dixons unlawful and misleading web site

bcl999

Yes mistakes do happen but I think what is adding to the OP's frustration is that the error was brought to retailer's attention two weeks ago and they've not even corrected their site yet. That's not excusable.

Hintza

Flyboy152 wrote: »

And how exactly has that helped the OP?

It helps the OP by pointing out that you need to do your research thoroughly so that you can spot mistakes like this and you know what you are buying.

If you don't do your research then you end up with all the hassle that returning an unsuitable item entails.

redped

bcl999 wrote: »

Yes mistakes do happen but I think what is adding to the OP's frustration is that the error was brought to retailer's attention two weeks ago and they've not even corrected their site yet. That's not excusable.

If the website is wrong, then I agree. If it was simply a case of the wrong product being delivered by the warehouse (i.e. simple human error), then there's no problem with the website.

Still, neither of these are unlawful and deceiving, both of which the OP claim.

DCFC79

Lol not a misleading or unlawful site but a mistake happened and it sounds like its being recitifed.

k3lvc

To be fair the website has been wrong for ages - we ordered one in Dec '10 having been in Currys and unable to strike a deal. I got them to confirm in writing that it had a lid (key selling point for me) and a hotplate before they delivered and I arrange disconnection of the old appliance.

It's all dead easy if you do your research

irishjohn

bcl999 wrote: »

Yes mistakes do happen but I think what is adding to the OP's frustration is that the error was brought to retailer's attention two weeks ago and they've not even corrected their site yet. That's not excusable.

Whats causing the OP's frustration is she ain't getting any compensation - seems for most people sorry ain't enough these days.

Hintza

Our new cooker (for the new build) was delivered late and I casually commented that it would be nice if they could add a splashback for the hassle, CS said they would see what they could do. I never pushed it and sure enough it arrived a few days later.

mrsherb

thanks for all the comments while i think some where from 12 year olds going by the childish comments made, to people who gave constuctive thanks.
it is my first time on this site so i did not want to make a fool of my self .
but i did alot of research before buying this product and checked the details and double checked agaist the belling web site, so you can see while i was annoyed of the product recieved.
I purchased product code Product code: 939419 which looks very nice!
but it looks like Product code: 333765 whist ok not the style i was looking for.
the title of this was correct as It is a breach of the Regulations (and potentially a criminal offence) to engage in an unfair commercial practice. A practice is unfair if:
it is a misleading action (it contains false or misleading information - and is therefore untruthful in relation to a list of specified matters - or if its overall presentation in any way deceives or is likely to deceive the average consumer).

i will take on board your advice and comments and thanks for taking time to make suggestions.

Flyboy152

irishjohn wrote: »

Whats causing the OP's frustration is she ain't getting any compensation - seems for most people sorry ain't enough these days.

And in some circumstance, it shouldn't have to be. Take the Murdochs for example, do you think that they should just get away with a bland and lamentable apology in a few newspapers?

If the mistake has caused significant inconvenience or pain and suffering to the OP, they should be compensated. However, the level of compensation should be reasonable and proportionate.

Flyboy152

Hintza wrote: »

It helps the OP by pointing out that you need to do your research thoroughly so that you can spot mistakes like this and you know what you are buying.

No, it was a judgemental post and irrelevant to the OP's query.

If you don't do your research then you end up with all the hassle that returning an unsuitable item entails.

Why should they need to? The advert described the product and they expected to receive what they had ordered; what could be simpler?