Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!brl-adm!brl-smoke!wmartin
From: wmartin@brl-smoke.ARPA (Will Martin )
Newsgroups: net.consumers,net.legal
Subject: Re: Mail order scam -- BEWARE
Message-ID: <1728@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 12-Mar-86 10:08:14 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.1728
Posted: Wed Mar 12 10:08:14 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Mar-86 01:56:52 EST
References: <545@nsc-pdc.UUCP> <947@felix.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: USAMC ALMSA, St. Louis, MO
Lines: 14
Xref: watmath net.consumers:4519 net.legal:3107

The original poster stated that he/she had resealed the package and *took it
to the post office* to send back. Now, while I agree with the other
respondents who stated that he/she had no real duty or requirement to send
the junk books back, I can empathize with him/her in wanting to be rid of
the entire matter and not think about it any more. So, what he/she
should have done is to keep the free steak knife, re-seal the package
in such a manner that his/her name & address are no longer visible,
but can be seen when it is opened, mark it "Return to sender" with a big
arrow pointing to the return address, and *drop it in a mailbox*.

In this case, the USPS would deliver it back to the sender, since they
could not have hassled or snowed the individual about the postage.

Will