Trader wants to charge me more
Options
magicsnaps
Posts: 14 Forumite
in Credit cards
After two days negotiation, a trader completed a four figure credit card transaction over the phone with me. Twenty minutes later he called asking for another £500, because the item was not shown on the website at the correct price. I refused but he refused to dispatch the item and said he would cancel the credit card transaction, unless I agreed. What is my legal position?
0
Comments
-
The transaction will be cancelled and you'll get the money back0
-
Most T&C's state errors and omissions excepted e.g if you see a car on a forecourt and all the numbers have fallen off the windscreen except the 5 you wouldn't be allowed to drive it away for £5 as opposed to £4995.0
-
Your entitled to a full refund of the orginal money or pay the extra for the item0
-
If you had paid £500 more in error would you expect him to give you a refund?
Works both ways - as long as either the transaction is cancelled or if already processed then refunded in full.0 -
Hold your horses!
A deal's a deal. The question is, what was the deal....In the simple case of two people negotiating over the phone, then once the deal is done, that's it. Both sides are bound. If one side makes a mistake about price, then tough.
In this case, it seems there was a website. The trader may well have T+Cs that allows them to back out if a price is wrong. But really it's up to the trader to show that those website T+Cs are incorporated into the deal that was struck on the phone. In the case where an order is processed on the website, a box is ticked (indicating acceptance of T+Cs) and a callback arranged to process the CC, then website T+Cs apply. But if somebody sees an item on a website and agrees a price on the phone, then I can't see how the trader can rely on T+Cs on the website.
More detail needed about the exact sequence of events. And of course we don't know what the website T+Cs (if any) say anyway.
Of course, there is the practical issue as to what could be done in the event the legal position is that the seller is bound, but still refuses to go ahead.0 -
magicsnaps wrote: »After two days negotiation, a trader completed a four figure credit card transaction over the phone with me. Twenty minutes later he called asking for another £500, because the item was not shown on the website at the correct price. I refused but he refused to dispatch the item and said he would cancel the credit card transaction, unless I agreed. What is my legal position?
A little eyebrow raising because the retailer took payment before the item was ready to dispatch. Personally I would say that since the retailer took payment then you have bought the item and the retailer should supply the item. However since your recourse in the event that the item is not supplied is a full refund there is not a lot left to do.
I have come across this before though and I view it as a sneaky way to increase profit: i.e. an item is displayed on a website at an unbelievably low price which is then stated either to be out of stock and an alternative at a higher price offered or it is stated that the price is wrong and is actually a higher price but it's in stock if you want to buy it at the higher price. Don't use that retailer again!0 -
However since your recourse in the event that the item is not supplied is a full refund there is not a lot left to do.
There are legal remedies:
1) Buy elsewhere and sue the retailer for the difference in price between the price agreed and the price paid elsewhere.
2) Sue for "specific performance". Essentially the court orders the supplier to supply at the agreed price. (This remedy isn't usually available if 1 above is available. It's most suited to unique items which can't be obtained elsewhere.)
Neither of which is without cost, which the OP may or may not be able to recover.0 -
chattychappy wrote: »There are legal remedies:
1) Buy elsewhere and sue the retailer for the difference in price between the price agreed and the price paid elsewhere.
2) Sue for "specific performance". Essentially the court orders the supplier to supply at the agreed price. (This remedy isn't usually available if 1 above is available. It's most suited to unique items which can't be obtained elsewhere.)
Neither of which is without cost, which the OP may or may not be able to recover.
You cannot highlight these things without knowing the name of the retailer and then checking on their T&Cs. i.e. typically there is a clause which says that the retailer accepts the contract to supply the goods when the goods are dispatched to the buyer. However also typically the retailer takes payment when the goods are dispatched and that's the reason why I stated in my previous post that taking payment without dispatching the goods is an "eyebrow raiser".0 -
You cannot highlight these things without knowing the name of the retailer and then checking on their T&Cs.
Yep, hence my earlier post.chattychappy wrote: »The trader may well have T+Cs that allows them to back out if a price is wrong. But really it's up to the trader to show that those website T+Cs are incorporated into the deal that was struck on the phone.
...
More detail needed about the exact sequence of events. And of course we don't know what the website T+Cs (if any) say anyway.
It's a pity the OP hasn't been back to enlighten us!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards