Teens ripped off - is it worth complaining?

visidigi

Googlies wrote: »

So lets stick to rights, as the customers were minors the shop could not enter into a contract with them, and so they can ask for their money back.

Absolute genius, yes lets, lets get the money back, and give the product back - then everyone's happy....right?

Its like we become more like america every day...

eranou

Googlies wrote: »

So lets stick to rights, as the customers were minors the shop could not enter into a contract with them, and so they can ask for their money back.

Care to provide a link to back this claim up?

halibut2209

The 'contract' was to supply 30. They didn't do this.

The fact that they state "up to 30 is £x" is irrelevant. The order was incomplete, so the goods were not as described.

arcon5

Unfortunately whether they fulfilled the order or not, the girls accepted the new specification at the same price rather than rejecting the order. It is shoddy service though, thats for sure.

full-time-mum

OK, summarising what's been said so far, it would seem that...

Legally the shop were within their rights to charge the full wack (because of the "up to" bit in their pricing structure) even though they didn't fulfil the order but morally they could have done better?

arcon5

Googlies wrote: »

So lets stick to rights, as the customers were minors the shop could not enter into a contract with them, and so they can ask for their money back.

My understanding is minors can enter into contracts, they cannot however be enforced. So if for example they failed to collect the product, the business would be unable so successfully recover theirlosses -- however, since the product has been paid for and transaction complete no enforcement is necessary.

(maybe I will stand corrected though)

arcon5

It actually works like this in alot of industrys.... take picture framers for example, many workshops will work on a minimum price structure. For example, if the min.price for a custom frame is £20, but based on their standard margins a small frame comes to £35 and a slightly larger one £40 -- both would be charged at £50 and therefore the same price irrespective of size..

full-time-mum wrote: »

Legally the shop were within their rights to charge the full wack (because of the "up to" bit in their pricing structure) even though they didn't fulfil the order but morally they could have done better?

Yes.... but also since they was unable to fulfil the order they could have cancelled without penalty.

halibut2209

arcon5 wrote: »

Unfortunately whether they fulfilled the order or not, the girls accepted the new specification at the same price rather than rejecting the order.

Doesn't matter, as this is a SOGA issue. Just because they took them home, it doesn't mean SOGA no longer applies.

arcon5

halibut2209 wrote: »

Doesn't matter, as this is a SOGA issue. Just because they took them home, it doesn't mean SOGA no longer applies.

In which case they it could be argued it is reasonable to consider them to have accepted the producted after they leave the shop.

When they went on, they can also argue they advised the customer they can no longer fulfil Y sale however for the same price can offer X which they then went ahead with and purchased.

'Im sorry Sir, we have just discovered this fridge is out of stock. We can therefore cancel the order or offer you this alternative product for the same price.' Happens all the time.

Googlies_2

visidigi wrote: »

Absolute genius, yes lets, lets get the money back, and give the product back - then everyone's happy....right?

Its like we become more like america every day...

You're the one squealing about rights, and now your not happy about rights.

I think you might find the American legal system followed ours.