Website fekup question

[GarethG]

If an online store puts up items for £0 and you put in an order while they are at this price where do I stand. Can they suddenly charge me the full amount, can they refuse to send the items for that price or are they obligated by law to send them at the price advertised?

Just wondering because it's just happened to me and I would save £180 if I am in the right.

[Hígh Treason]

I'm not sure, but as purchase is a form legal contract, the parties concerned are then bound by that contract if you already "payed" for your order, then I believe they are unable to change the price and are legally obliged to send it at the price they specified at the time of your payment.

If they try to say otherwise, you can always argue your case anyway, if you make it look professional enough, companies usually get scared (especially in the current ecenomic climate) in case you call trading standards. Do you, by any chance, have the receipt for your order?

If you have the reciept then they are powerless to do anything about it as far as I am aware.

[GarethG]

Thanks for the info HT, I have an e-mail reciept and I fortunately know someone personally who works with trading standards. So I could always go to them if there is any problems.

If your interested in keeping an eye for other free items then the site is Newitts.com. Just go on a category and filter the results by price to make things easier.

[ramtops]

If an online store puts up items for £0 and you put in an order while they are at this price where do I stand. Can they suddenly charge me the full amount, can they refuse to send the items for that price or are they obligated by law to send them at the price advertised?

Just wondering because it's just happened to me and I would save £180 if I am in the right.

I always ask myself how I'd feel if I'd made the cockup, and someone else benefited. Do as you would be done by!

[lubuntu]

The retailer does not have to accept your offer to buy and if the product price is wrongly labelled you don't get to buy it for that price. However, it is an offence to deliberately and misleadingly advertise the wrong price.  Obviously if they charged you a different price to the one advertised and sent you the product then you have the right to return it or negotiate a settlement.  I would ask them why they advertised it at that price and why they wont sell it to you at that price - maybe they will be willing to offer you a goodwill gesture and knock you a percentage off the true price if you really want the item.  Otherwise if you believe they are being deliberately misleading then report them to the trading standards.

[richardmyers]

When this has happened in the past (I think Tesco Direct did it with a TV once) the lower price order has not been honoured, and proper price is required.

[GarethG]

Just got a refund via paypal for the full amount, they didn't give any reason but I think we all know what it is!

[jamadams]

I was always under the impression that if it was obvious that the price was incorrect, IE a £500 telly for £50, then they do not have to honour it.

[DarkJester]

AFAIK (and I used to work for a major retailer)...

When you see goods advertised (at least this applies to physical bricks and mortar outlets) this is an "offer to treat" and you offer to buy them at the displayed price. Normally this is trouble free however if the price is incorrect then the retailer is under NO obligation to sell them to you at that price. However they must correct the displayed price, they are not allowed to continue advertising the goods at that price (either by correcting the price or removing the goods and price from display)

Now in a bricks and mortar situation a member of staff would normally intervene if a price is ridiculously low and its doubtfull that anything in a shop would have a £0.00 price tag on it.

However internet retailing removes this "personal touch" and relies mainly on electronic systems which is where most problems occur. If someone keys in the wrong price into a database then its very easy to miss although it is indeed something that mos E-tailers are very good at checking these days.

What does not change though are the main elements of the law. ie its an offer to treat and they are under no obligation to supply the goods until a contract has been formed. This does not occur until payment has been accepted from the purchaser. If you have a receipt with a sum of money on it then this would constitute such a contract and they are liable to supply he gods at that price.

In instances where E-tailers have fallen foul of situations like these then a common tactic is to say that the goods are out of stock and refund your money, this has happened to me a couple of times with Play.com. The E-tailer is still in breach of contract though and they are liable for the difference you would have to pay to get the good somewhere else. Trouble is of course is that the onus is upon the purchaser to pursue them for the difference throught the courts for breach of contract and its an extremely rare event.

[GarethG]

Well they refunded me and I was wrong in the previous post, they did explain the reason for refunding me in the paypal e-mail. Basicly they are in the right and I have no leg to stand on according to my trading standards contact. These rules were apparently set by Kodak & Argos cases in the past.

If anyone is interested the story for the Kodak & Argos legal cases can be found here.

They also confirm DJ's previous post about contracts been formed and 'invitations to treat'. Thanks all! Im dissapointed but thats life lol!

[The Dominator]

This forum is just a hot bed of knowledge, you learn something new every day.

This thread makes for interesting reading, well done to all.

[lubuntu]

Here's some more info (think I will do a new thread on this when I get my prob resolved) but the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SOGA) can save you a lot of money.  No need to pay for extended warranties - SOGA is applicable for up to 6 years since you purchased an item.  Lets say you buy a TV and you do not buy an extended warranty and the TV breaks after 13 months! SOGA says that goods must be of satisfactory quality and fit for their purpose - but even more importantly is that they should last a reasonable time and a reasonable time is what  "reasonable person" thinks is reasonable! So if you pay £600 for a new TV is it reasonable that it breaks after 13 months? No it isn't.  So you go back to the retailer (who your contract is with - not the manufacturer) and you state SOGA and that it is unreasonable for the goods to break within a certain time.  This can apply to washers, fridges, TVs, PCs, etc - all out of their 12 month warranty period (although the onus is on you to prove that the goods are faulty after 6 months).  I am going through this process myself so will update on a new thread when its resolved.

[DarkJester]

Whilst legally correct the overwhelming majority of in-store staff (even many managers) inherently believe in the 12 months warranty phallacy becasue they have it drummed into them from head office. To get any recompense you always have to go to head office or even the courts.

To clarify your point relating to 6 months. Before 6 months the law automatically assumes that the fault was present at the time of manufacture. You are able to reject the item outright and claim a refund. After 6 months the onus is on you to prove the fault was present at manufacture (if you want to reject the goods) However the retailer is within their rights to insist that the item is repaired.

Also do not let retailers fob you off by referring you to the manufacturer of the item (Sony, Samsung, Electrolux etc) as your contract is with the retailer and not the manufacturer.

[GarethG]

Good to know!

As the Aldi parrot says 'like, like, like, like, like, like, like, like, like it!'

[dylan]

I've used the SOGA to get a free repair to a cooker that broke after 16 months.