If tesco advertises something which has expired, do they still have to honour it?

Equaliser123

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

I made [iirc] about £4k on the R&R policy. Now it's just DTD [double the difference].

That highlights why that policy no longer applies.

nomoneytoday

Equaliser123 wrote: »

That highlights why that policy no longer applies.

Exactly the greed of the few spoilt it for the many

12bdebt3

omen666 wrote: »

Dont think so somehow.

If you read my post properly I said something along the lines of "It's up to the discretion of whoever is in charge."

Common sense would say that a loss of £200 because of a mistake like that clearly isn't worth it but a loss of a few pound won't exactly make a dint into Tesco profits.

dmg24

neilmcl wrote: »

An advertised price is merely an offer to treat so generally no, the store is not bound by it.

The correct terminology is Invitation to Treat.

Oopsadaisy

Equaliser123 wrote: »

That highlights why that policy no longer applies.

Care to explain??

What does it matter how much I got on R&R as to Tesco's decision to withdraw it??

Do you think it would still be in place if I hadn't claimed mine??

12bdebt3

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

Care to explain??

What does it matter how much I got on R&R as to Tesco's decision to withdraw it??

Do you think it would still be in place if I hadn't claimed mine??

I think Equaliser123 was implying that it was withdrawn due to customers misuse.

I doubt Equaliser123 is saying that YOU are solely to blame for this, just that the minority of people misuising this procedure ended up being costly to Tesco, so this is the reason they would have stopped it.

Oopsadaisy

nomoneytoday wrote: »

Exactly the greed of the few spoilt it for the many

Wrong, wrong, wrong...Tesco's continued ineptitude at pricing and promotional literature ruined it.

My getting £4k on R&R [not all in the same transaction I add] cost Mr T exactly the same as 10 people getting £400 or 100 people getting £40.

Explain how me taking two packs of mispriced sirloin steaks instead of leaving one [which could then even have been sold at the wrong price to a customer who didn't notice the misprice], would have enabled R&R to comtinue.

Is it because you think that 'people getting loads of stuff on R&R tipped off Tesco that there was an issue'??? Wrong again, Tesco had software reports and also they even had people reading the MSE because it was that common knowledge.

So I'm at a loss as to why you see me as greedy?? Seriously, try and explain it to me.

Why, it's almost like you're jealous:rotfl::rotfl:

Oopsadaisy

arrontdep wrote: »

I think Equaliser123 was implying that it was withdrawn due to customers misuse.

I doubt Equaliser123 is saying that YOU and solely to blame for this, just that the minority of people misuising this procedure ended up being costly to Tesco, so this is the reason they would have stopped it.

It was withdrawn because for whatever reason it was costing Mr T too much, end of story. It was costing them too much because they mis-priced too much, not because we kis-used the R&R. No mis-prices, no R&R.

They don't truly care about customer mis-use or not as long as it doesn't cost them more money than they have budgeted for it.

For example, in the cafeteria they budget for 'little milk sachets'. They don't care if you fill your pockets and take them home, or put 10 in your cup of tea, as long as it's within budget.

So Mr T had a budget for R&R, the budget got anihilated because they mis-priced so much stuff [in other words ripped off so many customers].

They had two choices: reduce mis-prices to within budget [too much effort], or cancel R&R.

R&R actually helped tesco avoid TSOs wrt mispricing.

So the effect is that nowadays there are less people who check their bill [not worth it for a few pence] and so tesco is ripping off more people than they did in the days of R&R.

Lesson over.

dmg24

Oopsadaisy, however much you try to dress it up, you (and others like you) were greedy. Whereas we could have all had the occasional bargain as a result of a misprice, your greed meant that few others could benefit. I imagine you were also one of those that abused the vouchers policy.

There is such a thing as taking moneysaving too far, and you did.

12bdebt3

Oopsadaisy wrote: »

It was withdrawn because for whatever reason it was costing Mr T too much, end of story. It was costing them too much because they mis-priced too much, not because we kis-used the R&R. No mis-prices, no R&R.

For whatever reason = People were misusing it by applying when they overpaid by 1p, therefore costing Tesco too much.

They don't truly care about customer mis-use or not as long as it doesn't cost them more money than they have budgeted for it.

For example, in the cafeteria they budget for 'little milk sachets'. They don't care if you fill your pockets and take them home, or put 10 in your cup of tea, as long as it's within budget.

My point was that they did care about customer misuse because it was costing them too much, so that point is irrelevant.

So Mr T had a budget for R&R, the budget got anihilated because they mis-priced so much stuff [in other words ripped off so many customers].

I don't know how you can class overpaying by 1p as being ripped off.

They had two choices: reduce mis-prices to within budget [too much effort], or cancel R&R.

Exactly and I was correct on the reason why they cancelled it. Too many people misusing it was causing them to lose too much money.

R&R actually helped tesco avoid TSOs wrt mispricing.

Yes but it probably lost them millions in profits.

So the effect is that nowadays there are less people who check their bill [not worth it for a few pence] and so tesco is ripping off more people than they did in the days of R&R.

As I said before, overpaying by a few pence isn't being ripped off. Plus, like you said, Tesco has DTD. So how are they now ripping more people off than the days of R&R? Answer: They're not.

Lesson over.

You're not a very good teacher.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: