Keysight Scary Letter

[Fraser]

I was wondering whether this had all come to nothing.

I was interested to read the name of the disposal company as Veolia. I know of that company. They are a well known international disposal agent for classified material. As a licensed disposal agent for such equipment they are up to their necks in the brown smelly stuff over this incident. If they can ‘mislay’ or incorrectly process this equipment, their licence issuer could consider it possible that they could do similar with Government classified equipment. Serious stuff as I know from my previous employment. The S*it will have hit the fan over this mistake !

The UK agent..... all licensed and approved ...... but mistakes can cost them dearly in both financial and reputation terms. The USA based agent is likely the same.

https://www.veolia.co.uk/services/confidential-shredding

https://www.veolia.co.uk/services/secure-destruction

I feel for the purchasers of the equipment. Their personal details have been distributed, without conscent, to all parties involved in this mess. Is that even legal in the U.S.A ? I can understand it where military equipment is involved, but commercial civilian kit ? Makes you wonder about this equipments past doesn’t it 

I see two options open to the buyers of the kit...... reply in the affirmative and become embroiled in a discussion about what “fair market value” would be for this old equipment (likely not much) or tell fibs and say it was such a worry to own it that it was sent to the local dump for landfill. Their choice. As soon as the buyers admit that they still have the equipment, they are on the legal hook and the concerned parties may continue to issue veiled threats, if that is their intended path to recovery. Having someone phoning, emailing and potentially visiting your home in person sounds unpleasant for the recipient.

I suspect a solicitor might advise caution in dealing with this recycling and disposal company. They have only their own interests at heart and a desire to bury this incident before it grows legs and causes more embarrassment and complications for them.

Fraser

[Fraser]

The Veolia web site for the USA reads as very capable and professional. They are likely a high value company that wants this problem to go away. Alternatively, they may be a ‘clean-up’ agent being engaged to sort this mess out for other parties who have made a mistake ? A problem solver, if you like. Let us hope that they do not employ a ‘wetwork’ team !  ....... Only kidding 

https://www.veolianorthamerica.com/what-we-do/waste-capabilities

[SparkyFX]

Heard a similar story a decade ago about someone who purchased a Rhode&Schwartz Spectrum Analyser. Turned out the military intelligence paid the customer a visit to check what is done with it.

[jjoonathan]

OP Here: nope, I never heard anything beyond the initial letter and phone call. After six months the promises I made expired and I assumed it had blown over.

[Jwalling]

I feel for the purchasers of the equipment.

Yeah, the World's tiniest Veolia is playing just for me! 

EDIT: I wasted enough time exchanging emails with Mr. Vince Harrington (when he actually bothered to reply) In my last email to him months ago, I stated I was thinking of selling the scope. He never replied to that one either. I will wait for an email from them before I waste any more of my time.

[Fraser]

 

[mikeselectricstuff]

I was wondering whether this had all come to nothing.

I was interested to read the name of the disposal company as Veolia. I know of that company. They are a well known international disposal agent for classified material.

But they also do more mundane stuff like empty the household bins for some UK councils.

[mikeselectricstuff]

As soon as the buyers admit that they still have the equipment, they are on the legal hook

How exactly are the on any kind of legal hook?

[Fraser]

Mike,

By that I mean that they are volunteering a confirmation that they still have the equipment. If they do not confirm such it is hard for Veolia to prove they still have it in order to pursue the matter further. In law you normally have a right to silence and such is sometimes the best option. Neither confirm nor deny 

Fraser

[MadTux]

Well sorry, HP, sorry Agilent, uhm Keysight, I just sold that 3335A with good profit 
Unfortunately, I forgot who that customer was 

[Mr. Scram]

Blowing all the goodwill of the people you need it the most from doesn't sound like a great idea.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Mike,

By that I mean that they are volunteering a confirmation that they still have the equipment. If they do not confirm such it is hard for Veolia to prove they still have it in order to pursue the matter further. In law you normally have a right to silence and such is sometimes the best option. Neither confirm nor deny 

Fraser

But in this case, whether you still have or not doesn't affect your legal postion. It is not stolen goods or subject to any ownership restriction. You bought it in good faith, you own it. If they want it, it is up them to make you a suitable offer

[nigelwright7557]

I think they are suggesting the equipment is stolen.
Hence it is illegal to sell it on.

[Psi]

I wonder what they would do if you replied with something like...

Unfortunately i have built additional circuits, microprocessors and modules inside this piece of test equipment for use in my application.
As such, the text gear now contains my own intellectual property and i am unable to return it to you without removal of this.

I would normally be happy to return the unit to you for fair compensation however i must also request compensation for the time i must now spend returning the equipment to its original state by removing all my intellectual property.

The labour cost to remove all of this is $400.
If i receive fair compensation for the test equipment plus $400 to cover my labour then i can release the equipment back to you.


    

[alpher]

The labour cost to remove all of this is $400.

[/b]

    

$400 ??
Will you work for cup of a cofee too ?

[AVGresponding]

If only my 3784A was on the list...

I could really do with swapping it for something useful like, oh, a 300W DC load, or a programmable system PSU   

[bd139]

I think they are suggesting the equipment is stolen.
Hence it is illegal to sell it on.

If it’s stolen they should contact law enforcement in the countries in question. Handling it internally means they would be handling stolen goods if a claim arose externally.

The reason they haven’t gone through law enforcement is that there’s no case. They are paying third parties to handle it so they don’t lose face. keysight have their own legal guys who clearly won’t touch it.

Ultimately the whole thing is a gigantic fuck up from end to end and they’ve handled it terribly and someone needs to call them up on it loudly. Why would I want to buy anything from a company that pulls this shit?

Edit: if you’re in the EU I’d GDPR their arse with a DSAR

[Mr. Scram]

I think they are suggesting the equipment is stolen.
Hence it is illegal to sell it on.

People bought it in good faith and they so far never claimed it was stolen. You can do whatever you want with the equipment. If they're going to make any claim they'd better get on with it.

[usagi]

they’ve handled it terribly and someone needs to call them up on it loudly

paging dave jones...

[nctnico]

Good GRIEF! 
Are you F%@#$% kidding me?
Just came in the mail yesterday.

What I don't get is why they are sending letters stating they want the equipment back but they are not including any information about what the procedure is going to be. If they are serious they include a list with the equipment they want back, a price they want to pay for it and a courier account to use for shipping. The wording is just too vague to take any action.

[AndyC_772]

If it’s stolen they should contact law enforcement in the countries in question.

That's the first point that needs to be clarified. What they've said is "sold without authorization", which is a vague term that could mean anything.

The fact that you've been approached by a garbage disposal firm and not a law enforcement officer may be a clue here, but I'd still press the point. Maybe respond something like this...

Dear <name>

Re: your recent letter concerning my test equipment

I understand that you would like to take possession of my <device>, which I purchased in good faith from <supplier> on <date>.

I feel it is important to clarify the precise legal status of this equipment before proceeding any further.

If the item in question constitutes stolen goods, (ie. is subject to criminal legal proceedings), then I will of course return it to the rightful owner as soon as I have received a signed statement to that effect from a Director of the company which owns the equipment. In this event I will, of course, ensure that the appropriate law enforcement agency is informed of the incident, and I may pursue the seller for any losses and/or damages.

If, however, "without authorization" simply refers to a breach of contract between two parties (neither of which is me), then please understand that I am under no obligation to return the equipment whether for "fair market compensation" or otherwise, and that I have not yet agreed to do so at this time.

<Delete as applicable...>

[The equipment is in regular use and is essential to my business, therefore I cannot contemplate returning it at this time unless compelled to do so by law.]

[The equipment is in regular use, but I would be prepared to relinquish it in exchange for a brand new unit of equivalent specification. My <device> will be made available for collection by you within 7 days of the arrival of its replacement. All taxes, duties, shipping and other costs will be paid for by you.]

[The equipment is not currently up for sale, but I would be prepared to consider an offer of $XXX plus shipping.]

I look forward to receiving your detailed clarification of the status of the equipment in question, and of any offer you may wish to make in exchange for it.

Yours sincerely,
......

[bd139]

It's actually best not to respond at all unless you get something via registered post or it's government official paperwork i.e. a summons. Don't incriminate yourself!

[AndyC_772]

That's certainly an option, and if you'd prefer not to engage with them then that's up to you.

Personally I think it might be quite interesting to see where it goes, and if you've done nothing wrong, why not find out?

[nctnico]

It's actually best not to respond at all unless you get something via registered post or it's government official paperwork i.e. a summons. Don't incriminate yourself!

I fully agree! Don't spend any time on letters with drivel.

[jjoonathan]

My letter arrived via email and, two days later, in exact duplicate via registered post.