In advance of my trip to Israel, I bought a heater and specified to the store owner that I needed a heater that runs on 220v. When I arrived, I opened the box and realized that he had given me a heater that runs on 110v. I contacted the merchant; he is ready to refund my money upon return of the heater.

Q: Am I responsible to spend time and effort to ship back the heater and pay the shipping costs?

A: The merchant must pay for the shipping, but you are obligated to ship it to him, assuming it does not require uncommon effort.When a customer specifies that he intends to use his purchase in a distant place and, upon arrival, discovers that the item is damaged or is not the item he ordered, the merchant must refund the customer’s money and retrieve the faulty merchandise (C.M. 232:21). The rationale is that although a merchant may assume that his merchandise is not defective, if a defect would cause the customer a financial loss, he must exercise greater caution to assure that the merchandise is not defective.

This being the case, when a customer specifies that he will take the item to a different location, the merchant is aware that shipping back the defective merchandise will cause the customer a loss (Prishah 232:18) and must therefore pay the shipping costs. Additionally, the merchant is obligated to pay the shipping costs since he did not confirm that he was giving you the heater you requested.

However, concerning the shipping arrangements that do not require extraordinary effort, it is not sufficient to merely notify the merchant to retrieve it himself. The mitzvah of hashavas aveidah (returning a lost object) also obligates one to prevent a Jew from suffering unnecessary financial loss. It is therefore your responsibility to make the shipping arrangements.

Ostensibly, the merchant’s behavior is considered aveidah midaas — one who negligently allowed his possession to become lost — and in such a case, the mitzvah of hashavas aveidah does not apply (C.M. 261:4). This principle, however, is not applicable.

Every time someone loses an object, there is an element of negligence, but it is not categorized as aveidah midaas unless the owner actively indicates that he is not concerned about the object. For example, a person who throws an object into the public domain has actively demonstrated that he is not interested in that object and it is considered an aveidah midaas.

In contrast, when an object was lost because one was not careful enough, it is not an aveidah midaas and the mitzvah of hashavas aveidah still applies.

The final ruling in your case is that the merchant is responsible to pay the shipping costs, but you are obligated to arrange to ship it back to him.