A Traders Obligation to Provide Goods As Advertised

anubeon

Greetings All,

I recently purchased a Revo iBlik RadioStation via PlayTrade for £84.50. The item I received however was a Revo iBlik DAB/DAB+, an inferior item. I contacted the seller and they advised me to return the item I had received in error and that they would dispatch the correct item upon receipt. Upon receipt of the item however the seller arranged for a full refund and removed the listed item from PlayTrade.

Given the price disparity between this sellers offering and those if other sellers (typically twice the price) I am inclined to believe that the seller accidentally listed the item incorrectly. However I did flag the price disparity with the seller prior to making purchase, only to be assured that their low prices were due to the fact that they dealt solely with clearance items and liquidated stock.

My question is this. Is the seller obliged to provide the goods as advertised? Also, where do I stand in light of the unsolicited refund and delisting of the item? Is the choice of refund or replacement at the discretion of the seller or the customer?

Regardless of my rights the trader did make assurances to me via e-mail that he would dispatch the correct item. So the trader is either incompetent or disingenuous, either way I'm not inclined to role-over on this unless I have to.

I'd appreciate any assistance rendered. I'd also appreciate references to any appropriate statutes which favour my case.

Kind Regards,

Nubey.

savemoney

Unfortunately not as I assume its a private seller sold via Play.com

You can complain though but I doubt it will get you anywhere

If it was a trader like Play and it was sold with with title saying "special offer" and money was taken etc it could be argued that you could claim for 'loss of a bargain' but you may have to go to small claims court if the shop wouldnt play ball

whatmichaelsays

I don't have any references to hand (stuck using the mobile) but from what I recall from my retail days, the seller can withdraw an item from sale and void any existing contracts (such as a pre-order) if, for whatever reason, he is unable to fulfill the order within a reasonable timeframe. Im not sure what is in the Playtrade T&Cs but most retailers have this provision in their terms of sale.

If it were me, I wouldn't be that inclined to chase the issue too far. The seller has clearly had an issue with either supply or listing and has backed out of the deal. You have your refund and if it were me, I'd just go elsewhere.

anubeon

I don't have any references to hand (stuck using the mobile) but from what I recall from my retail days, the seller can withdraw an item from sale and void any existing contracts (such as a pre-order) if, for whatever reason, he is unable to fulfill the order within a reasonable timeframe. Im not sure what is in the Playtrade T&Cs but most retailers have this provision in their terms of sale.

How is it that a company is legally permitted to void contracts in this manner? What use is any contract if the terms can be changed on a whim?

If it were me, I wouldn't be that inclined to chase the issue too far. The seller has clearly had an issue with either supply or listing and has backed out of the deal. You have your refund and if it were me, I'd just go elsewhere.

Well, going to another retailer will incur significant extra costs. Although I suppose such costs would only reflect the 'true' value of the item in question, so I can't complain really.

I have very little sympathy for this seller, even if this was an innocent mistake. I sent the seller an e-mail flagging the low price, and they assured me that the item description was indeed correct. I was also informed that it was their intention to provide the item as advertised and NOT to arrange a refund in full. So they've either knowingly misrepresented themselves or are they;re utterly incompetent. Furthermore, arranging the refund in this unsolicited manner robs me of the opportunity to provide feedback (suspicious me thinks), which given their conduct would most certainly have been negative.

Anyhow, hopefully I will be able to arrange a replacement gift in time for Christmas.

Regards,

Nubey.

olly300

anubeon wrote: »

How is it that a company is legally allowed to void contracts in the manner? What use is a contract is the terms can be changed on a whim and after 'signing'?

What exactly do you want them to do?

They can't get the goods so the only thing they can do is give you a refund of your money to put you back in the place you were before you made the transaction.

anubeon wrote: »

Well, going to another retailer will incur significant extra costs. Although I suppose such costs would only reflect the 'true' value of the item in question, so I can't complain really.

I have little sympathy for the seller, even if this was an innocent mistake. I sent the seller an e-mail flagging the low price, and they assured me that the item description was correct. I also informed that it was there intention to provide the items as advertised and NOT a refund. So they've either knowingly misrepresented themselves or are utterly incompetent. Furthermore, arranging the refund in this unsolicited manner robs me the opportunity to provide feedback (suspicion), which given there conduct would most certainly be negative.
.

There is nothing stopping you contacting their local Trading Standards and putting in a complaint about the misrepresentation of the goods they have for sale. After all you have all the email communication.

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/ (Put in the companies postcode, and then email them, copy and paste your correspondence with the company in the emails. )

whatmichaelsays

Again, I don't have the references to hand but when it transpires that a retailer, for whatever reason, cannot supply goods, there is scope for them to offer a refund "or a product of equal / similar value or specification". It's common when, for example, suppliers go bust, products become obsolete or supply chains break down. The retailer will usually inform you of this however, rather than just make a decision of his own bat as has happened here.

What you have said in your second post about your email exchange sheds some light on things and in truth, it does seem as if the seller has been a bit of a tool. Im still not aware however of any regulation that would require him to do any more than he has done but if somebody finds one, I'll hold my hands up.

Appologies if it came across as being arsey but my comments about "just forgetting about it" just come from experience. I have bought and sold on Amazon Marketplace and eBay myself and found that these people usually aren't worth chasing for anything more than a refund. For me, the time I waste chasing some of these idiots (and there are plenty of them) is worth more to me than the few quid I save.

anubeon

What exactly do you want them to do?

They can't get the goods so the only thing they can do is give you a refund of your money to put you back in the place you were before you made the transaction.

I want them to fulfill their obligations. I went out of my way to insure that the offer was genuine and have fulfilled my obligations by paying, in full and on time. Any mistakes were their own, and surely they should bare the financial consequences of this as a matter of course.

My understanding is that any retail purchase represents a contract. It would thus seem to me that the seller is obliged to provide the goods as advertised, even if at a NET loss. Again, any mistakes made were their own, and their own responsibility.

It doesn't seem ethical to me that a retailer can simply cancel their contractual obligations on a whim like this. Note that they have made NO representations to me that they are unable to provide the item in question, they have simply arranged a refund without consulting me and after having informed me that they intended to send the correct item out to me. Not exactly transparent behaviour now is it!

If I were to have purchase this item on the high street, only to be forced into a refund or replacement (with an inferior item) after the transaction had been completed, I would consider that indefensible (hell, its a mugging!). I don't see much difference here.

There is nothing stopping you contacting their local Trading Standards and putting in a complaint about the misrepresentation of the goods they have for sale. After all you have all the email communication.

Thank you for the information, I may well do just that if this whole mess isn't cleared up by new year.

Appologies if it came across as being arsey but my comments about "just forgetting about it" just come from experience

Not at all, I understand your point entirely.