Website price error where goods were delivered

nomessin

Hi

I recently found a pricing error on a website £17.99 instead of £400+, and I order two of the items. The T&C's have the standard, order acknowledgement does not infer a contract, but the order confirmation is acceptance of the offer and once they have sent an order confirmation that the Contract is concluded.

However their T&C's also state that they are under no obligation to provide the product at an incorrect price if the pricing error is obvious and unmistakeable and could have reasonably been recognised by me as a mis-pricing even if they have ALREADY sent an Order Confirmation to me.

So I have the order ackowledgement, I have the order confirmation, I have the goods, but now the site (major electronic manufacturer) is stating they want to collect the goods because of the error.

Where do I stand?

hollydays

They have already provided them,how can they ask for them back?

4743hudsonj

nomessin wrote: »

Hi

I recently found a pricing error on a website £17.99 instead of £400+, and I order two of the items. The T&C's have the standard, order acknowledgement does not infer a contract, but the order confirmation is acceptance of the offer and once they have sent an order confirmation that the Contract is concluded.

However their T&C's also state that they are under no obligation to provide the product at an incorrect price if the pricing error is obvious and unmistakeable and could have reasonably been recognised by me as a mis-pricing even if they have ALREADY sent an Order Confirmation to me.

So I have the order ackowledgement, I have the order confirmation, I have the goods, but now the site (major electronic manufacturer) is stating they want to collect the goods because of the error.

Where do I stand?

if you have the goods then they dont have a comeback for collecting them

theyre bluffing hoping you wouldnt call it

its un ethical so its up to you what you do

i would send them back personally, i dont like being screwed over so i wouldnt like screwing others over

nomessin

I realise the ethical part of the issue. To be fair if they had phoned up and stated 'look we know we cocked up, and we know you have a bargain, but you could see it was wrong and don't you think it's a little unfair' I may have been more forthcoming. But going into we want to collect the goods seemed a little heavy.

It's also a bit rich coming from a big corporate who a few years ago was notified (by an ex-colleague) of a firm distributing counterfeit products and despite chasing them they did nothing, which meant she lost a load of business.

One rule for one and one for another

sporedude

Put it like this, Would you like someone to screw over you?

fwor

The items seem to be clearly covered by the definition of "goods sent in error".

If you search for that term, you'll find quite a few articles explaining where you stand.

Essentially, you have no right to keep the items. The supplier is playing it "by the book" in trying to arrange to have them collected rather than asking you to ship them, as it is down to them to recover them at minimum inconvenience to you.

In some cases, ignoring them would be enough to make them give up, but as you have £800 worth of their gear which they are legally entitled to have back, I doubt that will work in this case.

Halloway

OP what are you asking? In my experience on here when someone in your situation asks 'where do I stand' it generally means 'can I get away with this'?

For once, in this case I think you might be legally allowed to keep the items. However you have admitted that you ordered the items in the full knowledge that the price was an error and that could give the seller grounds to take legal action to recover the items.

However, then your last post indicates that you feel offended in some way (I don't understand why you would be offended that the company wants to pick up the items) and then you indicate that you want to exact some kind of vengeance for previous actions by the company. What is one to think?

molerat

If the goods delivered were the ones offered / ordered they belong to the buyer.

Seller offered goods at a price (invitation to treat)
Buyer made an offer at sellers advertised price
Seller accepted offer and took consideration
Seller delivered goods

How about taking the difference out of the web managers salary. Maybe that would focus his attention on making the site work properly.

tbw

fwor wrote: »

The items seem to be clearly covered by the definition of "goods sent in error".

If you search for that term, you'll find quite a few articles explaining where you stand.

Essentially, you have no right to keep the items. The supplier is playing it "by the book" in trying to arrange to have them collected rather than asking you to ship them, as it is down to them to recover them at minimum inconvenience to you.

In some cases, ignoring them would be enough to make them give up, but as you have £800 worth of their gear which they are legally entitled to have back, I doubt that will work in this case.

Leaving aside any moral issues and whether the OP was well aware of the error when he ordered the stuff ,can you explain why he has no right to the items please ?(I'm not trying to be argumentative - I just get confused when these discussions come up).

So far as I can see, the company offered the goods at the low price, the OP offered to buy them at that price, the company accepted the offer, took his money and then delivered the goods. There doesn't seem to be anything illegal in the OP keeping the items. Are you saying that he has no right to keep them because he KNEW it was an error when he ordered them?
So far as I can see

Alias_Omega

What did you buy, and where from.?

I would keep the items, you bought the items at the stated price.

You were not buying this from a person on eBay, but a company where they can swallow this up, and maybe learn from it.

When you purchased the item, you paid the price on offer and the goods were delivered. Tough luck i say...

ABH_3

Funnily enough I tried to get an answer on this very topic earlier in the week. It unfortunately didn't turn out well, I'm still not sure those I asked understood the concepts or not

Where you're obviously going wrong here is that you're not being EQUITABLE enough, yes that's right. YOU are being too unfair to the POOR business. You need to get on your knees and PREY, NOW! For guidance. Then consider what that poor business and or owner is going through, sod the fact he made what is so obviously a mistake, infact we'll look over the fact that he had two, yes that's TWO chances to sort his stock\ordering\delivery systems out, but yet for whatever reason he did NOT do so and so TWO inequitable obvious mistakes happened.

But seriously, my own belief is that like yourself you paid I imagine for two of the objects, two were delivered and as such you now have them in their possession. Some people would have us believe that a 'contract' is more than it is: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/contract-of-sale.html 2 people \ meeting of two minds etc engage in the process of 'business' and form a contract one offers, the other accepts the two minds meet, both agree on worth\value and duly exchange. Surely if there was anything 'inequitable' with the transaction, then the other party would have said something earlier, what's more if they had any concerns that such may arise then surely they should NOT rely upon automated order\delivery systems. It's not the purchasers position to satisfy the vendors demands AFTER the contract, surely that part is taken care of BEFORE. The question of equity would come in IF the vendor didn't think you were playing fair, or IF there were any unfair conditions, as far as I can see the OP didn't make any they just made a purchase!

Nobody said you had to be 'fair' I'm sure the business in this instance could argue that they have been, but their mistake if the feel they've made one is the automation. Either way, it's not for the OP to point that out, and if they did they would surely just be ignored anyway.

IF the OP wants to get into a discussion with the business they could point out that what they undertook was a 'sale' under the sales of goods act, he's quite happy with it. It proceeded well and the company performed admirably in all circumstances. You could even point out that the sale is done, you're happy and No you don't need any further warranties etc you're quite happy with your rights under the sales of goods act.

My own experience in all of this was not dissimilar to your experience OP. However, I engaged in discussion with my vendor and pointed out the following: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/loss-of-bargain-rule.html and what I found was a BARGAIN and I was very happy with it.

Furthermore if they should wish to pursue this claim then I would be only too happy to defend it. Afterall, WE have a sales contract, and I'm certain that should that contract have turned out differently, then they wouldn't have been complaining, I also felt that their complaint had no legal standing as they 'offered to treat, I accepted, they accepted, then they delivered' this seems to be the very basis of our legal system, the fact one 'offers to treat', the other 'accepts and a contract is formed', I also pointed out that should they have thought anything was remiss they they ought to examine the systems they have in-place, afterall it's not for me to come and program their computers to behave in a particular way, surely they pay for someone for that?

You could also look here: http://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=41347

In my own case, I got a phone call a few weeks later the lady I spoke too advised me she was a 'lawyer' for the company and that 'as a gesture of goodwill' they would forget about it. She also said that they would refuse to put anything in writing, I said it didn't matter I recorded my phone calls anyway You too could take the same precaution, but using one of these things if you wanted too: http://www.truecall.co.uk/ I used an old tape recorder as it didn't exist.

Now not being a lawyer, I thought I would clarify a few points with Bookworm earlier in the week, but now I've taken the time to reply here she may see it and come and correct my understanding of the law and hopefully assist you in understanding where you stand.

If however this doesn't happen, you could try posting to: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/ which it seems is where she hangs out more often than not. She seems legally qualified and dare I say it, not as sarcastic\sanctimonious as some... there I said it, I'll put my fireproof undies on and be on my way. Oh yes and the 'equity' references were for Bookworm's or whatever the other woman's name was should she feel the need to jump in.

Hopefully this will help with your situation in some way nomessin.