Rip Off Britain?

vuvuzela

Buzby wrote: »

The SEL (shelf edge label) should represent what will be charged at the till, but here's the problem. Prices change, loss leaders end, and the issue is when the new SEL is printed (triggering the new price at the till). The problem is in the time it takes for the label to get from the printer to the shelf.

Sadly, as they print anything up to 30+ at a time, the time taken to find the product and swap the SEL is variable.

Mistakes mean you must check your receipt. It is the nature of the beast.

Indeed. There are thousands of SELs in a store and they are put there by hand, thereby introducing human error into the equation. I always check my receipt at every store, surely this is just common sense rather than blindly accepting what they charge you ?

Money-Saving-King

Did you actually check the text of the receipt of just assume it was the right one? Sometimes they can overlap where the products might be.

Funny feeling the op won't be back though.

kwikbreaks

On shelf edge prices mentioned above...

What I've seen in numerous supermarkets is that some offer or other has sold out and the shelf stackers have filled the hole with an alternate product without removing the old price ticket. You need the eyes of an eagle not to be mislead on prices in any supermarket.

taciturn-reader

We have a local shop (a kind of 'mini-supermarket') called The One Stop Shop (owned by Tesco, apparently) where the staff refuse to give itemised till receipts. They'll had over a receipt for the total payment if the customer has paid via debit or credit card, but that's all.
So it's a case of keeping an eye on the price that appears when an item is being scanned, to make sure it's the anticipated price ... this isn't always easy when the customer is packing groceries into a bag at the same time.

Laz123

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Sorry but this is not something new. The invitation to treat scenario is often quoted on this board.

But from a consumer's point of view this has to be a stupid law. If that's the case why put a price on items in the first place if the advertised price is wrong and the law is not protecting us from the mistakes of the store's pricer.

Buellguy

taciturn-reader wrote: »

We have a local shop (a kind of 'mini-supermarket') called The One Stop Shop (owned by Tesco, apparently) where the staff refuse to give itemised till receipts. They'll had over a receipt for the total payment if the customer has paid via debit or credit card, but that's all.
So it's a case of keeping an eye on the price that appears when an item is being scanned, to make sure it's the anticipated price ... this isn't always easy when the customer is packing groceries into a bag at the same time.

Which sounds really dodgy to me, although I'm sure that there will be people along soon to say it is perfectly legal

whatmichaelsays

Laz123 wrote: »

But from a consumer's point of view this has to be a stupid law. If that's the case why put a price on items in the first place if the advertised price is wrong and the law is not protecting us from the mistakes of the store's pricer.

The law reflects the fact that human beings make errors, and that these minor errors should not cost retailers potentially significant sums.

Retailers cannot deliberately mislead on prices, and they must take reasonable steps to minimise and rectify any errors in their pricing. The odd one will still slip through, but that's the nature of human beings.

vuvuzela

taciturn-reader wrote: »

We have a local shop (a kind of 'mini-supermarket') called The One Stop Shop (owned by Tesco, apparently) where the staff refuse to give itemised till receipts. They'll had over a receipt for the total payment if the customer has paid via debit or credit card, but that's all.
So it's a case of keeping an eye on the price that appears when an item is being scanned, to make sure it's the anticipated price ... this isn't always easy when the customer is packing groceries into a bag at the same time.

Any proof of this ? I remember a few years ago some other poster came on here trying to get people to believe that Tesco were trying to change people 50p for receipts. They couldn't come up with anything convincing either...

19lottie82

Horseunderwater wrote: »

That has always been the case - My mum when she was alive, went into Woolies years back when kit kats were normally 14p each, however she saw multipacks at same price & took those 2 till instead & old eagle eye would not sell them to her for same reason. Called her manager who said you can buy 1 at that price as a reward for spotting the error, the rest will be 40p as usual. She took the 1 & never shopped there again. All over 80p. That was in 1981/2.

This could have been the straw that broke the camels back for poor old Woolies!

[Deleted User]

I knew about 'Invitation to treat', but I would have thought that the law might have had something to say if the customer is not told that he is being charged more at the time he hands the money over. If the receipt is deemed to tell the customer the prices, it begs the question as to whether it is reasonable to expect someone to hold the queue up while he stands picking through a long receipt, and to remember the shelf prices for every item.

If it's a genuine mistake it seems a bit petty of the supermarket not to correct it.