularly to notice that every bank has cameras aimed at each teller in such a way as to monitor their transactions bill by bill? Citation please; otherwise, it is just an availability heuristic.

 

And no, we weren't talking about a specific type of mistake. The entire premise of this was simply that I asked a question to sc302 about how the bank would have retrieved mistakenly-given-away money back if a bank had no idea where it went. Based off of that you then stated that every bank has teller cameras (with the presumed argument that are evidently good enough to be a trace for all clerical errors?)

 

P.S. I cash checks multiple times per month. The local branch I typically go to is inside of a grocery store and teller area isn't designed in such a way that it would be possible to put unnoticeable cameras in. It is all an entirely open area inside. They have cameras on the ceiling to monitor things (and entrance to the store) and that is basically it. The setup looks similar to this: http://media.vcstar.com/media/img/photos/2013/05/21/cc87e649f2b944d9a70d64e5dce8eb74-1bfd46bc1b914d66b480899c0b427624-0_t607.jpg

[Joe User]

So your proof is: "did you go to a bank in the past 10 years?" sounds about right. I have a question for you: how many banks do you stake out regularly to notice that every bank has cameras aimed at each teller in such a way as to monitor their transactions bill by bill? Citation please; otherwise, it is just an availability heuristic.

 

And no, we weren't talking about a specific type of mistake. The entire premise of this was simply that I asked a question to sc302 about how the bank would have retrieved mistakenly-given-away money back if a bank had no idea where it went. Based off of that you then stated that every bank has teller cameras (with the presumed argument that are evidently good enough to be a trace for all clerical errors?)

 

P.S. I cash checks multiple times per month. The local branch I typically go to is inside of a grocery store and teller area isn't designed in such a way that it would be possible to put unnoticeable cameras in. It is all an entirely open area inside. They have cameras on the ceiling to monitor things (and entrance to the store) and that is basically it. The setup looks similar to this: http://media.vcstar.com/media/img/photos/2013/05/21/cc87e649f2b944d9a70d64e5dce8eb74-1bfd46bc1b914d66b480899c0b427624-0_t607.jpg

 

You know what, technically, you're correct (The best kind of correct).  Absolutely every single banking institution (especially the one in your local S-Mart) does not have cameras aimed at their tellers, I'm betting some may even use sketch artists to save on those high camera expenses.

 

Next time I go stake out some banks (My favorite hobby since 1993), I'll start keeping a mental note of the lack of amazing camera technology available today.

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

You know what, technically, you're correct (The best kind of correct).  Absolutely every single banking institution (especially the one in your local S-Mart) does not have cameras aimed at their tellers, I'm betting some may even use sketch artists to save on those high camera expenses.

 

Next time I go stake out some banks (My favorite hobby since 1993), I'll start keeping a mental note of the lack of amazing camera technology available today.

 

I'm just going to quote someone who already posted in this thread since this appears to be a theme here:

 

Its the old: My personal experience applies 100% to everything tactic ;).

 

:yes:

[Dane]

So your proof is: "did you go to a bank in the past 10 years?" sounds about right. I have a question for you: how many banks do you stake out regularly to notice that every bank has cameras aimed at each teller in such a way as to monitor their transactions bill by bill? Citation please; otherwise, it is just an availability heuristic.

 

And no, we weren't talking about a specific type of mistake. The entire premise of this was simply that I asked a question to sc302 about how the bank would have retrieved mistakenly-given-away money back if a bank had no idea where it went. Based off of that you then stated that every bank has teller cameras (with the presumed argument that are evidently good enough to be a trace for all clerical errors?)

 

P.S. I cash checks multiple times per month. The local branch I typically go to is inside of a grocery store and teller area isn't designed in such a way that it would be possible to put unnoticeable cameras in. It is all an entirely open area inside. They have cameras on the ceiling to monitor things (and entrance to the store) and that is basically it. The setup looks similar to this: http://media.vcstar.com/media/img/photos/2013/05/21/cc87e649f2b944d9a70d64e5dce8eb74-1bfd46bc1b914d66b480899c0b427624-0_t607.jpg

 

 

In my bank there are five areas for the teller to give cash out. There are five cameras alone, one each directly pointed down at the teller and the customer.  Every branch is set up this way.    Another bank I go to, there are several pointed at the tellers and customers as well but not as much like the one bank.

[thomastmc]

I bought my first computer online from Compaq, and they didn't charge me. The charge went on to my debit card, but was taken off a few days later. It was a problem with their accounting that effected many people. I got letters threatening me with legal action if I didn't "complete the transaction". Nothing ever came of it and I got my computer for free :)

 

In the end, it's more expensive for them to pursue legal action to recover the devices or funds than it is to just write it off.

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

In my bank there are five areas for the teller to give cash out. There are five cameras alone, one each directly pointed down at the teller and the customer.  Every branch is set up this way.    Another bank I go to, there are several pointed at the tellers and customers as well but not as much like the one bank.

 

Of course you are going to have cameras pointed at the tellers and customers in general, that's by definition what you'd do. That doesn't necessarily mean you have 1:1 correspondence of cameras to tellers in every bank or that the cameras are of a fine enough quality and granularity to view the exact details of each transaction. Doing a cursory camera count at your local branch doesn't prove otherwise.

 

EDIT: It is also worth noting that if cameras were positioned to view every transaction in great detail & quality then why do clerical errors exist? It stands to reason that any clerical error would get corrected after a shift because the footage would get reviewed and pinpoint exactly what transactions the discrepancies occurred at.

[Joe User]

I'm just going to quote someone who already posted in this thread since this appears to be a theme here:

 

 

:yes:

 

Except for the fact that you're completely wrong, I have to agree with you 100%.

[snaphat (Myles Landwehr) Member]

Except for the fact that you're completely wrong, I have to agree with you 100%.

 

Again, I welcome you to show evidence to the contrary. At the moment, you are agreeing with Shadrack's statement which was pointing out that availability heuristics are a logical fallacy and not a basis for evidence; which you were doing in saying things like all banks must have X because my bank has X.

 

I DO think this is steering off topic from the main thread topic though, so I don't wish to pursue it unless someone here can find regulations about camera usage in banks or actual regulations saying who is at fault for money loss. Those would be cool.  :)