Goods 'dispatched' but not shipped - legals

pepsilol · 10 Oct 2016 at 11:56

Tefal said:
well its a £100 quid difference.

how long does it take you to earn £100 after tax?

About 15 minutes.

krisboats · 10 Oct 2016 at 12:51

pepsilol said:
About 15 minutes.

Worst "look at me" post ever. :rolleyes:

Tefal · 10 Oct 2016 at 12:53

pepsilol said:
About 15 minutes.

ahhh you offer the "15 minute quickie" service?

The Running Man · 10 Oct 2016 at 13:10

Tefal said:
So what was the remedy?

Ps4 slim with fifa and now tv 3 months for the same price .

Tefal · 10 Oct 2016 at 13:15

Dis86 · 10 Oct 2016 at 13:40

krisboats said:
Worst "look at me" post ever.

Nah. Read more of his posts. Constant ******** like that abound.

Spikey · 10 Oct 2016 at 14:07

pepsilol said:
About 15 minutes.

Pimp.

Energize · 10 Oct 2016 at 16:26

stoofa said:
Underhanded tactics?
The company simply took too many orders for the stock they have. At no point where customers put at a disadvantage. It was a simple mistake.
Now in the end Game have decided to do something about it all - but it wasn't underhanded.
Underhanded is taking monies and delivering no product. Underhanded is taking monies and then delivering the wrong item on purpose. Underhanded is taking an order at one price and then charging a higher price as the items are dispatched.
Taking too many orders is not underhanded - it was a mistake. How were Game going to make any kind of profit from this "underhanded" display?

It causes a large amount of inconvenience to people when retailers breach their contract as in the case in the op, people shouldn't have to spend a whole hour on the phone. Hence why the law provides a remedy for it.

touch · 11 Oct 2016 at 10:22

Energize said:
It causes a large amount of inconvenience to people when retailers breach their contract as in the case in the op

There is no breach of contract. There will be a clause in the contract detailing what happens in the case that they can't fulfill the order and they will have followed that process.

The Running Man · 11 Oct 2016 at 10:28

touch said:
There is no breach of contract. There will be a clause in the contract detailing what happens in the case that they can't fulfill the order and they will have followed that process.

There is when they take my money and tell me it's shipped.

touch · 11 Oct 2016 at 10:33

The Running Man said:
There is when they take my money and tell me it's shipped.

Well, making the same assumption as others have about which retailer you bought from, their T+Cs say:

Although We endeavour to give accurate stock availability information on the Site occasionally products you order may not be available. If this happens We will cancel your order, send you an email to confirm the cancellation and any sum debited by Us from your debit/credit card will be refunded in full to the same card.

You accepted these terms so they would only be in breach of contract if they didnt refund your money.

Dis86 · 11 Oct 2016 at 10:52

touch said:
Well, making the same assumption as others have about which retailer you bought from, their T+Cs say:

You accepted these terms so they would only be in breach of contract if they didnt refund your money.

What part of 'they said it's shipped' aren't you getting?

tom_e · 11 Oct 2016 at 10:55

touch said:
Well, making the same assumption as others have about which retailer you bought from, their T+Cs say:

You accepted these terms so they would only be in breach of contract if they didnt refund your money.

From the same terms.

Acceptance of your order and the formation of a contract between you and Us will take place when We send you an email confirming that the products you have ordered are being dispatched to you

touch · 11 Oct 2016 at 10:57

tom_e said:
From the same terms.

Yes, so the contract had already been formed at the time they cancelled it.

Dis86 said:
What part of 'they said it's shipped' aren't you getting?

The contract says they can cancel it if they dont have stock. They didnt have stock so they cancelled it, as per the contract terms. Regarless of what other emails they sent.

tom_e · 11 Oct 2016 at 11:02

touch said:
The contract says they can cancel it if they dont have stock. They didnt have stock so they cancelled it, as per the contract terms.

They confirmed shipment at that point the contract has been agreed according to their terms, they then broke the contract terms by cancelling the order after the despatch notification was received by the buyer.

Dis86 · 11 Oct 2016 at 11:04

touch said:
Yes, so the contract had already been formed at the time they cancelled it.

The contract says they can cancel it if they dont have stock. They didnt have stock so they cancelled it, as per the contract terms. Regarless of what other emails they sent.

I'll ask again because you really seem to be struggling here...

What part of they said it has been dispatched aren't you getting?

Please explain how you can dispatch something that isn't in stock.

touch · 11 Oct 2016 at 11:05

tom_e said:
They confirmed shipment at that point the contract has been agreed according to their terms, they then broke the contract terms by cancelling the order after the despatch notification was received by the buyer.

They didnt break the contract terms. The terms specifically state that they can cancel the contact. Sending an email doesnt void this part of the contract.

touch · 11 Oct 2016 at 11:07

Dis86 said:
I'll ask again because you really seem to be struggling here...

What part of they said it has been dispatched aren't you getting?

Please explain how you can dispatch something that isn't in stock.

I didnt answer it because it's not relevant.
It doesnt matter what emails they send because that doesnt change the contract that was agreed to.

The contract says they can cancel it, so they are not in breach of contract by cancelling it.

Dis86 · 11 Oct 2016 at 11:10

touch said:
I didnt answer it because it's not relevant.
It doesnt matter what emails they send because that doesnt change the contract that was agreed to.

The contract says they can cancel it, so they are not in breach of contract by cancelling it.

It's entirely relevant. It's an out and out lie. When businesses lie it's what's known as fraud.

In addition, those same terms you keep referring to state the contract is only formed when an email is sent indicating the goods have been dispatched. That is what they have done without dispatching the goods.

touch · 11 Oct 2016 at 11:18

Dis86 said:
It's entirely relevant.

It's irrelevant to the question of whether they have breached the contract or not - which is what the OP asked.

I doubt there's any form of fraud either. Probably just stock control errors. There's hundreds of different scenarios where physical stock levels dont match the stock levels on paper.