Legal advice needed

4fxtwin

zenseeker wrote: »

This topic has been well covered many many times...the company retains the right to cancel the sale at any time prior to dispatch, it's the same with all online purchases.

Can you please point me to the statute which explains this?

Thank you.

zenseeker

Oh for the love of God move on!!! The people on this forum know what they are talking about, this subject comes up on an almost daily basis.

If you tell us which company it is, we can point you to the part that covers them, but it is usually something along the lines of retaining the right to cancel the transaction without giving a reason. Even if they have billed your card they can still cancel and refund you. The only way that you are getting a bargain is if they dispatch the item, but until that time the ball in in their court, accept this and stop wasting your time.

spaceman5

4fxtwin wrote: »

Can you please point me to the statute which explains this?

Thank you.

It has been covered, i think it is called something like distance selling law, have you read all of the terms and conditions, here is an extract from amazons terms and conditions which covers this:-

14. Our contract
When you place an order to purchase a product from Amazon.co.uk, we will send you an e-mail confirming receipt of your order and containing the details of your order. Your order represents an offer to us to purchase a product which is accepted by us when we send e-mail confirmation to you that we've dispatched that product to you (the "Dispatch Confirmation E-mail"). That acceptance will be complete at the time we send the Dispatch Confirmation E-mail to you. Any products on the same order which we have not confirmed in a Dispatch Confirmation E-mail to have been dispatched do not form part of that contract.


i bet if you look at the T & C`s of this company somewhere you will find the same wording or very similar, this is what entitals them not to sell you the product at the price you purchase it, Dave

zenseeker

Further to the Amazon example:

[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica][SIZE=-1]Despite our best efforts, a small number of the more than 1.5 million items in our catalogue are mispriced. Rest assured, however, that we verify prices as part of our dispatch procedures. [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica][SIZE=-1]If an item's correct price is lower than our stated price, we charge the lower amount and send you the item. [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica][SIZE=-1]If a product's correct price is higher than our stated price, we will cancel your order and notify you of that cancellation.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica][SIZE=-1]Please note that this policy applies only to products sold and shipped by Amazon.co.uk.[/SIZE][/FONT]

4fxtwin

zenseeker wrote: »

If you tell us which company it is, we can point you to the part that covers them

http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/topics/topic.aspx/emea/topics/footer/terms?c=uk&cs=ukdhs1&l=en&s=dhs&~lt=popup

OK here are the T&Cs covering the purchase. As I stated previously I received an order confirmation with the price and an estimated delivery date of 27/01/09.

Norton_Blade

4fxtwin wrote: »

Can you please point me to the statute which explains this?

Thank you.

Many of these precedents were established in common law, not case law, so it's cases you want to be looking at.

While my law is rusty and as much as I hate wikipedia for proving a point, the case of Hartog v. Shields [1939] 3 All ER 566 sums things up quite nicely.

Hartog v Colin & Shields [1939] 3 All ER 566 is an important English contract law case regarding unilateral mistake. It holds that when it is obvious that someone has made a mistake in the terms of an offer, one may not simply "snap up" the offer and be able to enforce the agreement.

Modern relevance

his case has become a highly relevant precedent in the modern context of e-shopping on the Internet, when online retailers sometimes get the published price wrong and receive hundreds of online orders (automatically accepted) before they discover their error - e.g. advertising a £299 television on the website for £2.99. Retailers can avoid having to supply at the mistakenly low price if the court finds that the would-be purchasers must have known that the advertised price was clearly a mistake.

spaceman5

4fxtwin wrote: »

http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/topics/topic.aspx/emea/topics/footer/terms?c=uk&cs=ukdhs1&l=en&s=dhs&~lt=popup

OK here are the T&Cs covering the purchase. As I stated previously I received an order confirmation with the price and an estimated delivery date of 27/01/09.

the order confirmation will have been sent automatically as soon as you made the order, everybody does that, but the only way you will recieve the goods for the price you have clicked at to buy, is if you get a despatch confirmation email, Dave

4fxtwin

spaceman5 wrote: »

the order confirmation will have been sent automatically as soon as you made the order, everybody does that, but the only way you will recieve the goods for the price you have clicked at to buy, is if you get a despatch confirmation email, Dave

I received two emails; an order acknowledgement almost immediately followed by an order confirmation about an hour later. Presumably the second was sent following a credit check. It is this order confirmation which Dell cites as its acceptance of the offer and formation of a binding agreement to deliver at the quoted price.

spaceman5

i must say, i am quite surprised that there certainly does not seem to be any wording in ther terms and conditions, like the amazon one above, no where does it state that they can cancel the order if is a mis price, also it does say that once you have recieved order confirmation from dell, that the contract is binding, so you may have a small chance, Dave

4fxtwin

Norton_Blade wrote: »

Many of these precedents were established in common law, not case law, so it's cases you want to be looking at.

While my law is rusty and as much as I hate wikipedia for proving a point, the case of Hartog v. Shields [1939] 3 All ER 566 sums things up quite nicely.

Thanks, I'll look into that.