Can a retailer force me to have a refund?

ClareE

I recently purchased an item that was incorrectly labelled on the shelf. The boxes on the shelf were display boxes, and once I'd taken it to the cashier, I was informed that there weren't any in stock, but that it could be ordered to arrive soon. I was also informed that the price was a special offer price (£29.99) and that it should have been more (£49.99) but that as it was their fault for not having updated the label, I could pay the lower price, the item would be ordered and my receipt would say that I had paid in full, at the lower price. That was on the 8th June 2015. I have since rung up at the beginning of July, to be told they were due any day. I then rang about a week later, was told to speak to the manager, who informed me that their supplier didn't want to supply the item at the lower price. I was told that they were trying to get one, but that I might have to have a refund instead.
Where do I stand? When I worked in retail years ago, and this kind of thing happened, which it did occasionally, the customer was kept happy, according to what they had been promised and the loss of money was written off and a lesson was learnt by the staff. The fact that they can't get it at the lower price isn't anything to do with me surely, had it actually been on the shelf they still would have had to sell it to me would they not?
Any help would be appreciated, I'd just like to go in there armed with a few facts if possible.
Thanks

stevemLS

Having worked in retail and dealt with similar situations and exercised a discretion in the customers favour, you must realise that a discretion means you either do or you don't.

In this instance, they choose not to.

And no, they don't have to sell you anything at the marked price (or at all), mistakes happen.

Sorry.

marliepanda

ClareE wrote: »

Where do I stand? When I worked in retail years ago, and this kind of thing happened, which it did occasionally, the customer was kept happy, according to what they had been promised and the loss of money was written off and a lesson was learnt by the staff. The fact that they can't get it at the lower price isn't anything to do with me surely, had it actually been on the shelf they still would have had to sell it to me would they not?
Any help would be appreciated, I'd just like to go in there armed with a few facts if possible.
Thanks

Nope they would not have 'had' to. They may have chose to, but they were not legally obliged.

They are also not legally obliged to get you one at that price, and can offer you a refund so you are 'back in the same position'

ClareE

Ah ok, is the whole "obliged to sell at the marked price" thing a bit less of a thing than everyone always makes out?
Maybe I'll just keep my fingers crossed for a favourable outcome

bris

Obliged to sell at the displayed price is wrong, however in your case they have accepted your offer so yes they must now fulfil the order. Well they should but it would take legal action for loss of bargain to make them, but for 20 quid it's not worth it.


The way your post is written acceptance has definitely taken place and marliepanda is wrong in this case.

stevemLS

bris wrote: »

Obliged to sell at the displayed price is wrong, however in your case they have accepted your offer so yes they must now fulfil the order. Well they should but it would take legal action for loss of bargain to make them, but for 20 quid it's not worth it.


The way your post is written acceptance has definitely taken place and marliepanda is wrong in this case.

No, doctrine of mistake - recession of contract

marliepanda

bris wrote: »

Obliged to sell at the displayed price is wrong, however in your case they have accepted your offer so yes they must now fulfil the order. Well they should but it would take legal action for loss of bargain to make them, but for 20 quid it's not worth it.


The way your post is written acceptance has definitely taken place and marliepanda is wrong in this case.

They can't source it so they cannot fulfil. She hasn't walked out the shop with it, it's an order which cannot be fulfilled. They are not legally obliged to fulfil it at that price.

They accepted her offer to order her one, but now they cannot source it.

boo_star

marliepanda wrote: »

They can't source it so they cannot fulfil. She hasn't walked out the shop with it, it's an order which cannot be fulfilled. They are not legally obliged to fulfil it at that price.

They accepted her offer to order her one, but now they cannot source it.

Loss of bargain would be the only avenue the OP can go down.

It's hardly worth it for £20 though

Nessun_Dorma

marliepanda wrote: »

They can't source it so they cannot fulfil. She hasn't walked out the shop with it, it's an order which cannot be fulfilled. They are not legally obliged to fulfil it at that price.

They accepted her offer to order her one, but now they cannot source it.

According to the OP, it is not a matter of being unable to source the goods, but more they are unwilling to provide them.

Does nobody understand the concept of contracts on this thread?

Nessun_Dorma

boo_star wrote: »

Loss of bargain would be the only avenue the OP can go down.

It's hardly worth it for £20 though

As a matter of principle perhaps, yes.

agrinnall

ClareE wrote: »

Ah ok, is the whole "obliged to sell at the marked price" thing a bit less of a thing than everyone always makes out?

The only "thing" it is is an urban myth, as pointed out some retailers will honour the incorrect shelf price but they are certainly under no obligation to sell at a lower, or any, price.