Are they allowed to do this?

[JonJ678]

As their systems are automated, that does not constitute acceptence on their end of a contract.

Interesting. Does this same argument not then absolve them of liability for almost anything? After all, their system is acting to represent them during this part of the sale. I would have hoped they were bound by their poor coding/warehouse management as much as by an employees direct mistake.

 

[Nitefly]

As their systems are automated, that does not constitute acceptence on their end of a contract. Think of it as your buying a magazine, the que is very long, you can throw the exact amount of money at the cashier and walk out, this is theft even though you have paid the amount of money if you waited in the queue. Their T&C's will say what their acceptence is, there is no law saying taht their automatic payment systems constitute acceptence.

Agreed. E-commerce law is tricky as it is difficult to establish when the offer, made by the purchaser, has been accepted by the retailer. If the process is automated, it is difficult to argue that there has been a 'meeting of the minds' between the two parties.

I would say they are entitled to do this, although I am not a solicitor (yet) and I haven't really studied e-commerce in any depth.

 

[Mark A]

The number of responses above which include the phrases "Surely ..?", "I'm almost certain ...", "probably ..." indicate, as always when this type of question which no one knows the definitive answer to, that the OP should speak to someone who can actually guide him rather than give their unqualified opinion.

Speak to the CAB or a solicitor. You know, someone who acutally knows the answer. All of the above is just opinion and therefore next to useless.

The problem with this is that by the time you have arranged a meeting at the CAB/ solicitors, attended said meeting etc, is it really worth all that for the sake of £40? I'd rather pay the extra and save all that hassle.

 

[Volcs]

I'm not making this up; I'm an online retail consultant - unless they're a complete two bit operation the T&Cs will cover them, and there is nothing in law that they are breaching.

Standard T&Cs from a site I already had open:

If, by mistake, we have under priced an item, we will not be liable to supply that item to you at the stated price, provided that we notify you before we despatch the item to you. In those circumstances, we will notify the correct price to you so you can decide whether or not you wish to order the item at that price. If you decide not to order the item, we will give you a full refund on any amount already paid for that item in accordance with our refund policy in section 7 below.

If for any other reason beyond our reasonable control we are unable to supply a particular item, we will not be liable to you except to ensure that you are not charged for that item.

Your order is an offer to buy from us. Nothing that we do or say will amount to any acceptance of that offer until we actually despatch an item to you, at which point a contract will be made between us. At any point up until then we may decline to supply an item to you. If we decline to supply an item to you and you have already paid for it, we will give you a full refund of any amount already paid for that item in accordance with our refund policy in section 7 below.

 

[JonJ678]

Ah. That puts the customer in a pretty ****** position. No contract until actually dispatched means they can mess you around as much as they please and there's nothing you can do about it.

 

[Nitefly]

Ah. That puts the customer in a pretty ****** position. No contract until actually dispatched means they can mess you around as much as they please and there's nothing you can do about it.

It's hardly messing the OP around if there has been a mistake and they are offering to rectify it.

 

[-BA-]

It's hardly messing the OP around if there has been a mistake and they are offering to rectify it.

You make it sound like they are doing him a favour. They aren't..... They have obligations under the DSRs which includes OP having the right to cancel the order right up to delivery stage if he or she so wishes.

 

[Nitefly]

You make it sound like they are doing him a favour. They aren't..... They have obligations under the DSRs which includes OP having the right to cancel the order right up to delivery stage if he or she so wishes.

They are offering to cancel the order.

 

[Stuff]

I'm not making this up; I'm an online retail consultant - unless they're a complete two bit operation the T&Cs will cover them, and there is nothing in law that they are breaching.

Standard T&Cs from a site I already had open:

I'd be surprised, as I am now, if the company put those rules into operation unless it was a huge price error. The site I purchased from does have similar T&C's, which sucks, but I'm hopefully gunna appeal to their better nature that it would be very bad customer service to enforce it on this occasion. I will never shop there again, but they don't know this.

Also, I've been on a few other big companies' websites and seen they all have this or similar in their T&C... But as I said, hopefully only used where huge errors are made, as I've never had any problems with any of them!

Ah. That puts the customer in a pretty ****** position. No contract until actually dispatched means they can mess you around as much as they please and there's nothing you can do about it.

Pretty much :/

It's hardly messing the OP around if there has been a mistake and they are offering to rectify it.

The 3 solutions they offer don't help me get what I want at all. I know that sounds a bit selfish, but I'm the customer... It is their duty to do what customer's want, or they won't have a business for long.

 

[Johnny Girth]

Law overules T&C's everytime, you just need to ascertain whether what they have done is legal or not.

T&Cs are the law...it's the law of contract, one of the oldest and most sacred!

Anyway, if the T&Cs state that no contract is formed until the goods are delivered (as they almost certainly will do) then that's what you've agreed.

It's possible that there is some consumer protection legislation that overrides this but not that I'm aware of.

 

[JonJ678]

Offering to cancel the order, when their argument for not accepting it is based on no contract having been formed, is hardly generous.

 

[~J~]

I'm not even gonna attempt to hint at the competitor, but I got an almost identical worded email from a competitor a few weeks ago.

While I was ummming and ahhhing as to what to do, I got another email a few days later saying that they had received more stock and would be honouring the original transaction.

Dunno how desperate you are, but, you may have the same good news as I did.

 

[Volcs]

Fair play mate, a lot of companies will try and please the customer to avoid bad publicity etc so it's definitely worth a shot - as for the original question though, they most certainly can do this .

 

[Nitefly]

The 3 solutions they offer don't help me get what I want at all. I know that sounds a bit selfish, but I'm the customer... It is their duty to do what customer's want, or they won't have a business for long.

If you want to get the order at the price you want, I would try asking politely whilst informing them that you will otherwise regretfully cancel the order. I don't believe they have the obligations that you are hoping for, sorry.

 

[Stuff]

I'm not even gonna attempt to hint at the competitor, but I got an almost identical worded email from a competitor a few weeks ago.

While I was ummming and ahhhing as to what to do, I got another email a few days later saying that they had received more stock and would be honouring the original transaction.

Dunno how desperate you are, but, you may have the same good news as I did.

That would be excellent, but I'm not holding my breath I'll just give 'em a call tomorrow and see what I can do.

Fair play mate, a lot of companies will try and please the customer to avoid bad publicity etc so it's definitely worth a shot - as for the original question though, they most certainly can do this .

Thanks for all the advice Volcs, I'll contact them tomorrow and I'll post the outcome soon after

 

[Rroff]

A contract IS formed at the exchange of money... they are contractually obligated to provide you with the product as advertised that you agreed on OR a complete and full refund.

At work when we can't deliver on the contract we have made with the customer and have to refund them their money it is marked against our performance (which affects bonuses, etc.).

 

[Volcs]

A contract IS formed at the exchange of money... they are contractually obligated to provide you with the product as advertised that you agreed on OR a complete and full refund.

At work when we can't deliver on the contract we have made with the customer and have to refund them their money it is marked against our performance (which affects bonuses, etc.).

I give up!

 

[[FnG]magnolia]

A contract IS formed at the exchange of money... they are contractually obligated to provide you with the product as advertised that you agreed on OR a complete and full refund.

At work when we can't deliver on the contract we have made with the customer and have to refund them their money it is marked against our performance (which affects bonuses, etc.).

Have you read the thread?

 

[philjohn]

I'm not making this up; I'm an online retail consultant - unless they're a complete two bit operation the T&Cs will cover them, and there is nothing in law that they are breaching.

Standard T&Cs from a site I already had open:

The problem with T&C's like that is they are, IMHO, overly one sided, when do they start treading into "unfair terms in consumer contracts" waters? To be fair though, we have some of the strongest consumer protection legislation in the world, so it's not all bad.

 

[DavidMarq]

The way I see this is if we assume a contract was formed then the supplier is in breach of contract by reusing to supply. The OP is thus entitled to recover his losses due to the breach of contact. These losses are the amount paid for the goods, an amount that the supplier has already offered to refund.

IANAL