MONEY MORAL DILEMMA: Should Arkwright give Granville his money back?

JohnnyBoy

Legally, Arkwright is required to give him back the money. To withhold the money once he knows of the overcharge constitutes the mens rea required for theft.
But seeing as it's GGGGGranville, he'll probably just cuff him round the ear...

BigMikeyG

end of the day you were overcharged and so should get the money back but I'm sure in regards to the problem last week many people would be a bit hypocrictical and keep the money, so really they deserve to lose this time - (probably me included).

biff77

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding of the law is that by overcharging Arkwright has committed a criminal offence (Fraud I think).

If an article is displayed at £399 but when you get to the till the shop informs you it is £499, and you agree to pay £499 then no problem.

Just because it is displayed at £399 doesn't mean the shopkeeper has to sell it you for that price. He can explain that it is a mistake and refuse to sell it to you at that price.

However if it is not pointed out at the till that the price is different, and you are then overcharged then a crime has been committed.

andyL12

The problem I think is that when you are asked to enter your pin number on the machine, it displays the price. so in effect, if you enter your pin number and dont notice the price, then it is your own fault. The same applies to anything, you dont sign an agreement without reading it first! This is the same you agree to the price by entering your pin number. I'm sure if it was the opposite way, the laptop was priced in store at £499 and sold for £399 he would be the angel and tell the assistant that it was too low NOT!!!! So its really his own fault. You dont read then dont complain.

iviv

biff77 wrote: »

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding of the law is that by overcharging Arkwright has committed a criminal offence (Fraud I think).

If an article is displayed at £399 but when you get to the till the shop informs you it is £499, and you agree to pay £499 then no problem.

Just because it is displayed at £399 doesn't mean the shopkeeper has to sell it you for that price. He can explain that it is a mistake and refuse to sell it to you at that price.

However if it is not pointed out at the till that the price is different, and you are then overcharged then a crime has been committed.

IANAL But I'm fairly sure that intent has to be involved somewhere. You have to have intended to take the extra money. If the price was entered in at £499 be accident, the till operator didn't know it wasn't supposed to be that much, and the customer put his PIN in.

There is no crime.

stationaryace

seeing as i said last week he should fess up and pay the full amount *or try to haggle a discount/extras* then i'll stick to this line of thought and say he should get his refund for overpayment. easy :rotfl:

Cloudane

Haha oh that is a great idea, putting the boot on the other foot.

I would say it's the shop's responsibility to get the price right, as that's indirectly what they're being paid to do. So if it's wrong then they should bear the brunt whether they sold it too high or too low.

It's not really black and white though, for example with last week's dilemma where you'd be more likely to be honest if the shop keeper was a single person trying to put food on the table, as opposed to some big multi-million-pound chain with huge profit margins.

iwant2keepmycash

I think the shop is entitled to keep the money. The contract was made at the POS terminal.

A price was agreed, even if by mistake, and the goods changed hands for consideration.

I also think it would be good commercial practice to give Granville his hundred pounds back (as a re-credit to the card with which he paid)

debbsie

iwant2keepmycash wrote: »

I think the shop is entitled to keep the money. The contract was made at the POS terminal.

A price was agreed, even if by mistake, and the goods changed hands for consideration.

I also think it would be good commercial practice to give Granville his hundred pounds back (as a re-credit to the card with which he paid)

You've just said the shop should keep the money, then said they should give it back.

Make your mind up!


If this happened to me, and the shop was holding on to my money, they would be reported to the Trading Standards . . but it would serve me right buying a computer from a shop called 'Arkwrights', wouldn't it???

iwant2keepmycash

No.

I said that they are entitled to keep the money. Not that they should.

And that remains my opinion until somebody who is better qualified to comment persuades me otherwise.