Am I right or are they?

akawellsy

Last week I bought computers from E****r on the Internet for £517. They acknowledged order and debited my Credit (not Debit) Card & stated that 'This email is NOT confirmation of acceptance of order; official confirmation of your order will follow. Later that morning I received an e-mail that stated "your order no ******* has been processed and payment successfully taken"
The delivery date was Monday - they didn't arrive.
I checked the website on Tuesday that said delivery was Monday, so I emailed them - they replied there was an error in their stocktaking & they were out of stock. I rechecked their site which stated '32 in stock' and queried this. They said new stock had arrived but was more expensive (now over £370 each) and they could not supply at old price, new price was over £750.
I protested said that I had entered a contract, fulfilled my part (ordered/paid), they had acknowledged order and supplied a delivery date. They stonewalled me stating the contract is not final until dispatch.
I feel they're trying it on .... who's right ???

gordikin

Ebuyer are right.

arcon5

gordikin wrote: »

Ebuyer are right.

Actually they are not. Contract is formed when an acceptance email is sent, not when dispatch has taken place.

4.1

After placing an order, you will receive an e-mail from us acknowledging that we have received your order. Please note that this does not mean that your order has been accepted. Your order constitutes an offer to us to buy a Product. All orders are subject to acceptance by us, and we will confirm such acceptance to you by sending you an e-mail that confirms that we have accepted your order (the Acceptance Confirmation) The contract between us (Contract) will only be formed when we send you the Acceptance Confirmation.

BUT... this is what gets them off the hook:

8.5

We are under no obligation to provide the Product to you at the incorrect (lower) price, even after we have sent you a Acceptance Confirmation, if the pricing error is obvious and unmistakeable and could have reasonably been recognised by you as a mis-pricing.

Plus... did the second email actually state the order has been accepted or just confirm an order ID number?

Move on op, you not on to a winner i'm afraid.

Fergie76

Should companies be allowed to accept and take payment without forming a contract?

I have read on these forums many times about this. IMO companies should not take payment until the goods as loaded on to the van or just about to leave the warehouse.

Why should consumers fulfil their part of the contract by paying and then companies be allowed to miss people about, because they have the money.

Fergie76

arcon5 wrote: »

Actually they are not. Contract is formed when an acceptance email is sent, not when dispatch has taken place.



BUT... this is what gets them off the hook:



Plus... did the second email actually state the order has been accepted or just confirm an order ID number?

Move on op, you not on to a winner i'm afraid.

From reading the OP, I don't think 8.5 as quoted applies, the products were correctly priced at time of ordering. The company has since received a new batch of stock and decide to change the price.

What position that leaves the OP in, I have no idea.

arcon5

Fergie76 wrote: »

Should companies be allowed to accept and take payment without forming a contract?

I have read on these forums many times about this. IMO companies should not take payment until the goods as loaded on to the van or just about to leave the warehouse.

Why should consumers fulfil their part of the contract by paying and then companies be allowed to miss people about, because they have the money.

I disagree.

What happens if the goods are packages and prepared, then the card is declined? Or if they suffered technical difficulties once the courier turned up meaning they either send a lorry full of unpaid items risking the first point or delay delivery.

It just causes more problems than its worth.

Alot of carts are not completed, its only once payment is made the customer has committed to buying the goods and the company can then spend time & effort fulfilling the order.

Also, what if the items was personalised? If the same rule applied the companies are going to be seriously affected by this.

If they form the contract at point of sale then they ezpose themself to even greater risk -- if a £10,000 car was accidently marked at £100 for example.

arcon5

Fergie76 wrote: »

From reading the OP, I don't think 8.5 as quoted applies, the products were correctly priced at time of ordering. The company has since received a new batch of stock and decide to change the price.

What position that leaves the OP in, I have no idea.

Thats a good point actually. So if the second email op refers to is infact the acceptance email then their next issue would be enforcing it without wasting more money.

scheming_gypsy

Fergie76 wrote: »

Should companies be allowed to accept and take payment without forming a contract?

depends how much you like shopping on the internet. Or would you prefer them to not take payment instantly but take your order, pass it on to a human to process and confirm that everything is ok and then take payment?

Fergie76

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

depends how much you like shopping on the internet. Or would you prefer them to not take payment instantly but take your order, pass it on to a human to process and confirm that everything is ok and then take payment?

No, but they shouldn't take payment if what you order is out of stock, unless they inform you before hand.

Fergie76

arcon5 wrote: »

I disagree.

What happens if the goods are packages and prepared, then the card is declined? Or if they suffered technical difficulties once the courier turned up meaning they either send a lorry full of unpaid items risking the first point or delay delivery.

It just causes more problems than its worth.

Alot of carts are not completed, its only once payment is made the customer has committed to buying the goods and the company can then spend time & effort fulfilling the order.

Also, what if the items was personalised? If the same rule applied the companies are going to be seriously affected by this.

If they form the contract at point of sale then they ezpose themself to even greater risk -- if a £10,000 car was accidently marked at £100 for example.

I can see your point and obviously, there are times that payment has to be taken at time of order. But why take payment for something that is not in stock, especially when it's listed as in stock.

Re - your last paragraphy, if something was obviously mis-priced then 8.5 that you quoted above would/should still come in to force.

bris

Everything is automatic, the payment is taken by the system, not a person, this is why the problems arise after payment and the shipping clause is in there. A lot of internet based sales are after work, some times late at night and the reason the mistakes are not noticed until the office staff turn up for work.
There is however a good point about the price being correct at the point of ordering, the only time I saw a case of "loss of bargain" was when a similar thing happened in Homebase (or B&Q) with a dishwasher where the money was accepted for the machine, even though it was out of stock. The buyer took them to court and won.