Can online grocery sites change the price of items after being checked out?

born_again

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81997991#Comment_81997991

the cost implication of a return for a supermarket would be significantly less - given the driver is already there with a van which has to return to the store anyway.

Given that retailer will know by refunds given to customers, it is a easy track for them.

As to cost, yes driver does go back to base, then has the wasted time of unloading returns, rather than just loading the next deliveries. Someone also has to process the refunds. So that is additional cost in processing. Even with a staff member already there, they could be doing something else.

sheramber

If they didn’t offer online ordering that would save vans, fuel and staff to pick orders.

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81998041#Comment_81998041

What are you accusing OP of doing? They simply asked if Sainsbury's were permitted to change prices between order and delivery…

GDB2222

I am just suggesting that we should all act responsibly and not create waste unnecessarily. That’s not aimed specifically at the op.

For example, it’s perfectly legal to order ten or more items of clothing with the intention of only keeping one. I’m questioning whether such practices are responsible.

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81998489#Comment_81998489

Yes, I agree entirely about ordering excessive quantities of clothing (or anything else) with the intention of returning most or even all, but that doesn't seem to be a particularly close match with the grocery repricing issue in this thread, as might have been implied by your reference to "It is obviously wasteful and ungreen to do as the op does".

GDB2222

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81998528#Comment_81998528

Clearly, sending even one item back creates a cost. So, there ought to be a good reason.

Ergates

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81999034#Comment_81999034

Good reasons could easily be: These bananas are all bruised - I'm not paying for damaged goods.
OR
The price you've charged me for these tins of beans is twice what they were when I added them to my cart.
OR
I wanted the turnips to go along with the haggis, but you've run out of haggis, so I don't want the turnips any more.
Etc.

I very much doubt a significant number of people are recieving their shopping and then going "You know what, I've changed my mind and I don't want this celery any more" - that's just not how people do grocery shopping.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81999034#Comment_81999034

If you send something back someone has to restock it, that's more working hours for ordinary people and less money for people like Larry Fink.

Have a look at the shareholders of any big company and you'll see the same trillion dollar asset management companies.

In terms of the environment, food companies condition the population to over consume, half the stuff in the supermarket contains palm oil which grows where the rainforest once stood, I don't remember asking for that but it does make these companies lots of money.

Closer to the point, supermarkets should be sending out food with long dates, they know customers will reject short dated food and once that goes back it can't be resold.

Tesco at least, should be picking from the back, the vans are refrigerated, I don't see any reason stuff can't go back on the shelf and where it doesn't there should be enough food banks and similar community projects to put unwanted food to good use, and indeed the staff at the store have to eat.