60% off at Hamleys - website glitch now rectified

BargainMad_3

In reply to your question:

"Does anyone know if their money was taken? If so, I think the legal position would have changed - I believe the store has the right to 'withdraw an offer of sale', but once someone has been charged, the transaction has been completed, ergo the offer by the customer has been accepted - does anyone out there have knowledge of consumer law?"


I have worked in the finance industry and what often happens is "authorisation" for the amount in question is taken. This is removed from your "available balance" BUT the retailer has not yet TAKEN the money. Then a short time later the ACTUAL money is taken (already ringfenced by the pre-authorisation). The retailer can "refund" the pre-authorisation amount to return your balance to where it was if it does not/cannot complete the transaction.

Such transactions are "invisible" on paper statements but are "visible" on online banking and ATM "available balance" amounts.

For example you could have placed an order for £100 on your credit card and it goes through Hamleys automated system. The £100 is "pre-authorised" (again automated) and your available balance for the credit card account is reduced by £100 (so you cannot spend it elsewhere). Hamleys then decide not to honour the order and "refund" the "pre-authorised" amount. Since no REAL transaction has taken place it does not appear on your statements.


I don't know if that helps


Now whether any of these orders got to the REAL stage is another matter i.e. money ACTUALLY taken from an account and then ACTUALLY refunded on an account (these WOULD show up on a statement). Only people affected would be able to confirm this. But again whether this would make any difference is another matter. It would seem Sainsburys used this as the "yardstick" over which orders to fulfil or not in their recent code debacle but again this was deemed as "goodwill" rather than a cast iron obligation by law.

deanos

My money is just pending on my Barclaycard it hasnt been taken yet

The_Londoners

Thanks Bargainmad, at least you have clarified the 'released funds' scenario. I shall check tomorrow at the atm as I don't have online banking for the particular card I used - luckily for me there are sufficient funds to complete my Christmas shopping even if Hamleys haven't released the money - if I find they have taken the money I shall avail myself of the free legal advice service offered via my employers - it may be that Sainsbury's found there was a legal precedent for supplying the goods after taking money, but gained good publicity by claiming it as a 'goodwill' gesture!

We shall see!

Wishing all my fellow disappointed Hamleys bargain hunters a very happy Christmas, and lets hope our future bargain hunting attempts are more successful!

zoezoe_3

BargainMad wrote:

I am very sorry but The Guardian got it totally wrong on more than one count.

Firstly the Guardian article implied they would honour the "60% off" orders.

Hamleys are not honouring these orders and the CEO is adamant on this - these points below were NOT reported by The Guardian.

Chief Executive Officer Nick Mather blamed a "technical error" and refused to honour the sales.

"Multiple use of discount codes contravenes the terms and conditions of the offer," he said in a statement. "These transactions are fraudulent and we are unable to fulfil these orders."

.......sadly The Guardian failed to report this.....are you saying that The Guardian was told differently by Nick Mather - I am sure he would love to know this!

What Hamleys WILL do (again not mentioned by The Guardian) is complete the orders at a 25% discount and deliver for Christmas - in that respect they will fulfil the orders but as Mather says the original orders are what he terms fraudulent.

Secondly The Guardian article implied stocks had been wiped out.

Again this is not true and Hamleys message on their website is actually there to correct the inaccurate reporting of The Guardian !

As I say I am glad The Guardian is around but they did not report this story very well. Someone read between the lines and filled in the gaps - there is no quote from Hamleys in the article about honouring orders or stocks being depleted.

I am happy to defend The Guardian in many areas but not this one I'm afraid. They could get themselves into very hot water if they are claiming Hamleys told them one thing and then did another.

please read https://www.hamleys.co.uk thay admit that they chnaged their minds - how can that be the Guardian's faualt ???

And Hamleys have not agreed to fullfil the 25% discount for christmas, I have the email and they just said the orders were cancelled and we could place them again. you seem slightly misslead !!!

jayok

BargainMad wrote:

"Multiple use of discount codes contravenes the terms and conditions of the offer," he said in a statement. "These transactions are fraudulent and we are unable to fulfil these orders."

The esteemed millionaire would be wrong on that as it is not fraud to use different codes on a website

What Hamleys WILL do (again not mentioned by The Guardian) is complete the orders at a 25% discount and deliver for Christmas - in that respect they will fulfil the orders but as Mather says the original orders are what he terms fraudulent.

You are 100% wrong on that. What Hamleys have done is cancelled all orders and gave customers a 25% off code that can be used until sometime in January. They have not released the items back into stock so they could be ordered today in time for christmas. Again, you are 100% wrong.

BargainMad_3

I have read the site but there is only "customer relations" friendly speak of "sorry we cannot fulfil the orders had we had hoped" - and that is it. No mention of renegading on the promise to honour orders AFTER the loophole was spotted. I still think The Guardian jumped the gun - if they have evidence of Hamleys saying they would fulfil the orders and then Hamleys retracted this well then I hope The Guardian publish it.

I admire you sticking up for The Guardian - I really DO LIKE that paper - but they do get things wrong....it's run by humans.

Now the Hamleys email I saw (today - Tuesday 19th Dec) stated:

"We appreciate that at this time of year no one wants to be disappointed. As a gesture we would like to offer you a 25% discount on your next order. Rest assured if you complete your order by the end of today we will guarantee delivery before Christmas.

To use the offer please enter the promotions code hamref95682 at the checkout stage. This offer is more generous than the original terms of the promotion and is valid for 30 days subject to the terms and conditions below."


It does make me think not everyone got this email from what the above two posters say. Did you not get that email ?

jayok

BargainMad wrote:

In reply to your question:

"Does anyone know if their money was taken? If so, I think the legal position would have changed - I believe the store has the right to 'withdraw an offer of sale', but once someone has been charged, the transaction has been completed, ergo the offer by the customer has been accepted - does anyone out there have knowledge of consumer law?"


I have worked in the finance industry and what often happens is "authorisation" for the amount in question is taken. This is removed from your "available balance" BUT the retailer has not yet TAKEN the money. Then a short time later the ACTUAL money is taken (already ringfenced by the pre-authorisation). The retailer can "refund" the pre-authorisation amount to return your balance to where it was if it does not/cannot complete the transaction.

Such transactions are "invisible" on paper statements but are "visible" on online banking and ATM "available balance" amounts.

Which obviously affects people who has used debit card as the balance available to the customer has been reduced therefore the customer cannot use the money whilst the money is ringfenced. If the retailer decides not to take the money, what happens? Does the money appear immediately as the available balance is back to the previous state or does the customer have to wait a time period for access to their money.

There are reports of people having no access to the money that was ringfenced for these orders even though Hamleys cancelled the order!! To me, for people that paid with debit cards, the money was taken.

jayok

BargainMad wrote:

Now The Hamleys email I saw stated:

We appreciate that at this time of year no one wants to be disappointed. As a gesture we would like to offer you a 25% discount on your next order. Rest assured if you complete your order by the end of today we will guarantee delivery before Christmas.

To use the offer please enter the promotions code hamref95682 at the checkout stage. This offer is more generous than the original terms of the promotion and is valid for 30 days subject to the terms and conditions below.


It does make me think not everyone got this email from what the above two posters say. Did you not get that email ?

I got that email. Notice the word 'next' in there? Rest assured, the orders were all cancelled (not converted to a 25% off order) and the stock was still showing out of stock therefore could not have been purchased today which happens to be the last day for christmas delivery.

Still believe Hamleys?

flufff

I think Hamleys may find the delay in returning their stock status to available and way theyve treated people will cost them more in long run than honouring this deal.Losses in internet sales,increased staff costs overtime.People simply not going into high street stores.

BargainMad_3

You are right but the retailer has ringfenced the money in anticipation of completing the order. Once they decide not to fulfil the order (cannot or will not) they remove this "ringfence" as it is not needed but there is a timescale between this occurring and it showing at your bank and this varies between banks. All this time though the retailer has not "received" the money into their accounts - just a "promise to pay" which the banks remove from your available funds so you can't/don't spend it elsewhere.

And as for your next order - well that could have been the one you placed today if the stock had been available...or the funds had been available in your account. It looks like you have been put in the worst position of having funds unreleased so you could not re-order stock that had not been released back into the warehouse anyway! I do sympathise because I think that underneath the CEO of Hamleys could not care less for your situation or for anyone else in the same boat.