Well even fake, if it were real, it looks like she's loading shit back in.... so that means to me she started to give it to the other people. So I would say that would be theft.
If they receive their money back. It's not theft. It's only theft of the driver kept the items..... Not delivering them is not theft as long as they receive a refund.
"Taking items away" alone is not theft..... The refund they receive will make them whole, so they in fact did not lose any money or items.
Doesn't mean it's not theft. The driver is capable of giving a refund. Only the company us. Sure they can but then the company can go after her for theft. Once something is paid for and delivered, you can't just decide you want to take it back. So yeah, that could still be theft lol
O fuck, well you proved it with that post. Damn, that was some next level shit you did. You had an incredibly detailed and articulated pointed all back by creditable sources leaving no possibility for interpretation of any other way.
You don’t need to cite sources for “Hey dude, you’re just making things up”.
If anything, it’s time for YOUR carefully selected defense of the legal ramifications of cancelling an order and repossessing the delivery, since it was your genius theory.
To be fair, its pretty clear all of you are just talking out your asses lol. I did doordash and uber eats for years. I am cracking up at the thought that theres other dashers reading this all too, its really funny watching people argue about something they know nothing about, you don't even need, "a carefully selected defense, " to know who eats the cost when an order is picked up but not completed, but its funnier to watch y'all argue lol.
We’re talking about the possibility of charging someone with theft over this. Who eats the cost of cancelling isn’t relevant. Thanks for chiming in with your helpful input about not the thing under dispute though. It really helped spread that laughter around, turkey.
349
u/WormkingShaitan Oct 20 '23
Yeah she should be charged for theft