Olympus E-1 Digital SLR - £98.70 (Apple Education Store) [CLOSED]

The_Negotiator

Not a problem is it, if what you say is right?

Advertising an item for sale is surely illegal if that item wasn't available, I would hedge my bets that zero SLRs were for sale in this case.

Again, why is B&Q different to this?!

StudentOfLaw

Well, i'm really shocked, I tried to offer you all some honest advice, which you'd rather disregard for your own 'cloud cukoo land' misgivings. Sorry to anyone who doesn't like my comments, i'm only trying to save you time and possibly money.

ps. I found this site by typing Olympus E1 Apple into google!

Tojo_Ralph

The_Negotiator wrote:

Advertising an item for sale is surely illegal if that item wasn't available?

Maybe a discussion on whether or not this is the case is called for?

kinster_2

StudentOfLaw wrote:

Well, i'm really shocked, I tried to offer you all some honest advice, which you'd rather disregard for your own 'cloud cukoo land' misgivings. Sorry to anyone who doesn't like my comments, i'm only trying to save you time and possibly money.

ps. I found this site by typing Olympus E1 Apple into google!

Ignore them mate, they think they're 'entited' to the camera.

The_Negotiator

I bought and paid for a camera, I would have thought I would be given normal consumer laws in the UK, once paid for I would assume it was mine?

POET_3

Comfortably_Numb wrote:

Thats it, stick your head in the sand when someone disagrees, and come up with a conspiracy theory.

Do you really think Apple would bother trying to infiltrate this forum to try and put off 3 or 4 people?

You know the answer if you are convinced you have a case, take them to court.

When this site has been posting links to the media to complain about the situation and (succesfully), have the story covered by several news sites, getting watchdogand trading standards involved, as well as contacting every newspaper i could find (which i have stated in my previous posts).


..Yes, i am %100 certain that apple will attempt to infiltrate the forums causing this mess for them.

Tojo_Ralph

StudentOfLaw wrote:

Well, i'm really shocked, I tried to offer you all some honest advice.....

Yee Olde villagers smell blood, so I think it will be a while before yee Olde villagers dowse their torches and return their pitchforks to the barn.

kinster_2

why don't you guys email the Olympus in Germany(?) to see if you get the same response?

POET_3

Originally Posted by Comfortably Numb
Thats it, stick your head in the sand when someone disagrees, and come up with a conspiracy theory.

Do you really think Apple would bother trying to infiltrate this forum to try and put off 3 or 4 people?




91664 views of this thread alone, add to that the dvd forums and the Irish forum.

i think we can safely say its more than 3 or 4 people...
So to answer your question, they would be mad not to.

Thirdfox

StudentOfLaw wrote:

...they only have a limited number off in the hope that it will give them more business on other products. i.e. if i owned one camera I could dedicate a whole page of a newspaper to advertise the great deal for the camera, knowing I only had one, but when 1000 people turn up I sell that one camera and hope that some of the other people buy other full proced goods. Its savvy business.

Any web technician would tell you that the first thing a computer should do before taking an online order is check whether the item is in stock or not.

StudentOfLaw wrote:

The contract in this case has nothing to do with changing of money, but is in fact made up of the Acknowledgement and the Terms and Conditions, of which Apple can revoke the deal on 2.6. All contracts have release clauses, and I think APple have been extremely clever with thiers.

In Ireland (at least) an exemptionary clause is negated by a misrepresentation (which I don't think even Apple would deny).

Thus clause 2.6 may be struck down in court.