Order cancelled after payment and dispatch

hobbsy83

So, this is the reply -

Unfortunately your order was never meant to leave us.

At this time it is set to "paused" yet for some reason it was still processed which resulted in you getting the acceptance email.

Upon seeing multiple of the same type of orders being despatched our product team had to request from all our couriers a mass recall of the effected orders resulting in around 120+ customer being effected due to an onsite error.

Due to the sheer price of the items being well over £150 it was necessary but unfortunately customers like yourself have been left without products.

I do apologise one more for this.

Accident or not it's breach of contract right?

InsideInsurance

hobbsy83 wrote: »

Accident or not it's breach of contract right?

No harm in trying to argue it and reply saying that the contract is formed as the goods were dispatched as per their T&Cs

stebiz

Not so easy

Unilateral Mistake
A unilateral mistake is where only one party is mistaken and the other party knows about it and takes advantage of the error. A unilateral mistake also negates consent and the existence of an agreement.
(i) Unilateral mistake as to the terms of the contract
For a unilateral mistake to be operative, it must relate to the terms of the contract. This type of mistake occurs where one party is aware of the mistake and takes advantage of the other party’s error. Such a mistake will render the contract void.
In the case of Hartog v Colin and Shields (1939) the seller had made a mistake as to the price of goods and it was held that the buyer must have realised the mistake and as it concerned a term of the contract, the contract was held to be void.

hobbsy83

stebiz wrote: »

Not so easy

Unilateral Mistake
A unilateral mistake is where only one party is mistaken and the other party knows about it and takes advantage of the error. A unilateral mistake also negates consent and the existence of an agreement.
(i) Unilateral mistake as to the terms of the contract
For a unilateral mistake to be operative, it must relate to the terms of the contract. This type of mistake occurs where one party is aware of the mistake and takes advantage of the other party’s error. Such a mistake will render the contract void.
In the case of Hartog v Colin and Shields (1939) the seller had made a mistake as to the price of goods and it was held that the buyer must have realised the mistake and as it concerned a term of the contract, the contract was held to be void.

Hey Stebiz,

The product was in the clearance section and marked down to 99% discount in big red letters. I genuinely thought it was a proper bargain. I work for an online retailer so I kind of sympathise with them, i'm still going to pursue it though, nothing ventured nothing gained and all that....

stebiz

hobbsy83 wrote: »

Hey Stebiz,

The product was in the clearance section and marked down to 99% discount in big red letters. I genuinely thought it was a proper bargain. I work for an online retailer so I kind of sympathise with them, i'm still going to pursue it though, nothing ventured nothing gained and all that....

If I was in your shoes I might well have done the same. There again I do quite like a day in court.

hobbsy83

stebiz wrote: »

If I was in your shoes I might well have done the same. There again I do quite like a day in court.

Haha, I don't want it to go that far. I've never experienced a day in court, I don't think i'd find it very fun!

bris

A contract between us for the purchase of the goods will not be formed until your payment has been approved by us, the prices have been verified, and the order has been processed and dispatched.

The bold parts are their get out, everything is automated by the system but the dispatch got the greenlight before the prices were approved and verified. As far as I can tell when the offer by you was looked at it was rejected so acceptance didn't take place.

That and the fact that any reasonable person in court would accept this was an obvious mistake would agreer acceptance didn't take place would make any court action very weak.

InsideInsurance

hobbsy83 wrote: »

Haha, I don't want it to go that far. I've never experienced a day in court, I don't think i'd find it very fun!

Unfortunately for civil court, and particularly the small track (aka small claims court) it is all very informal, often just held in a small meeting room and really just discussion. No wigs or anything

Hintza

Why were you ordering more than one? you weren't going to sell them were you?

keithdc

bris wrote: »

A contract between us for the purchase of the goods will not be formed until your payment has been approved by us, the prices have been verified, and the order has been processed and dispatched.

The bold parts are their get out, everything is automated by the system but the dispatch got the greenlight before the prices were approved and verified. As far as I can tell when the offer by you was looked at it was rejected so acceptance didn't take place..[/I]

But, you would reasonably expect the retailer to verify prior to dispatch.
Otherwise, what would be reasonable? Can they turn round 6 months later and declare that a contract never existed because they hadn't got round to verify their prices until then??