Online Order Cancelled Due to incorrect price

Optimist

The_Flood wrote: »

Legally, the order is not valid as the price is deemed vile.

Interestingly they are using French law to cancel the order. One has to wonder if they don't feel secure enough in the English terms on their website

mc33033

woody01 wrote: »

I am sorry but you are completely wrong.
It is exactly a 'cut and dried case' and there is no argument.
No contract has taken place therefore there is nothing the customer can do.
It's the law.

There is NO completion of contract until goods are received. It's the same as a high street shop.
Payment, regardless of any T&C's most definitely does not finalise the contract.

For the benefit of anyone else who may be considering their position here I will respond to this:

1) I am not completely wrong
2) A contract exist when you have go through a set process -in this case we have invitation to treat, offer and acceptance. Performance of the contract may or may not happen - this doesn't mean there is no contract. If it doesn't then there may be breach of contract and the pursuer may choose to sue for loss of bargain. You are failing to recognise that although some online retailers state no contract till goods ship (which is a sensible term) this is not universal and you cannot apply this in every case you see. You can apply it if it is in the T&Cs.
3) I know payment doesn't finalise a contract normally, in Scotland you don't need consideration to come into it at all. However, I've read Pixmanias T&Cs, and you can most certainly argue that their very poor wording can be taken to show that a contract DOES exist once payment is taken. Have you read the T&Cs?

I never placed an order so will gain nothing from this. I think however in this case where it appears a retailer has misled people rather than made a mistake (and I refer to the advertising of a 85% discount) that they should be held accountable and people simply saying others don't stand a chance in law should examine the situation from a legal standpoint as above. I see a link also to some solicitor on twitter looking for a case - do you really think they'd be looking if there was no chance of taking this further?