Online seller refuses to send product

But if he makes a legal claim based around breach of contract, what is he going to ask for/claim that he lost without lying/telling porkies?

He will have been put back in the position he was before with the refund (and in this case, he has actually been given £25 as a gesture of goodwill). He is actually in a better position than he was in before.

As I said above, loss of bargain.

Nobody in their right mind would believe a newly released CPU was on sale for 50% off MSRP, clearly a pricing error that they were hoping to take advantage of at the retailer's expense.

Nobody who knows the market or is an expert, perhaps. Mr Average Consumer on the street?... 50% of a CPU is still a lot of cash. It wasn't up for 99p or anything.
 
Nobody in their right mind would believe a newly released CPU was on sale for 50% off MSRP, clearly a pricing error that they were hoping to take advantage of at the retailer's expense.

Depends - sometimes there are loss leader deals, etc. other times the manufacturer have supported sales for various reasons - I've genuinely bought things like graphic cards (GTX470 for example) only weeks after release at like 40% off the MSRP, etc. after nVidia supported discounts.
 
Is this still going on....???

Take the refund plus £25 and move on with life...

Spend it on some flowers for your girlfriend, mother - something for someone. Give it charity for god sake.

Life is way to short to be getting worked up about a mispriced item that you didn't get.
 
But if he makes a legal claim based around breach of contract, what is he going to ask for/claim that he lost without lying/telling porkies?

He will have been put back in the position he was before with the refund (and in this case, he has actually been given £25 as a gesture of goodwill). He is actually in a better position than he was in before.

Potentially it becomes a case of theft not breach of contract. But as before the law can be quite vague in this respect (there is a whole thing about intention) and it would have to be established first where the reasonable transfer of ownership happened, etc. while T&Cs can't override statutory rights the specific wording can still make a difference in these cases.

Ultimately it just isn't worth going legal over it though - there aren't really any winners in this situation.
 
Last edited:
Ultimately it just isn't worth going legal over it though - there aren't really any winners in this situation.

Basically this. Sure you could take them to court, who knows, you might even win, but is it worth all that time and effort and expense to save £100 on a cpu you weren't even that interested in buying in the first place?
 
I bought a couple of these once for a project - didn't even notice until a week later or so they'd missed a zero off the price:

PGOx1K5.png

I noticed Amazon pushed the price up for awhile until they'd made back the difference I guess LOL.
 
Related..


tempsnip.png
 
Take the £25

People seem to be highlighting the wrong part of this..

From their T&C's:

Wherever possible we will accept your order to buy the goods of the specification and description at the price indicated by e-mail and in which case there will be a concluded agreement between you and us.

They should be highlighting the 'Wherever possible' part...


You've said you don't need the CPU, they've offered you either a £25 credit or the product for £100 less than its current price, so, you either get £25 for nothing, and when I say nothing, that's not really true anymore, you have spent your time creating this thread, so, work out what your hourly rate is based on that, or you get a CPU you don't need for less than you should do, in which case you have still got a deal, or, you flip it and then make whatever difference you can between the cost and the sale price...
 
Well IANAL but maybe you are? Care to elaborate? :) Are you suggesting it works only in reverse (i.e. someone backs out of an agreed sale and you sell the item for less, and recoup the difference)?

As I understand it, loss of bargain applies where breach of contract prevents you from claiming future profits - e.g. if the OP had been buying this CPU because he had just landed a £20k contract to do some data analysis on his PC, and the breach of contract meant he was no longer able to do this (e.g. it was the last CPU available and now was out of stock everywhere), then in theory he would be able to sue for the £20k he'd now lost out on. It doesn't literally mean "missed out on a bargain".

Basically the OP has 3 choices:

1. Accept the £25 - since he only bought the CPU because of the low price anyway, this is probably the best option. He basically gets £25 for nothing, with no loss.
2. Accept the £100 discount offer - if he wants the CPU now, this is probably still better than any other offer available, so 2nd best option.
3. Carry on hounding the retailer. Best case scenario, they give in eventually (but probably unlikely given their responses so far). Worst case scenario, OP takes them to court and loses (most likely IMO). As I said, he might win, but for a £100 saving on a CPU he didn't really want in the first place, is that really worthwhile? His time & effort spent doing so will probably far exceed the £100 saving anyway.
 
I'm pretty sure once sent it's well past the acceptance of the sale for the price agreed and the contract is accepted but is it worth the hassle of chasing them up for some form of breech of contract, probably not.
Not the way it works, there is more to a contract than just "offer and acceptance" although thats the two that most people focus on.

The law allows for unwinding contracts for mistakes, especially obvious ones like this.

The term we are looking at here is "Intention" to for a contract there needs to also be intent, did this seller intend to sell this product at that price? No it was a mistake they never intended to make so the contract can be canceled..
 
Back
Top Bottom