TESCO, 2 Self Edge Labels SEL for same product

DCFC79

halibut2209 wrote: »

OP was asking if this is the case, not stating it as fact

Not totally aimed at the OP but for other people who think its against the law to take photos of an sel in Tesco.

the_insider

What people should be complaining about is Asda's trick of charging £0.50 per can for Napolina chopped tomatoes and £4.00 for a 4 pack. Apparently the cardboard sleeve is £2.00 extra. People don't even flinch and I seem to be the only person who notices that the cans on the lower shelf are half the price for exactly the same item. Can't believe it.

gollum007

SuperHan wrote: »

Fines only really apply where there is an intent to defraud. This is just a mistake where a member of staff has changed one ticket, but not seen the other.

It's probably an error by the filling staff.
By far and away the biggest cause of these types of overcharge is where staff don't/ can't find something and they just stick it into a gap.
Correct procedure here is to print the 'new' price ticket as an additional location & let the labels people sort it out, but most people print it a as a replacement (The system's default option). When the price changes, the system prints as many labels as it thinks it needs, and if there are more than it knows about you get what you see here

-Gollum

jhwt

SuperHan - I think Gollum writes a lot of sense on this.

Apologies for a rather long post - but clarity on this is important.

The Price Marking Order 2004 says prices must be "close" to the product. This is necessary because we no longer stick small price labels onto every packet. We use SELs. ~7m away and opposite to the isle in a large store is not "close" or next.

The price, an invitation to treat, was £6 on SEL. TESCO accepted my £6 offer by selling me the product. TESCO have apologised and do not dispute the overcharge.

Tesco are obligated to sell me the product at the lower £6 price an not at any higher price.

Page 2 of the Order "Obligation to indicate selling price 4.—(1) Subject to paragraph (2) and articles 9 and 10, where a trader indicates that any product is or may be for sale to a consumer, he shall indicate the selling price of that product in accordance with the provisions of this Order."

This is also referred to in an explanatory note and interpreted by Standing Standards as "must". Of course other laws and regulations are in the mix.

But Gollum has already explained to us that they do not want overcharging. Supermarkets are allowed to use computer assisted checkout systems and PLU Price Look Up systems in place of individual labels however the store shall not charge any customer a price for any product that exceeds the item, shelf, sale or advertising price, whichever is least.

Inspections can compare the shelf, sale or advertised price of stock with the computer-assisted checkout system price and too many errors is not acceptable.

So your argument of how contract law / Sale of Goods etc pans out here fails to allow for the context of technology being used and the conditions under which stores are permitted to use it.

The price we pay is the price on the SEL close to the product. It does not matter at all what price the computerised PLU uses. The computer database is in error. The staff need to swiftly remove the incorrect SEL, effectively rising the price (from £6 to £8 in this case).

Supermarkets do not want to record a large volume of price errors and therefore one way to usually settle the matter is to pay "double the difference".

Photographs: I note that TESCO HQ made no comment to me about taking a photograph and I have not been warned or banned from the store. So HQ seem pretty relaxed about it, product+SEL only, and not staff or faces, and welcome the customers helping their teams correct prices.

I once went to Lidl and the PLU charge me £148 for some tomatoes. There was no suggestion that Lidl had changed the SEL price / the invitation using PLU or that I had accepted to pay £148.

jkkne

All this for a couple of quid?

Think folk need to put the computer down and go for a walk, get a hobby or just......get over it

gollum007

Yep, I spend my life cleaning up these sorts of mistakes
It really peeves those of us who change the labels when people don't follow the processes, as it can very easily snowball until there's a real problem.
The CSD processes are designed to allow us to track who is making the errors and actually correct them at source, but some people are more obsessed with the targets.

Probably shouldn't go on much more....

-Gollum

SimonSays

gollum007 wrote: »

Store is talking rubbish.
In this case, it should be processed as an overcharge with Dual Location entered on the system as the reason code. DTD absolutely applies in this case, don't let them tell you any different, and insist it's recorded on the CSD.

The reason stores don't like recording things as overcharges is because one of the store targets is the number of overcharges per 10,000 customers.
If the store tries to get difficult, insist they record a customer complaint on CSD with a reply from head office required. If they don't want to do that, then write/ phone the central Tesco number (Not the store number from the top of your reciept), and more than likely they'll get a visit from the area manager

-Gollum

You CAN call the number on the receipt as it goes through to Maesy-Coed-Road contact centre in Cardiff if you go through to speak to someone.

Also DtD wouldn't apply as if theyve been charged the shelf price albeit one of the two. It would be classed as a PI error.

But you'd know that from T5 and from silver award training

007stuart

Had something like this in B&Q. When I pointed this out at checkout to assistant he marched to aisle and ripped the SEL off and went with me back to check out and grudgingly acknowledged lower price to till operator.


Wife was not happy but it saved me a couple of quid.

jhwt

Useful:
from Daily Telegraph "Christmas consumer rights: don't let shops box you into a corner" 23 Dec 2012

"MYTH 5
'The price tag was wrong, but the retailer has to honour it'
THE FACTS Unfortunately not. This is a case of "if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is". If you happen to spot something that is incorrectly priced you have no legal right to buy it for that price. If you get to the till and the sales assistant notices, the retailer is within its rights to refuse to sell it to you for that price. This is also the case if you order an item online – if the mistake is noticed before you have been contacted by the retailer to confirm the sale, there is no legally binding contract and it is within its rights to refuse the sale.

However, if your sale has been accepted, you can insist that the retailer sells you the goods for the price at which they were advertised. Which?, the consumer group, said that in this case you might be able to buy the same item elsewhere and claim against the original trader for the difference in price. To do this you should write to the retailer in the first instance, explaining what you are doing. If it doesn't agree to refund the money, you will normally have to take a claim to the small claims court (see box above).
The trader could try to argue that it made a mistake with the pricing, voiding the contract. But it would have to show that the price was so low that you must have known it was not genuine: for example, a new leather jacket with a price tag of £2.":money: