Tesco misprice discussion area part 17

Constantine

Hermann wrote:

Difficult to know without seeing the wording but I not sure the law would see it that way.
The price sold is the price sold.
The compensation is compensation.

The store must comply with the law in regard to the sale price.

The compansation is a voluntary addition to the contract made at the till.

As an example if I take Tesco to court for a £100 refund they refused to give me and the court finds in my favour I get the £100.
If the court also awards the costs this is in addition to the £100 not taken as part of the £100 you're already getting.

Also if I claim £25 compensation for my time in court and it is awarded this is paid in addition to the original £100 and is not considered to be part of the £100.

All depends on the wording I guess.

They are charging you the correct price - that is half of the refund. The other half is the compensation.

Hermann

mikeywills wrote:

Well if you follow constantines approach and to be honest it seems the simplest and most obvious surely they would give you £100 back. 10 bunches overcharged by 5 each. Simple isn't it?, is there really any need to complicate it any further than that.
My only question really is what happens if you return the product for a refund, what do they give you back, the correct price or the amount on your receipt?

It does seem the most obvious thing to do, and is probably what will happen at the CS desk.

However if you've spent £60 buying the stuff and you get £100 refund you've only got £40 more than you spent. How is £40 double the difference?

Hermann

Constantine wrote:

They are charging you the correct price - that is half of the refund. The other half is the compensation.

I'm sure thats how most will see it, be interesting to see how things develop.

Hermann

Constantine wrote:

They are charging you the correct price - that is half of the refund. The other half is the compensation.

Out of interest ... with regard to the current R&R policy.

At which point in the process do you consider the "correct" price to have been charged.

eg £9 SEL £10 charged.

£10 refunded. Customer gets item for free as compensation.

The customer got compensation, a free product, but when was the correct price charged?

mikeywills

Hermann wrote:

Out of interest ... with regard to the current R&R policy.

At which point in the process do you consider the "correct" price to have been charged.

eg £9 SEL £10 charged.

£10 refunded. Customer gets item for free as compensation.

The customer got compensation, a free product, but when was the correct price charged?

I think the question in law would be followed by whether you have been fairly renumerated for the error, by giving you back greater than the cost of the item, I am sure the court would suggest that was a fair judgement.

Constantine

Hermann wrote:

Out of interest ... with regard to the current R&R policy.

At which point in the process do you consider the "correct" price to have been charged.

eg £9 SEL £10 charged.

£10 refunded. Customer gets item for free as compensation.

The customer got compensation, a free product, but when was the correct price charged?

The "correct" price was charged at the point of original sale - It was the SEL that was the "wrong" price.

That's one way of looking at it, anyway

Hermann

Constantine wrote:

The "correct" price was charged at the point of original sale - It was the SEL that was the "wrong" price.

That's one way of looking at it, anyway

Ahh of course!

You truly are a Tesco manager!

ginjim

mikeywills wrote:

eh?...............excuse my ignorance silver r&r?, I know the golden but silver?

well not getting as much as a golden i guess

Odd_Fellow

Constantine wrote:

The "correct" price was charged at the point of original sale - It was the SEL that was the "wrong" price.

That's one way of looking at it, anyway

Oh dear! Another can of worms....

By the way, ASDA is doing a big BOGOF promo on cans of worms :rotfl:

mikeywills

Constantine wrote:

The "correct" price was charged at the point of original sale - It was the SEL that was the "wrong" price.

That's one way of looking at it, anyway

I do like a bit of lateral thought, it will take such to benefit from the new policy.:rolleyes: