Stranger Uses Her Email For Orders, Gets Furious When She Changes Delivery

Typos happen. Most people fix them and move on. But when the same small mistake keeps landing in someone else’s inbox, patience can wear thin fast.

For months, this person has been receiving order confirmations for packages they didn’t buy, from stores they’ve never shopped at. At first, it seemed harmless, just an annoying mix-up. But when delivery notifications started coming in, the situation became harder to ignore.

With no response to calls or texts, they took matters into their own hands by changing the delivery location each time it happened. Eventually, the person behind the orders reached out, furious about the inconvenience.

Now the question isn’t about a typo anymore, it’s about responsibility, effort, and how far someone can push “not my problem” before it becomes one.

A person reroutes packages after a stranger repeatedly uses their email for online orders

Respect isn’t optional. When another person’s repeated carelessness becomes your problem, it crosses from harmless to intrusive.

Constant emails about orders you didn’t place, notifications, tracking updates, and delivery confirmations don’t just clog your inbox. They invade your time, energy, and digital space.

In this situation, the OP wasn’t ignoring a one-off typo. They were contending with a repeated pattern of another person’s disregard. The man repeatedly used the OP’s email instead of correcting his own, didn’t respond to messages, and then complained when the OP set limits.

The OP tried reaching out politely first; when that failed, she acted in a way that safeguarded her own peace. Changing the pickup location wasn’t about revenge.

It was a boundary response, a way of redirecting the inconvenience back to its source. What looked like “sabotage” to the other person was actually a consequence of his own negligence.

More than that, this scenario highlights how different people view responsibility. Some see a typo as trivial and expect others to absorb the fallout.

Others see the impact of repeated intrusion as something that should prompt correction. A person who continuously avoids accountability can make simple social interactions feel exhausting for those affected.

Psychologically, boundaries are essential for good mental health and respectful interaction.

According to experts, boundaries are invisible but crucial limits that define how you want others to treat you and what behaviors you will accept, in relationships, friendships, and even daily interactions. They help protect emotional well-being, reduce stress, and establish mutual respect.

Setting and communicating boundaries teaches people how you expect to be treated and signals that your time and space matter.

Psychology Today explains that without clear limits, people may take advantage of one another or assume entitlement to another person’s time, attention, or space. When boundaries are repeatedly violated, even in small ways, it can erode trust and create frustration.

This is why the OP’s response resonates. She didn’t act out of spite; she acted out of necessity. Instead of tolerating inconvenience that wasn’t hers to absorb, she asserted a limit. That doesn’t make her unreasonable. It makes her assertive.

Healthy boundaries aren’t about punishing others; they’re about protecting yourself and ensuring interactions remain respectful. It’s also why refusing to apologize isn’t selfish, it’s an acknowledgment that responsibility starts with recognizing the impact of one’s own actions.

So, respect for boundaries is foundational. When someone repeatedly violates your limits — even unintentionally, it’s okay to respond in a way that preserves your own equilibrium. Not every discomfort requires an apology, but every pattern of disregard deserves clear limits.

Here’s what the community had to contribute:

These commenters said repeated “typos” are laziness and his problem to fix

This group suggested canceling orders instead of redirecting packages

These Redditors leaned into petty revenge, encouraging escalation until he stops

This group shared similar experiences and backed consequences to teach him a lesson

These commenters voted ESH, saying OP’s response was excessive despite his laziness.

Was redirecting packages petty, or was it a proportional response to someone who openly admitted they didn’t care enough to fix their mistake?

Most readers sided with the idea that repeated negligence isn’t an accident, it’s a decision. And once that line is crossed, courtesy becomes optional. Where would you draw the line? Fix the problem for someone else or let inconvenience do the teaching?