Identical items on same shelf at two different prices - two different views too!

arcon5

2sides2everystory wrote: »

If you went into Asda and they had marked all of the Pringles cans in your eyeline at £1.00p and you grabbed a handful and got out of the store and found that two were marked and charged at £1.98 then you'd rightly be aggrieved. Why they might be marked differently is not your concern as a customer. You are only concerned with deciding whether you will buy at the advertised price. You are not expected to check each identical item carefully to make sure you are not being tricked.

You say this example is priced by shelf labels and price labels -- I can semi-understand what you saying, if for example they are stacked together to look like they are part of the same offer -- otherwise, they are clearly marked so buy the cheapest and move on.

You then say the store you refer to uses all pricing labels -- so you can see the price before you buy? Since eachh item is individually prices you can clearly see how much every one your buying is?
So if you don't bother looking at the price properly thats the stores fault?

2sides2everystory wrote: »

As you may have guessed, I believe that Trading Standards have misinterpreted the law and are not acting in the consumer interest by cosying up to major retailers and letting them off the hook on price labelling.

Are you serious?
:rotfl:

Do you care to quote the statute they have misinterpreted and explain why they have and what your interpretation of it is?

2sides2everystory

Yep totally serious. The item I am talking about is actually a pack of eighteen individual items (not a box of chocolates - something a bit more bulky - think bulky as in say a sixpack of Pringles cans in a plastic wrap). My items were not Pringles but fairly bulky. All on the same shelf abutting one another. There were other colours too on the same and shelves. The only price I had noticed (for each pack of 18) was £9.99 and in fact I had been sent on an errand to fetch them because they are £9.99 for 18 on the website too I think). As I said, there is no shelf labelling in this store group. Pricemarking is purely via a prominent identical style printed bar code sticker for almost every item in the store. I could barely carry 7 x 18 of these things, let alone turn them over one at a time to check fot shenanigans.

There is a lot of retailer hot air in this thread (mostly because England is a nation of shop-assistants thesedays and their job security is wholly reliant on them doing things unquestioningly just the way their bosses tell it.)

Someone earlier said that I offered to buy at the marked price. Sorry - not true. I was misled. Therefore the manager at store #1 acted correctly to correct the overcharge that resulted from his store's misleading price-marking. But his job might be in peril if I mention the store name.

Most typical supermarket implementations of Pringles promotions are unlawful in my opinion too.

arcon5

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Yep totally serious.

There is a lot of retailer hot air in this thread (mostly because England is a nation of shop-assistants thesedays and their jobs rely on them doing things the way their bosses like).

Most typical supermarket implementations of Pringles promotions are unlawful in my opinion too.

You say trading standards have mis interprated the law and acting unfairly against consumers, then in the next sentence say the supermarket is in your opinion, acting unlawfully.

2sides2everystory

Yep that's actually at least three guilty parties in one post - one that sold me my packs of 18 thingummies, and also the supermarkets who implement the £1 per Pringles can this week / 69p next week / BOGOF for £1.98 the week after plus variations of different priced flavours on neighbouring shelves or the same shelves in between! PLUS Trading Standards sitting all nice and cosy in some retailer's head office! You are clearly struggling to keep up, arcon5, sorry about that

arcon5

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Yep that's actually three guilty parties in one post - you are clearly struggling to keep up, sorry about that

Keep up with what exactly? So far you've vented your frustration, accused Trading Standards of misinterpreting the law, accused supermarkets of acting unlawfully -- but not yet substantiated any of this...

arcon5

2sides2everystory wrote: »

the supermarkets who implement the £1 per Pringles can this week / 69p next week / BOGOF for £1.98 the week after plus variations of different priced flavours on neighbouring shelves or the same shelves in between! PLUS Trading Standards sitting all nice and cosy in some retailer's head office!

So what law are they breaking?

Prices go up and down all the time. Its a demand-supply issue.

No different to the way holiday prices are X% more expensive than winter? General prices in January are X% cheaper than December.

The underlined bit... again whats wrong with pricing different flavours differently? For all you know it costs more to manufacture the different flavours which merit higher prices.

Its no different to the fact people would probably pay more for a white car rather than a bright pink car. Or more for an automatic model over a manual. Different flavours = different products.

2sides2everystory

Keep up with what exactly? So far you've vented your frustration, accused Trading Standards of misinterpreting the law, accused supermarkets of acting unlawfully -- but not yet substantiated any of this...

Yeah I think I have arcon5 - it's called life in the UK 2011.

What more do you wish me to substantiate? Are we turning a pro-consumer internet forum into a new kind of law court now? Have you not bought Pringles and seen the misleading marketing? Even if you do not buy Pringles you cannot fail to have noticed them and the fact that you cant be sure of the price.

Well my original example was actually the same kind of thing except perhaps not intended to mislead like the Pringles thing, just intended to save the retailer the bother of repricing older stock or of being careful about misleading labelling due to hiding the price of other stock behind the ones at the front of the shelf. Still tends to mislead though, so I contend it's unlawful.

Same as it is unlawful for a shop to refuse to deal with rectifying faulty goods if those goods were already discounted for one fault already.

It's a free country so Martin can contend and so can I whilst he still lets me use his website

arcon5 wrote: »

So what law are they breaking?

Prices go up and down all the time. Its a demand-supply issue.

No different to the way holiday prices are X% more expensive than winter? General prices in January are X% cheaper than December.

The underlined bit... again whats wrong with pricing different flavours differently? For all you know it costs more to manufacture the different flavours which merit higher prices.

Its no different to the fact people would probably pay more for a white car rather than a bright pink car. Or more for an automatic model over a manual. Different flavours = different products.

Yeah this is the other side to the story arcon5, but its not good enough. We have CPRs thesedays. Misleading marketing is unlawful. As I am sure you well know, the marketing is not driven by supply and demand - the marketeers are not satisfied with that. They wish to manipulate the customers' thinking. And they do.

arcon5

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Same as it is unlawful for a shop to refuse to deal with rectifying faulty goods if those goods were already discounted for one fault already.

Depends what you mean by this... if for example I purchased a TV with builtin DVD player and it was discounted and sold as 'DVD player not working' I then couldn't return it to the store and have them repair it.

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Yeah this is the other side to the story arcon5, but its not good enough. We have CPRs thesedays. Misleading marketing is unlawful. As I am sure you well know, the marketing is not driven by supply and demand - the marketeers are not satisfied with that. They wish to manipulate the customers' thinking. And they do.

So:
Week 1: 69p
Week 2: £1
Week 3: BOGOF

Whats misleading about that? As long as prices are clear.

Ofcourse they wish to manipulate your way of thinking -- but thats not the same as misleading somebody. Its how brand recognition works, its how DFS manage to sell crappy sofas for so much money.

2sides2everystory wrote: »

It's a free country

Well thats a whole new debate just there

2sides2everystory

:beer:
A question of degrees you mean ? I like my bitter warm and my lager cool but the faulty goods/already discounted reference was to Martin's jacket button missing versus the sleeves falling off later!

Now both my keyboard and my brain are steaming so on that bombshell you might forgive me if I tootle off to watch some news on the telly with my Horlicks instead of giving you the Ryanair example which is ongoing

RadoJo

2sides2everystory wrote: »

As I said, there is no shelf labelling in this store group. Pricemarking is purely via a prominent identical style printed bar code sticker for almost every item in the store. I could barely carry 7 x 18 of these things, let alone turn them over one at a time to check fot shenanigans.

From what you've said here, it seems that the items were individually priced, and you had the chance to look at those prices but didn't because you had so many. That is not the store's fault - you had the chance to check the individual prices and didn't.