Major retailer renages on an order!!

delstron

I ordered a wheelset on Sunday morning, paid by Paypal £149, order confirmation back - no problems. Went away on business for three days.

Returned to find a mail sent on Monday - "Unfortunately your order has been brought into the office with a problem with the parts in the order...." Giving me the option to cancel or change the order within two days.

That time has now expired and they have cancelled the order and refunded.

This would be fine but THE WHEELSET IS STILL AVAILABLE AT A HIGHER PRICE (Now £207)

What does the BR forum think of this please?

I'm giving them tommorrow to honour the order before naming & shaming - this is not on.

redddraggon

Fulcrum Racing 5s at Wiggle?

EDIT Fulcrum Racing 5s at CRC I bet...

Kingtut87

Bad form, but I think they're legally entitled to cancel your order if the item has been mis-priced. Online orders are an invitation to treat rather than a rock solid contract, afaik.

If you're polite and firm with them they might honor your purchase but I dont think they legally have to

top_bhoy

Two things:
1) Have you contacted them to explain to them your tardiness in responding and to get their approach to the matter
2) Although the website shows the wheelset is available, that isn't necessarily the case.

You need to identify and work through these two issues before doing anything else.

andrew_s

Kingtut87 wrote:

Bad form, but I think they're legally entitled to cancel your order if the item has been mis-priced. Online orders are an invitation to treat rather than a rock solid contract, afaik.

But does not charging him indicate that a contract has been accepted & made, regardless of any subsequent refund?

Wooliferkins

Have a read of the companies terms and conditions, they'll be on the website somewhere.

NWLondoner

andrew_s wrote:

Kingtut87 wrote:

Bad form, but I think they're legally entitled to cancel your order if the item has been mis-priced. Online orders are an invitation to treat rather than a rock solid contract, afaik.

But does not charging him indicate that a contract has been accepted & made, regardless of any subsequent refund?

Technically they have not charged him. As he paid by Paypal he sent the money. Also he placed the order on a Sunday and they got back to him on the Monday to inform him.

IIRC an order confirmation is NOT an acceptance of an order.

So while they would have been better off just accepting this one off mistake (£60 isn't a huge amount) and keeping him happy they are legally within there rights to refuse the order.

The ONLY time a retailer has to legally honour a price is when the item (in a shop) has a SEL/POS that directly corresponds to the item. Always check that the SKU on the POS/SEL matches the items SKU.

chriskempton

NWLondoner wrote:

The ONLY time a retailer has to legally honour a price is when the item (in a shop) has a SEL/POS that directly corresponds to the item. Always check that the SKU on the POS/SEL matches the items SKU.

Can you explain this bit please - what's a SEL/POS, and how has the OPs situation not met this criteria?

bigflangesmallsprocket

I work in a large store. If we have items out that are priced incorrectly, we always charge the lower price advertised. I know a tin of tuna is not a pair of wheels, but I'm under the impression we are legally obliged to charge at the advertised lower price. I would suppose that someone operating as a business, selling items advertised at a certain price, would be under the same obligation as the situation is actually the same, the online retailer merely being that their shelf is a virtual one, so to speak.

Mrs Goggins

A retailer can refuse to sell any item if they so wish. If they have priced an item incorrectly they can simply refuse to sell it, in the same way a barman can refuse to sell you a drink. There seems to be a misguided view that if an item is priced incorrectly they have to sell at that price but this is completely untrue.

Most decent retailers will simply admit the mistake and offer the item at the advertised priced or meet half way as a compromise, but there is no legal obligation to do so.

Its pretty funny when an irate customer starts quoting 'trading standards' etc... there is no such law.

petejuk

I'm under the impression we are legally obliged to charge at the advertised lower price. I would suppose that someone operating as a business, selling items advertised at a certain price, would be under the same obligation as the situation is actually the same, the online retailer merely being that their shelf is a virtual one, so to speak.

I'm afraid thats not the case anymore. A case a few years ago involving a digital camera and a major shop chain changed the law in favour of the retailer. Basically if its advertised at one price they are not obliged to sell it at that price if there had been an error pricing up.

Onan

What they're not allowed to do is INTENTIONALLY advertise a product at one price, then inform you at point of sale that it's no longer available at that price, and offer a more highly priced alternative. That's bait and switch.

Doesn't sound like that was the case here though, and I reckon you'd have a hard time proving it if it was.

The duration of time some online retaliers leave bikes they no longer have in stock on their webstore at discounted prices is tantamount to bait and switch. They get around this by making it clear in the adverts that these loss leaders are only available in limited numbers. "while stocks last".

LewisKIT

This has just happened to me - strangely after I had read this thread.

I just ordered a lovely TT bike at a great (but not totally outrageous) price. Before I ordered I phoned up the shop to double check if the price was indeed correct s it seemed pretty good value - I got a positive reply, after some conversation so there no confusion.

I ordered online, used credit card details, and got an order confirmation.

Now I have had a phone message informing me that the price was wrong, and now I see the price has changed online.

Reading the above threads, it sounds as if I won't have a leg to stand on. I am assuming the shop does not intend to make good its original price but will of course ask.

Well naffed off.

EdZed

petejuk wrote:

I'm under the impression we are legally obliged to charge at the advertised lower price. I would suppose that someone operating as a business, selling items advertised at a certain price, would be under the same obligation as the situation is actually the same, the online retailer merely being that their shelf is a virtual one, so to speak.

I'm afraid thats not the case anymore. A case a few years ago involving a digital camera and a major shop chain changed the law in favour of the retailer. Basically if its advertised at one price they are not obliged to sell it at that price if there had been an error pricing up.

I don't think it's ever been the case. Any advertisement (whether a price on a tin in an actual shop or a price next to a picture in a virtual shop e.g. a web page) is an invitation to treat, not an offer to sell at the advertised price. The prospective buyer makes an offer to the seller (by presenting payment) and it is then up to the seller if he wants to sell and complete the transaction, the seller is under no obligation to sell and is perfectly entitiled to withdraw the item from sale. This is a basic principle of contract law. It might not be good for customer relations but as Mrs Goggins states there has never been such a law.

If the seller honours the lower price then so be it and you have your bargain. There are all sort of other things that can come into play after the contract e.g. misrepresentation, if things aren't quite as they seem but that's not the same as the simply saying the seller has to sell at the advertised price, he doesn't.

LewisKIT

I have just realised that the shop in my case has charged my credit card.

Does this change anything in my favour.

I have now had a message from the shop that they have undercharged me by £800 but will give me a £200 discount as goodwill. It is still not enough to make it worth my while buying.

Their T&Cs say that the sale is not a contract until the accept the order. Is taking my money on the credit card 'accepting the order?'.

Nadder

It is to do with 'offer' not 'order' when you place your order you are offering to buy it from them - they then accept it by processing the payment and giving you the item.

By taking the money then yes I would suggest it does change things because they have then accepted your offer. However because it will be automatically done online I would imagine their T&C's would say that it has to be manually verified before the contract is in existence.

I don't think it will change things.

andrewjoseph

Did they charge the original price? if so, it would seem to me that by accepting payment they have agreed to sell at that price.

they have your money, now you want your bike.

LewisKIT

Yes - I have been charged the original (but erroneous lower) price.

I have spoken to them and they have offered a deal whereby they will sell me the bike at +500 more rather than the +£700 it should be.

I pressed harder and they have agreed to also upgrade the wheels from £100 cheapo training wheels to a pair of aero carbon clincher wheels they have on offer at £500. I would not choose these specific wheels if I had £500 (therea re much better alternatives) but I am wondering if it now seems like a good compromise vs going legal.

Thoughts?

beausabreur

I haven't read the contract but on the basis of the term you have quoted, if they have charged your card you have a complete contract. This is a major difference from the Argos and Amazon cases alluded to in other responses, where payment is only processed after the order is confirmed. On those sites, you place your order, get an order confirmation and then payment is taken. Their T&Cs confirm that a contract only arises after payment has been accepted. Other readers are correct that the advertisement of the goods is simply an invitation to treat and that you make the offer (by paying) which is then accepted. In this case, the T&Cs say acceptance occurs when payment has been processed. That has occurred so there is a complete contract. What they are trying to do is simply rewrite the contract. Consequently, unless they can prove that there was a mistake of which you took unconscionable advantage (i.e. a deal so good that it could not have been intended - not apparently the case) they have to sell you the bike at the price you paid and was debited from your card. You would stand good prospects of success on this in the small claims court.

delstron

GOOD NEWS

The retailer CHAIN REACTION has agreed to sell me the wheelset at the original price following my representations.

Happy ending

Beardy10

A couple of years ago I saw some very cheap Volks Ski's on Snow and rock's website which were the current year's model but discounted by 50%, Seemed very strange to me as is was February which is obviously peak season for them....anyway I ordered some.....a few days later I had a phone call saying they had made an error and they offered me £50 in compensation. I think the discount was worth £200.

Regardless of what the law says imagine trying going to court to sue for the £150. Snow and Rock could very easily argue they made a legitimate mistake and have offered reasonable compensation. Small claims court would have told me where to go I suspect.....

Sounds like Chain Reaction have done more than they legally needed to...well done Chain Reaction!

batch78

@ Delstron, good result, they were technically, but not morally, in the right.

@Lewiskit. Fight the bast@rds, its one thing to unintentionally advertise the wrong price but to take payment and accept the contract they are now obliged to deliver. Good luck

whyamihere

LewisKIT wrote:

I have just realised that the shop in my case has charged my credit card.

Does this change anything in my favour.

I have now had a message from the shop that they have undercharged me by £800 but will give me a £200 discount as goodwill. It is still not enough to make it worth my while buying.

Their T&Cs say that the sale is not a contract until the accept the order. Is taking my money on the credit card 'accepting the order?'.

I'm not a lawyer, but from what I remember, they can only charge your card when the order is being processed. As they've charged you, they should have processed the order - The only thing that should stop the sale after processing has started is if your card doesn't work.