Item sent free now company want it back

neilmcl

agrinnall wrote: »

You may be right, but the responses in this thread show that there are differences of opinion, and if I were the OP I wouldn't be in a rush to either return the laptop or agree to pay any more than was confirmed by Lenovo.

As Brian Clough would say about opinions, "We can discuss it for a time then we decide I was right" (paraphrased)

neilmcl

DoaM wrote: »

As I understand it, a contract can be voided (made as if it never existed) due to a unilateral mistake before the contract is completed. (i.e. before the goods have been delivered and transfer of ownership has completed). Once the contract is complete then there's nothing to void.

As I should've clarified earlier, the contract becomes voidable rather than void. Voiding the contract is just one remedy a court can impose:

English courts may grant the following equitable remedies for mistake:

Voiding the contract: if a contract is voided it is unenforceable from the outset.

Specific performance: a court may order a contract to be performed but only if damages would not be an adequate remedy.

Rescission: this is where the contract is set aside and the parties are returned to the position in which they were before the contract was made.

Rectification: this is where the court corrects mistakes made in recording the parties’ agreement.

The court may order recovery of monies paid or property transferred by mistake.

DoaM

neilmcl wrote: »

As Brian Clough would say about opinions, "We can discuss it for a time then we decide I was right" (paraphrased)

“We talk about it for 20 minutes and then we decide I was right”

Close .

DoaM

neilmcl wrote: »

As I should've clarified earlier, the contract becomes voidable rather than void. Voiding the contract is just one remedy a court can impose:

The court may order recovery of monies paid or property transferred by mistake.

I guess it depends if a completed contract can be viewed as a mistake. After all it must have been reviewed by a person prior to the goods being delivered - the seller will have had several "touch points" with the order prior to the consumer receiving the goods.

powerful_Rogue

DoaM wrote: »

I guess it depends if a completed contract can be viewed as a mistake. After all it must have been reviewed by a person prior to the goods being delivered - the seller will have had several "touch points" with the order prior to the consumer receiving the goods.

Of course it's a mistake. The OP knew this before he placed an order. No company is going to intentionally send out a brand new laptop for free.

DoaM

You've misinterpreted what I've said (or simply disagree - which is fine) ... I've mused whether a completed contract can be viewed as a mistake.

I fully agree that the OP chanced his luck and knew it was a mistake - I just don't agree that the seller has an automatic right to a return or payment ... they had ample opportunity to avoid completing a mistaken contract.

photome

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Of course it's a mistake. The OP knew this before he placed an order. No company is going to intentionally send out a brand new laptop for free.

Then lenovo shouldnt have sent him the laptop they did so they completed the contract.


I agree with DoaM in this case

powerful_Rogue

I think this is going to be a case of some agreeing and some disagreeing.

Only way we will find out is if lenova issue SCC proceedings and get a result.

DoaM

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

I think this is going to be a case of some agreeing and some disagreeing.

Only way we will find out is if lenova issue SCC proceedings and get a result.

At least we agree on something.

neilmcl

DoaM wrote: »

Close .

I did say it was paraphrased