Make A Wish: Dispute Resolution for Unclaiming/Claiming Used Hardware

[CharlesIsWorkin]

C'mon Meraki; we need this! People are trying to be "green" and "cheap" these days and would like to buy some used hardware sometimes to get things rolling. However, here we are, stuck with some useless unmanageable hardware.....

Why? Because Meraki won't unclaim a hardware serial number from another account.

At least they could do some arbitration between the former owner and the current owner of the hardware, couldn't they? Something akin to EBay's Dispute Resolution system, but for getting former owner's of hardware to unclaim it.

I can dream, can't I? 🙂

[mmmmmmark]

Kinda fits in with this topic too: https://community.meraki.com/t5/Off-the-Stack/Do-not-buy-Used-Meraki-Equipment-from-eBay-Or-Any-Unau...

It's a nice wish for sure, just not likely to happen.

[CharlesIsWorkin]

Yeah thanks for that link. I went ahead and read through it. It's like there's some areas in which Meraki's customer support really shines, but not in this area.

[PhilipDAth]

All you need to do is have the former owner unclaim it, and then you claim it, and the process is done.  It don't think it could be simpler than this.

If the former wont wont voluntarily unclaim it then I don't think Meraki should touch it.  The person currently in possession can start a civil case.

If the person currently in possession of some kit can't say who originally owned it then I don't think Meraki should touch it.  That person should be able to go back to who they bought it from and have them unclaim it.  Otherwise I'm thinking stolen property.  Perhaps Meraki should refer these cases to the Police, but hard to do when you are operating in countries all over the world.

[MerakiDave]

Agreed and thanks @mmmmmmark for referencing that other thread, and I would have the same comments here.  I understand the ask, but this is not something Meraki can allow without introducing the potential for abuse and legal headaches for both Meraki and for customers.  As @PhilipDAth pointed out, it's a simple matter of the original owner unclaiming the hardware so it can be claimed by the new owner. 

The caveat is that when the equipment was originally purchased, the original agreement (however legally binding it may or may not be, hey I'm an engineer not an attorney 🙂 ) is between Cisco/Meraki and the original owner.  That's the part that cannot be transferred, because an eBay or other 3rd party seller is not an authorized seller/reseller. 

There's a definite risk (regardless of vendor) when buying used equipment on the grey market, because it's completely outside the terms of the original agreement, and Meraki cannot get involved in equipment ownership disputes.  If someone did purchase equipment 3rd party, and had a dispute, it would be on the new owner to follow whatever claim/dispute process is in place with that 3rd party, which does not involve Meraki.

[CharlesIsWorkin]

Yeah I hear you guys, and I agree. I am not asking Meraki to get involved any further than facilitating communication between the person/organization in possession of the item and the person/organization who has that particular serial number listed in their Inventory.

I am not asking for any type of warranty transfer.

It would be a simple query on Meraki's part to find out which Dashboard the device is registered to and then facilitate some communication between the interested parties. And this would be nice way to bridge the gap in communication breakdowns through other channels such as Ebay and the like, where the seller may not be the Dashboard owner. As Phil said, it is a simple matter of the previous owner unclaiming the hardware, and I am asking for a little support in achieving that.

I'm asking for a hand, not a hand out. 🙂

[MerakiDave]

Understood @CharlesIsWorkin and that's a completely reasonable request.  I suppose it would have to be handled on a case by case basis since every circumstance won't be exactly the same... I suppose if Meraki Support was unable to assist, it's not because they don't want to help, but are likely restricted by policy to get involved as an intermediary between the two parties, likely something along those lines.  Still, work with Support in a dispute situation like that and given the circumstances, perhaps there would be some creative way for the 2 parties to be put in touch anonymously, or at least the 1st party could somehow be advised to unclaim equipment that's of no use to them anyway.  Don't know for sure, just thinking out loud.  

[CharlesIsWorkin]

Thanks for the productive discussion guys. I have another question along the same lines: what happens to defunct and derelict Dashboard inventories of bankrupted/liquidated companies where there is no one to contact?

[PhilipDAth]

@CharlesIsWorkin that would be a question for the liquidator - as they are responsible for liquidating companies.

[CharlesIsWorkin]

@PhilipDAthThat has been my posture as of late. I have been using gray market hardware myself and always make it a point to bug the seller to check that devices are unclaimed prior to me buying. I do that all the time now, or I won't touch the auction/listing with a ten-foot pole.

An unclaimed device really does imply device ownership is properly transferred, and so for that I see the merit in the current process.

However, then there are sad ebay auctions like this one: 11x Meraki MR52 headed for the landfill/recycler

If I knew these were unclaimed, I would buy this up and use like half of them and keep the others for spares just in case these died. But hey, my situation is different than a lot of others. I'm not an MSP, I'm tied to a business that I do the support for so I do look for upgrades and such on a semi-regular basis.

[PhilipDAth]

@CharlesIsWorkin consider this case.  Meraki contact the original owner.  They tell Meraki it was stolen, and they want to know who inquired so they can report it to the Police.

The person with the currently in posession of the device may not know it was stolen, and now they are about to be charged with receiving stolen property.

[mmmmmmark]

I think that typically, part of being charged with receiving stolen property is that the purchaser must know that the property is stolen. I'd like to think that most people would not purchase stolen property knowingly but obviously the fact that there are laws against it mean that people do it.

But I also think it's better that law enforcement become involved in the situation so that hopefully the seller would be contacted by law enforcement and be able to either tell them who they got it from or, if they stole it, be charged. Again, it's not likely to work out that well in practice.

So Meraki would have a moral obligation to notify law enforcement if they were contacted by the purchaser of stolen property, they shouldn't notify the owner other than to ask for a file number that whatever branch of law enforcement has provided the owner with regarding the theft.

As for the buyer of stolen property, they'd be out the device but hopefully they would have used a method of payment that they could file a dispute with, like a credit card or paypal, etc.

[PhilipDAth]

The law might be different in your country @mmmmmmark - but in my country the charge is "being in possession of stolen property". It doesn't matter if you know it is stolen or not.  Saying that you bought the property of a random unknown person on an online auction is not a defence.

[mmmmmmark]

@PhilipDAth: looks like NZ also requires that the possessor has some knowledge of criminal activity in order to be charged, at least that's what a quick search turned up:

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM330408.html

That being said, i'm no lawyer nor do I want to be one!