M&S demanding more money for sale items I ordered online.

useless_git_requires_wife

No way I would let this drop if it was me.

Ask them to start an official complaint procedure. It's perfectly reasonable of you to have assumed that the order was correct and was coming at the time advised for the price advised. On that basis, you've incurred extra expense and spent plenty of your own time in preparing for your new furniture.

Ombudsmans/courts, etc, look at what is REASONABLE from BOTH SIDES of a dispute, not just at what is written in the t&c's from large organisations and then back that up.

somethingcorporate

Hardly worth it, no contract has been formed and the extra expense is minimal.

The higher the difference between what you were expecting and what they want the lesser chance of you getting the goods.

Chalk it up and move on.

keithdc

I don't think this comes under the usual MSE board response to alleged misprices.

The fact you had several phone calls about the products seems to have given M&S ample opportunity to realise their mistake, and one could argue that the first phone call represents acceptance of the contract. Do you have phone records that show time and lengths of phone calls.

How much was the order for? What was the pre-sale price?
However, I'm not sure whether this will make much differenece....
- If the price was patently ridiculous, then it supports the idea that M&S should have realised their error very early on.
- If the price wasn't ridiculous (60% off in a sale is not uncommon), then it doesn't make much difference.

There is possibly an argument here that this extends further than contract law into notions of estoppel (but its been some time since I did my law degree, so hopefully someone will come along soon with legal knowledge).

guardone

You will find that your M+S card is not directly related to the shop. hence they have agreed a price and taken the money through the finance of the MS card. I would advise them you are suing them for breach of contract. They will argue their terms re delivery, but you can argue that they had time,looked at the details etc and took your money. I think you have a 50/50 chance... depends on case law which I am not an expert in, but you could search for similar cases, there must be many. Tomorrow go ask citizens advice bureau.

arcon5

I think people are forgetting the difference between whats right morally and whats legal.

Yes its very inconvenient to op. Yes they did have ample opportunity to spot the error. Yes I would also be extremely p***ed off to be in the same situation... BUT....

Simple facts:
op placed order
contract formed on dispatch as per terms and conditions
M&S reject order and agree to refund all money

No contract is formed between op and M&S so legal redress is not possible.

Sorry op, you can file a complain by all means and maybe appeal to their good nature and negotiate to meet them in the middle, but other than that your flogging a dead horse.

bod1467

One other factor (perhaps) being overlooked - this was a SALE.

Can the OP give some indication of normal vs sale prices for the items ordered? I know M+S are asking for £3.5k more, but how much is that in relation to the original purchase price?

In short - M+S may be playing the game here. I can't believe that EVERY SINGLE item was mispriced.

richto

If they took your money then a contract exists and they must honour it.

Any terms that claim that a contract doesnt exist until dispatch are unfair contract terms and are likely invalid. Clearly it is unreasonable for them to take your money and then some time later to decide not to accept the purchase, and I think that you would have a very good chance that a judge would agree with you.

Take them to the small claims court for the £3,500 cost that they kindly quoted you via Moneyclaim Online. Your downside is only the small cost of filing the claim, whereas the upside is £3,500. Costs are not normally awarded in small claims cases so you have no other risk.

It would cost them not much less to turn up to your local small claims court to defned the case, prepare for it, etc then to pay up.


For reference I recovered £400 for a pool table that Woolworths online quoted as £0.00 + £2.95 Delivery, via the small claims court when Woolworth tried to charge me £400 instead. It was stated as 'offer of the month' , etc so it was conceivable that they might be giving them away. As they took some money, judge said contract exists and i won the cost of the pool table.

wealdroam

richto wrote: »

If they took your money then a contract exists and they must honour it.

Any terms that claim that a contract doesnt exist until dispatch are unfair contract terms and are likely invalid. Clearly it is unreasonable for them to take your money and then some time later to decide not to accept the purchase, and I think that you would have a very good chance that a judge would agree with you.

The Sale of Goods Act says...

Payment and delivery are concurrent conditions.
Unless otherwise agreed, delivery of the goods and payment of the price are concurrent conditions, that is to say, the seller must be ready and willing to give possession of the goods to the buyer in exchange for the price and the buyer must be ready and willing to pay the price in exchange for possession of the goods.

The important words there are "Unless otherwise agreed".
The implication is that it is possible to agree that the contract isn't formed at the time the money is taken.
If that is the case, then it cannot be an unfair contract term.

This is exactly what most online retailers, including M&S, do.

As mentioned earlier, the OP has agreed with M&S that the contract is formed when the goods are dispatched.
He probably did this by ticking a box something like "I have read and agree to the Terms and Conditions".

richto wrote: »

Any terms that claim that a contract doesnt exist until dispatch are unfair contract terms and are likely invalid.

Is that your opinion Richto, or can you provide a citation?

guardone

Interesting, I believe small claims are not binding as cases in other courts, so suspect a good legal team from M+S would win, despite the good fortune of Richto. Richto, if you provide your court address, and OP moves so that his local court is your court, then when he sues he might get your judge and be lucky. (normally you use the court local to the contract place).
Either way, when the issue is finalised, please ensure you give us a detailed update. thanks

somethingcorporate

richto wrote: »

If they took your money then a contract exists and they must honour it.

Any terms that claim that a contract doesnt exist until dispatch are unfair contract terms and are likely invalid. Clearly it is unreasonable for them to take your money and then some time later to decide not to accept the purchase, and I think that you would have a very good chance that a judge would agree with you.

Wrong I am afriad, as per Wealdroam's post. Please do not post such as gospel without having any evidence to back it up.

These are common terms for online shopping for most retailers. And if you hang around this forum longer than 24 hours you will see we get this question 2-3 times a week and always give the same answer...