Undercharged for goods,, what's the legal position?

So the story is that I ordered a new shed at B&Q on Sunday, paid the amount asked and was told to wait for my delivery.

They called me today and said "we don't know how but we've undercharged you by £84, can you pay it please?".

Can I –
A-make them stand by the deal and payment made on the day?
B- expect them to cancel the order if I don't pay the balance?
C- Another combination of events that my limited knowledge can't come up with?

I expect the usual flurry of responses from STW's combined legal brain

G

I'm guessing B myself

Did you realise at the time?

If you've not taken delivery the contract is not complete so they can ask or cancel. Least that's how I understand it.

i didn't realise at the time because there was a sale on and the staff member was rattling every discount deal into the till that she could + my pregnant wife was threatening to puke on me if I didn't get her the hell out of B&Q. I was more interested in paying and getting out of there..

if you have paid and they have taken the money at the priced amount then its yours for that price.

In shops if something is mispriced then they can just say no, but if money changes hands the sale is complete.

It was on telly not long since.

They will however just cancel the purchase if you do not pay the extra.

I can't remember the case history to prove it, but the position is, if something is offered for sale at the incorrect price and it wasn't obvious (eg, new tyre £35 when it should have been £40) they have to honour it. If something is offered for sale at the incorrect price and it is obvious (eg, new car £10 when it should have been £10,000) they don;t have to honour it.

In your case have you paid the advertised price or not?
Eg. Advertised at £100, you paid £100, now they say it should be £184, I don't think they can ask for it. Or advertised at £184, you paid £100 and they acepted at the time, bit of a grey area.

ah wait you did it in the shop? well if money changed hands and you have the receipt they can not refuse the sale.

it is a binding contract.

they can only tell you its priced wrong before the money changes hand.

If they sell it to you at that price then tough luck for them, and its yours for what you paid.

If youve paid the money to the shop they have "accepted your offer" and you have a contract.

if you havent paid any money in the shop then they could say no and you wouldnt enter into a contract.

Suppose it may depend on how arsey they get!

Not a fan of B&Q. Nice to hear their incompetence has worked in someone's favour for once. Consider it a karmic return on my kitchen they made a complete and utter balls up of.

Hope you get it for the originally agreed price.

You've paid, they've accepted & therefore a contract is in place – trouble is if you took it all the way you're only likely to get your money back if they break the contract – bluff em & see what happens.

I am not a lawyer – caveat –

Yep, I think the general idea is "invitation to treat", ie they can put a price on something, you decide to buy, and then the contract is only then fulfilled. So if a mistaken price is put, ie a car for £10, and you then decide to buy, they can still refuse to sell to you, as it is only an invitation, which they may withdraw from you, when it becomes apparent the car is not £10.

Once you have made the bargain with the retailer, ie they have invited you, you have agreed and a contract is created, at which point it is then up to them to perform to their contract with you.

If they fail to perform the contract, you may sue them for a specific breech of contract, to provide goods to you, for the sum agreed, for which payment has been taken.

HOWEVER

The appropriate measure of damages you are entitled to for their failure is likely to be limited to "put you in the position you were in, prior to the breech of contract". Ie, they refund your money in full, and you are as it were, back in funds, and without a shed. Unless you had a speific need for the shed, delivered on that day, and its non arrival has caused you further quantifiable loss, then thats that.

So, I'd say – "bring the shed, its the one I wanted, but I want free delivery to make up for my inconvenience", which is a valid head of claim in law. Mattocks Vs Mann recognised the time taken in phone calls or letters to sort out a litigious matter.

Of course, there might be other consumer legislation I am not aware of to ammend this view.