HP Touchpad Contract Law

newpbc

Hi like many others over the last day or two I just received an email from my online retailer saying my order has been cancelled due to lack of stock and I'll will recieve A full refund.
Do I have to accept this or can I insist that the retailer supply me with a product of equivalent specification under contract law.

somethingcorporate

Refund is perfectly allowable. Assuming it was an online purchase there would be no contract anyway due to them not having dispatched the item yet.

newpbc

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Refund is perfectly allowable. Assuming it was an online purchase there would be no contract anyway due to them not having dispatched the item yet.

Hi thank you for the quick reply I've been doing a bit of further reading and that seems to suggest under contract law that when a retailer takes my money they have accepted my offer and a contract is formed at this point am I wrong in this impression.

TonyMMM

You can check their T&Cs but most on-line suppliers will usally say that a contract is only formed when the goods are despatched.

newpbc

Hi Tony

Thanks for the reply I'm going to check there Tc's now however another thread I'm reading not sure if I'm allowed to post a link to it here suggests that if they did have such a clause it may well be illegal under the following laws Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 or the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and as such unenforceable

Optimist

The lady on this thread has one she doesnt seem to want. Make her an offer.

Optimist

newpbc wrote: »

Hi Tony

Thanks for the reply I'm going to check there Tc's now however another thread I'm reading not sure if I'm allowed to post a link to it here suggests that if they did have such a clause it may well be illegal under the following laws Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 or the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 and as such unenforceable

Look at the ecommerce regulations it is perfectly possibly to sell on-line and take payment by credit card without actually concluding the contract.

It needs to be made clear that by placing an order the customer is making a offer on the site and that the contract will only be formed if the customer's order is accepted by the seller this is usually by despatch of the item

It has to be clear that taking payment from the customer's credit card does not indicate acceptance

newpbc

Thanks all for the advice offered It looks that there may be some margins within the law here but I'd end having to risk taking the company to the small claims court which is probably not worth the hassle consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?26633-Question-on-Contract-Law was one of the more interesting sources of information I've read today but may well be outdated now but may be useful to anyone else who feels aggrieved by a retailer taking there money and then not living up to there promise.

cgk1

If they refund your money - what's your actual loss here? You ordered something, it was out of stock, they refunded the money - I think you are on a hiding to nothing.

newpbc

cgk1 wrote: »

If they refund your money - what's your actual loss here? You ordered something, it was out of stock, they refunded the money - I think you are on a hiding to nothing.

The fact that they accepted my order took my money on the pretense of delivery then now tell me I'm not getting what I paid for but they will refund me now stock every were else has sold out is not good enough as I can't simply go and buy the product else were.
If they had just said straight away I could have attempted to acquire the goods else were from the thread mentioned this is known as loss of a bargain and is covered by law.

tomwakefield

newpbc wrote: »

The fact that they accepted my order took my money on the pretense of delivery then now tell me I'm not getting what I paid for but they will refund me now stock every were else has sold out is not good enough as I can't simply go and buy the product else were.
If they had just said straight away I could have attempted to acquire the goods else were from the thread mentioned this is known as loss of a bargain and is covered by law.

At the moment it is taken that the acceptance of contract is determined by the terms of the retailer, and isn't necessarily when money is taken due to the automation of processes.

If you want to change that, your best hope is to take them to court and persuade them that such a term is unfair

Who is the retailer?