MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Ive just ordered a new item (cant say what in case OH snoops ;)) it was advertised as coming on their website with a free set of goggles. Ive just rung them up to check they received order fine and theyve said as the item had extra discount added as its now on sale they wont send the free goggles (the cost of the goggles is what its been reduced by) but the advert is still up saying free goggles. Im assuming this is tough luck on my side?
Was it on sale when you bought it, or have they since reduced the price?
An advert is an "invitation to treat", they've no obligation to supply what you ordered. However, if they've taken your money then they've agreed to the sale, so are legally, contractually bound to supply.
If they've reduced it since and given you the discount I'd be tempted to say "tough", but otherwise I'd say they're on shaky ground.
I Am Not A lawyer.
It would be a shame for the shop owner to have to tell his kids "sorry, Christmas is cancelled this year due to a forum know it all demanding we give him a discount AND free stuff, maybe next year little timmy and charlotte eh?" 😉
The link is on the homepage saying "free smith goggles" you click on it, it takes you to the item at the price you pay, and payment has been taken.
Then I'd say they have to honour it, personally.
It would be a shame for the shop owner to have to tell his kids "sorry, Christmas is cancelled this year
If a store is closing over the loss of profits on a single sale, unless they're selling Ruanda or something, I'd hazard they've bigger problems than a know-it-all on an Internet forum.
So instead of the Goggles they've refunded/charged you for the item without the Goggles ?
Can't you just buy some Goggles with the difference ?
^^^This^^ in conjuntion with what the T&Cs say.
What theyve said on the phone is that last week the item was £40 more (before id seen it) theyve now reduced it but the banner is still in place. Theres no clue that the item was ever advertised at a higher price. it just says SALE WAS £... now £...
It's Christmas mate... go have a beer and forget about it 🙂
If it's still being advertised with the free goggles, then that is what you should receive.
They've advertised as such (and still are) and you bought, whatever the other item was, on the strength of it. They are obliged to honour the deal.
You're being silly lads. That's going back to the debate like when Tescos had X-Boxes up for about £20, "they have to sell me them..." etc etc...
In the end, no-one got a £20 x-box.
Lets assume they don't have the Goggles..how do you propose they magically make them appear ?
I doubt they have any legal obligations, you're still entitled to return the item and get a refund after all. It's a bit crap on their part and they should sort the web-site out asap now they're aware of the issue but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it
They are obliged to honour the deal.
Which bit of the law is this? I can't quite remember how it all works. Price in an invitation to make an offer, the seller can accept or reject at any point. Or something like that.
Where ownership passes is also a tricky one too.
That's going back to the debate like when Tescos had X-Boxes up for about £20, "they have to sell me them..." etc etc...
Except, it's not.
They don't have to sell you anything unless they've accepted the order and agreed to the contract. Then they do. For all practical terms this means they can back out of the sale until they've taken your money, which implies acceptance of contract.
These days, there's an extra loophole for wiggle. If something is obviously an error, they don't have to honour it. Eg, if they were selling a £250 Xbox for £240 in error, they'd have to honour it (once they'd accepted the contract). If they were selling a £250 Xbox for £2.50, they wouldn't.
In this case, I think the OP is on solid ground.
Lets assume they don't have the Goggles..how do you propose they magically make them appear ?
Then the shop would have to reject the whole order before taking payment.
Then the shop would have to reject the whole order before taking payment.
You're assuming the computer and stock control system have the ability to do this...
So, where are they getting the Goggles they don't have in stock from ?
That isn't the argument, as they apparently still have them but aren't honouring the sale as the item has since been discounted.So, where are they getting the Goggles they don't have in stock from ?
I agree it's not worth pursuing but if the retailer wanted to keep a customer happy they should at least hold their hands up, apologise and offer a discount on the goggles as a gesture.
You're assuming the computer and stock control system have the ability to do this...
I'd hazard most do, these days. A lot of places don't take your money until dispatch for exactly this reason; ever noticed when you get email confirmations for online orders nowadays they often say something along the lines of "this is an automated receipt that does not imply acceptance of order"?
So, where are they getting the Goggles they don't have in stock from ?
Well, if they've entered into a sales contract that they can't fulfil, I'd suggest that they're breaking the law. Realistically, they'd have to negotiate options with the customer, I would think. They're still legally obliged to fulfil the order regardless; if they physically can't then I'd expect an alternative product to be offered. Worst case scenario, small claims court I suppose. (Not that I'm suggesting that in the OP's case, that'd be ridiculous. But you asked.)
Again, this is As I Understand It. I'm not [s]TJ[/s] a lawyer.
aren't honouring the sale as the item has [b]since [/b]been discounted.
Since when? Since you placed the order, or since they first went on sale?
If it's the former then you're probably shit out, but it seems poor form to amend your order without telling you.
If the latter and they've just not updated their website properly, well, sucks to be them.
I think I'd be pushing for it "as a gesture of goodwill", personally; that nicely lets them dodge the bullet that they did anything wrong.
Item was reduced yesterday so since they opened that offer, advert still in place
There's nothing on the page that says offer not in conjunction with offer. If I hadn't rung them I'd be expecting goggles. I'm not overly fussed but the goggles would have been nice as its a fair old whack of cash and would soften the blow somewhat.
I think they could fall foul of the ASA who now also can govern website marketing. I'm fairly sure that what they are currently doing would be deemed to be misrepresenting or misadvertising the product if someone was to let the ASA know.
I think it's also pretty dishonest. All e-commerce businesses make genuine errors which they would be reluctant to honour but it sounds like this company are aware of the situation and have not corrected the misleading banner.
Again, this is As I Understand It. I'm not TJ [strike]a lawyer.[/strike]
But coming along quite nicely and filling the void he left, were you apprenticed to him at all?
You just need to hold back a bit on statements similar to the one I quoted, it smacks of self doubt, Don't worry if you end up totally wrong, you've always got the Edinburgh defence to fall back on.
[url= http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/so-bought-something-on-ebay-and-now-found-it-cheaper-online-guilt-question ]What comes around eh?[/url]
Hopefully the ebay problem is all sorted, karma innit.
Im not fussed, just thought it was a bit cheeky tbh not taking the banner down.
karma innit
It certainly is.