Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
But not the original faulty set he paid for. He would have obtained a working set in their stead by falsely representing the second set were faulty, which seems like clearly intent.
Amazon also seem guilty of several offences over this. I don't feel that committing more offences to undo their effects is the best approach.
I wouldn't authorise a charge on it, and it would get laughed at in court.
The only mens rea is to receive for oneself that to which one is lawfully entitled anyway, ie, a working set of batteries,