A recent discussion on the Mumsnet message board raised ethical questions surrounding a woman’s experience with an order from Tesco. The contributor had canceled her order, received a refund, but then the order was inadvertently delivered to her. This led her to question whether she should inform Tesco about the mistake, having never stolen before and typically adhering to rules.
Responses to her post revealed a divide in opinions. Some users argued that she should keep the items, suggesting that a large corporation like Tesco would not suffer significantly from the loss. They pointed to the indifference that many feel towards large companies, arguing that Tesco would not be affected by a £300 error, especially in light of current economic conditions. Others, however, expressed a more rigid moral stance and equated the situation to shoplifting if she chose not to inform Tesco, challenging her to consider her conscience.
The legal context is provided by the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, which state that goods delivered by mistake still belong to the retailer, and consumers are expected to attempt to return such items. Despite the theoretical understanding of the law, many participants in the discussion implied that reporting the error would be unlikely to result in any repercussions for the contributor.
A related personal anecdote involved another user who received a duplicate rug order, felt guilty about keeping it, and opted to return the item. This choice was met with surprise by customer service and led her to wonder about the implications of her ethical decision versus potential personal gain.
The conversation highlights a broader question of whether such unexpected benefits are tests of character or mere accidents, and how people’s perspectives impact their actions in similar situations.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/sep/28/what-would-you-do-if-a-supermarket-accidentally-gave-you-300-of-groceries-you-hadnt-paid-for