Aldridge Vs Madbid.com Court Case

bod1467

OP says he bought the other items at the same time/shortly after he bought the £199.99 bundle. My take on it is that £199.99 for such a bundle was seriously cheap, thus the other offers were not unnatural in comparison and the OP acted in good faith.

But the bottom line is ... the retailer shafted themselves by not having proper safeguards in place.

StuieUK34

whoever created the account named "Common_sense" with 1 post, has issues...

mattyprice4004

Common_Sense wrote: »

How could you not know this was a genuine mistake. It's obvious to me that any company in their right mind would not offer a buy now price that low without some prior advertising.

Well it obviously wasn't a genuine mistake, otherwise the OP would have lost in court.

:rotfl:

StuieUK34

Well done Harley.......
If there were more of you about, there would be less stories to read of peeps being mis-lead, etc etc.....

I always thought mad-bid was a joke site, not real ??? as the prices are always advertised real low, and has weird ways of bidding (and to those who lack Common sense, the idea of madbid is to be super low prices with the potential to increase)....

Well done Harley, fancy taking on KGB deals for me ?!!

Common_Sense_4

StuieUK34 wrote: »

whoever created the account named "Common_sense" with 1 post, has issues...

I'd rather have issues than be a snidey money grabber. We all like a bargain, but this is just rediculous.

I would also be interested to know how much was awarded over and above any offers made by Madbid. That would make this a much more validated thread.

pulliptears

We have turned down the confidentiality agreement that has been spoken of because MadBid is transparent in its communication and did not believe paying someone to keep silent would have been the right thing to do. We had offered a settlement agreement on numerous occasions to the user in order to prevent both parties having to go to court, however this was refused. Both parties are satisfied with the judgment but please note it was only £42 higher than what we initially offered.

From here:

http://madbidforums.com/index.php?/topic/10276-mr-aldridge-v-madbid/

Is that correct? You went through all that to gain £42 more?

harleyfan

pulliptears wrote: »

From here:

http://madbidforums.com/index.php?/topic/10276-mr-aldridge-v-madbid/

Is that correct? You went through all that to gain £42 more?

Thank you for your comments, in part yes, the damages awarded were in the end for £42 more than their initial offer that was including costs (£300)(so in reality £130 + costs of £170). The judges award was for £42 more than their offer (£342) PLUS i was awarded my costs (£170) making a total of £512. However, their initial offer was a without prejudice offer and of course would not have given me any proof that i was, as i believed in the right.

Furthermore, it would have been kept quiet and the other 39 people affected would know nothing about it and would not ever have been able to make a claim.

The judge did suggest to Madbid.com that they may wish to consider a non disclosure agreement but they chose to decline this advice.

Going down the route i have taken has left a legal decision that i hope will allow the other affected customers to claim as well as i have proved an injustice has been done.

I am now banned from the madbid.com forum and all of my posts have been deleted, i assume to try and keep this whole thing as quiet as possible so i hope very much that some of the affected users find this post and are able to come to an agreement with madbid.com that compensates them for damages to which they are entitled

I hope that makes sense.

harleyfan

bod1467 wrote: »

OP says he bought the other items at the same time/shortly after he bought the £199.99 bundle. My take on it is that £199.99 for such a bundle was seriously cheap, thus the other offers were not unnatural in comparison and the OP acted in good faith.

But the bottom line is ... the retailer shafted themselves by not having proper safeguards in place.

I can see your point and obviously a 3D TV bundle at £199 was a bargain, thats why i bought one, as that was delivered i kept an eye on the site and more bargains came up (it should be noted that not all items were as well priced) and i bought some of them, there were also items such as a new ipad advertised for £6 and a Wii for £5 but i did not buy these as i did not want them, i was buying as gifts for family, friends and myself for christmas.

i was expecting a big announcement on facebook by madbid.com along the lines of look what bargains we have sold lately but none was forthcoming.

Also, the site did and still does advertises products with a buy it now price of up to 93% off the RRP (for example iluv sports headphones + 35mp3 with an RRP of £34 and a buy it now price of just £2.59).

Therefore how is one to reasonably know what is a mistake and what is a genuine offer.

This is one of the points, along with 63 other examples that i produced in court.

Anselm

Well done on your court case, and very well done for winning it while being a litigant in person.

Edit: is there a court report I could read, it sounds really interesting!

harleyfan

Anselm wrote: »

Well done on your court case, and very well done for winning it while being a litigant in person.

Edit: is there a court report I could read, it sounds really interesting!

As the case was only held on Wednesday (5th September) there is currently no paperwork. I will receive paperwork in the post very soon and have been in touch to ask if i can get a transcript of the judgement.

The court pointed me in the direction of a transcript company who can request the tape and type an court authorised copy for me but at a cost. more forms to fill in.

They tell me the judgement only will be around £35 to type up. If i want the whole case typed from the recording at could be very expensive as that is every word that was spoken over the course of the whole day.

The court tell me to wait and see what arrives in the post as they are unsure what they are sending me at the moment as they are about a week behind with their post. groan.