Undercharged by shop

chattychappy

derps wrote: »

The retailer can discharge their liability simply by refunding and not supplying the items. I don't believe they have an obligation to account for anything more than the original amount of the contract because the price of the rings isn't an consequential loss the OP has suffered because they can reach their original position with a refund.

With respect, this is wrong. Once there is a binding contract, the wronged party doesn't have to accept restoration of the original position, but can insist on damages. Damages puts the party into the position they would be in had the breach not occured (as opposed to the contract not having occured). It is true that consumer legislation often gives buyers the option of rescission in some circumstances (ie returning goods and demanding a full refund), but this is an additional remedy at the option of the buyer.

It has to be that way. Imagine if the contrary was true and your analysis was correct. Easyjet could refuse to fly passengers and refund tickets if they could sell the seats at a higher price off their website. Afterall, the refund would allow the customer to "reach their original position", as you put it.

aleph_0

To take the observation about the misprice one step further, the OP was told a price for an item which doesn't have it's price displayed, in a market which can often have high margins and a bit of negotiation. The lack of a public pricelist is a deliberate strategy from the shop. The price offered clearly seemed reasonable to both the OP and the seller (this wasn't a computer mis-scan, this was someone saying, "this is the price we're offering it to you at").

If the shop are making such mistakes, they're also likely to be making mistakes in the shop's favour. I doubt they're making similar refunds to customers who they've offered an item to at a price which gives them more profit than usual.

The legal side has been covered already. But I see very little moral obligation for the OP to pay any more money.

Mojisola

tobtas wrote: »

I have not yet received the rings I purchased (mine needs to be made and my fiance's needs to be resized)

aleph_0 wrote: »

The legal side has been covered already. But I see very little moral obligation for the OP to pay any more money.

If he doesn't, he's unlikely to get the rings.

Would the couple really want wedding rings that had been fought over in court? Regardless of the legal situation, I'd get a refund from this company and go in search of rings that will have happy memories attached to them.