Asda Overcharge and £2 Giftcard Problem....

geordie_joe

taxiphil wrote: »

Oh dear, here we go again.

It's an offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, which have replaced the same offence in the Consumer Protection Act 1987.



Wrong again.

Have a read of the law - here.

(clue - Regulation 5(4)(g))

Oh dear, here we go again, another idiot who reads one line and thinks he knows it all.

These regulations do not say it is an offence to misprice something.

If you actually bothered to read it you would see that the offence is giving information that

"causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise, taking account of its factual context and of all its features and circumstances."

Regulation 5(4)(g)) only lists "the price or the manner in which the price is calculated; " as one of the ways the above could be met.

What it means is, the average customer would ONLY have bought the item at the misprice and WOULD NOT have bought it if the true price had been displayed.

To use this thread as an example, to be an offence under these regulations, the average consumer, who wanted to buy cottage cheese and went into the store to buy cottage cheese, would not have bought it if the true price was shown.

And just to make it clear, the offence is misleading the consumer into taking a "transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise, taking account of its factual context and of all its features and circumstances."

If this case ever went to court the consumer would have to say "I did not go into the store to buy cottage cheese, I did not want to buy cottage cheese when I entered the store. I only bought the cottage cheese because I thought it was 8p cheaper than it really was"

And the store would say "They came into the store, when to the section containing cottage cheese and picked up a pack of cottage cheese. They clearly wanted to buy cottage cheese and the misprice did not cause him to "to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise, taking account of its factual context and of all its features and circumstances."

(clue - Regulation 5 READ THE ENTIRE REGULATION)

geordie_joe

MyUserNamesTaken wrote: »

The Consumer Protection Act 1987 makes it an offence for a trader to give a consumer misleading price indications. In the first instance speak to the trader about the differing prices, if you are not satisfied with the response, contact your local authority trading standards department who enforce the Act and who could bring a prosecution against the trader.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dti.gov.uk/ccp/topics1/facts/misleading.htm#faqs

What is it with you people, can you not read things for yourself.

The above act did make it an offence to give misleading price indications, BUT ONLY IF "he fails to take all such steps as are reasonable to prevent those
consumers from relying on the indication."

In the case of a supermarket you haven't bought it until you have paid for it at the till. At the till the price you are going to be charged will be displayed, you will be told the total price you have to pay and you have the right to refuse to pay/buy the item.

The supermarket has made a mistake on the price of the product on the shelf, but at the till they have taken reasonable steps to prevent you from relying on the price on the shelf, by telling you the price you are about to be charged.

In plain english, they have not committed an offence, no matter what some web site might say.

geordie_joe

MyUserNamesTaken wrote: »

Ohhh..they've updated. Shows how long it's been since I've really argued a misprice!

They haven't updated anything, all we have is people who have read one or two lines and think they understand the regulations.

patsmith

i also think the management in ASDA are rude.Last year I fell in the store and cracked my ribs(no-ones fault) and the manager filled in accident form and gave me a cup of coffee.That was it no follow up call to see how I was or anything.I contacted ho who were very sympathetic but it took them 6 weeks to get the manager to ring me and he was very put out by it. I didn't even get a bunch of flowers!!!!!!!

taxiphil

geordie_joe wrote: »

Oh dear, here we go again, another idiot who reads one line and thinks he knows it all.

These regulations do not say it is an offence to misprice something.

If you actually bothered to read it

I've read the CPUTRs many times from start to finish, and written about them extensively, thanks.

You, on the other hand, weren't aware of their existence a mere 2 hours ago and were claiming that "Mispricing is not an offence under any laws" and "To be prosecuted for this, trading standards would need proof the mispricing was done deliberately" - statements which I hope you can now accept are wholly wrong.

The CPUTRs do use vague and abstract terminology from European law which is unfamiliar to British courts - such as the passage you highlight - "causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise" and it is true to say that this requires a lot of subjectivity on the part of the court, and has yet to be interpreted by a higher court.

So, to an extent, you have a point there.

But perhaps you'd have the humility to admit you were embarrassingly wide of the mark earlier in this thread, instead of calling me an "idiot"?

geordie_joe

patsmith wrote: »

i also think the management in ASDA are rude.Last year I fell in the store and cracked my ribs(no-ones fault) and the manager filled in accident form and gave me a cup of coffee.That was it no follow up call to see how I was or anything.I contacted ho who were very sympathetic but it took them 6 weeks to get the manager to ring me and he was very put out by it. I didn't even get a bunch of flowers!!!!!!!

I don't mean to be rude, and don't particularly want to defend asda as I have never been in an asda store, although I have shopped with them online twice.

But.... you have said it was no-ones fault, so why should they give you anything?

Looking at it from their point of view, and "compensation" they give you could be construed as an admission of guilt if you decided to sue them.

taxiphil

geordie_joe wrote: »

In plain english, they have not committed an offence, no matter what some web site might say.

"Some web site"?? Err, that's the Department of Trade and Industry Website.

So how do you explain the following...

http://menmedia.co.uk/news/s/1016750_asda_fined_3500_

(dozens of similar stories out there, it was the first one Google threw up)

alwaysonthego_2

MOVING THREADS FOR BETTER RESPONSES


Hi, Martin’s asked me to post this in these circumstances: I’ve asked Board Guides to move threads if they’ll receive a better response elsewhere(please see this rule) so this post/thread has been moved to another board, where it should get more replies. If you have any questions about this policy please email [EMAIL="abuse@moneysavingexpert.com"]abuse@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].

geordie_joe

taxiphil wrote: »

I've read the CPUTRs many times from start to finish, and written about them extensively, thanks.

But you don't appear to actually understand them!

taxiphil wrote: »

You, on the other hand, weren't aware of their existence a mere 2 hours ago and were claiming that "Mispricing is not an offence under any laws" and "To be prosecuted for this, trading standards would need proof the mispricing was done deliberately" - statements which I hope you can now accept are wholly wrong.

Completely wrong.

Mispricing is not an offence under any laws, mispricing in order to make a consumer make a purchase they would not otherwise have done is an offence.

It's a bit like knocking someone over in your car. Knocking someone over is not an offence, knocking someone over because you were not looking where you were going is an offence. Knocking someone over because they run out in front of you and you had no chance to stop would not be an offence.

"To be prosecuted for this, trading standards would need proof the mispricing was done deliberately" is also true. It is not an offence if you misprice something on the shelf, but at the point of sale give the right price. For it to be an offence the shop would have to deliberately not tell you how much you are going to pay at the point you are going to pay.

How many supermarkets do you know that don't tell you how much you owe them after they have rang up the items you have bought? To do that they would have to ring your items through and say something like "Right, give me a twenty pound note and I'll give you some change" instead of "That will be £16.78 please".

taxiphil wrote: »

The CPUTRs do use vague and abstract terminology from European law which is unfamiliar to British courts - such as the passage you highlight - "causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise" and it is true to say that this requires a lot of subjectivity on the part of the court, and has yet to be interpreted by a higher court.

Are you kidding, that is plain English! It means "You have decided to buy the items based purely on the price displayed" It can't be clearer than that, and it can't be unfamiliar to British courts.

taxiphil wrote: »

So, to an extent, you have a point there.

So what you are saying is I, who didn't know the existence of the CPUTRs two hours ago, understand them more than you who has "read the CPUTRs many times from start to finish, and written about them extensively, thanks."

taxiphil wrote: »

But perhaps you'd have the humility to admit you were embarrassingly wide of the mark earlier in this thread, instead of calling me an "idiot"?

I wasn't embarrassingly wide of the mark, I was guilty of writing things in simple terms so most people could understand them. In my defence I can only say that I did not know there was an armchair lawyer, who has "read the read the CPUTRs many times from start to finish, and written about them extensively, thanks" but does not understand them,reading the thread.

So no, I won't admit to being "embarrassingly wide of the mark", but I will take the opportunity to call you and idiot again.

In future please do not go telling people what the law is until you actually know what it is, and also remember that it is not your job to interpret the law, that is the job of a judge.

BillTrac

sinw wrote: »

Hi Folks,

Just to let u know the Asda £2 giftcard for overcharging is still in operation.

I just been to Asda was overcharged by 8p on Cottage Cheese, I went to c/s who informed me it was at there discretion and I was not getting it for 8p.

A manager was called, who was a manager from George, he advised me it finished a year ago, I politely took his name and h/o number; as i was walking away he asked me in a very obnoxious manner if I had got my 8p back.

NE how I phoned h/o who advised me it was given the wrong information, the giftcard is still running, never stopped. I am now getting a written letter of apology from said staff for their rudeness, they have let Asda down as all the other staff were very nice indeed.

God I'm fuming - The Cheek Of It!!

Must be me, I understand some of this post but not all of it....:o

If you were overcharged by 8p why would you be getting it for 8p? If you were overcharged then you are entitled to the overcharge being refunded. Hardly their discretion.

The cheek of it over 8p?

Can't see the point of the thread