Garden Rooms Great Offer

iwantitnow

iwantitnow wrote: »

Roses are red violets are blue
but I'm not getting my garden room
from B@Q

A misprice it was, which you all knew
but your hopes they still grew and grew

The phonecall has brought an end to the dream
so time to employ the legal team

I am in no doubt that it will go on for years only to eventually end in tears
so take my advice and do not groan
dial 08457 909090 and give the samaritans a phone

Looks like the samaritans are now being inundated with moneysaving mispricers threatening to throw themselves off a cliff unless B&Q honour this misprice.

All I can say is jump ya !!!!! like me you knew it was a misprice in the first place, so don't go on making out that you are naive

photome

iwantitnow wrote: »

Looks like the samaritans are now being inundated with moneysaving mispricers threatening to throw themselves off a cliff unless B&Q honour this misprice.

All I can say is jump ya !!!!! like me you knew it was a misprice in the first place, so don't go on making out that you are naive

I knew it was a misprice, but if B and Q have terms in their T and Cs that shouldnt be there then they should be held to account.

How do you or B and Q HO explain the staff instore not spotting the "obvious" mistake.

DenBen

It's Palladium Conservatories my husband feels sorry for. One day they had 230 orders, and must have thought this year's Christmas Bonus was well safe. Next day - nowt! :think:

kazmeister

I too ordered and waited, they took my money, I got a letter Thursday, they havent as yet refunded my money.

Realistically we didnt expect to get one but .........

If it was SOOO an obvious mistake why did they not contact us with the real price before taking our money and sitting on it.

Hello1234_2

Hello everyone,

The previous poster "Welcome" @ 5:31pm has got it right, you've almost no chance of compelling B&Q to honour the agreement.

The reason has nothing to do with the terms and conditions or the "acceptance" of your orders that were communicated by email after payment was taken (incidentally the phrase "we reserve the right not to supply you at our discretion" is not an unfair term in the context that it has been written into the terms and conditions, and somewhat irrelevant anyway).

The law that B&Q may rely on is the "doctrine of mistake". This allows them, in laymans terms, to withdraw from the agreement on the grounds that you knew the offer was too good to be true. Mistakes do, unfortunately, happen and you cannot expect to take advantage of that in good conscience.

If you doubt that any reasonable person would not have made that assumption, then look through some of the comments posted in this thread:

"Just ordered one. I will let you know if they honour the order."

"I just phoned customer services and it is showing on all their screens at the £357 price so they said they have no reason to think it is priced wrong !! Bargain of the century."

"Like me you knew it was a misprice in the first place, so don't go on making out that you are naive."

"I knew it was a misprice, but if B and Q have terms in their T and Cs that shouldnt be there then they should be held to account."

Clearly there are enough people here who suspected there was a mistake, and greed is getting the better of your judgement. If B&Q can show the reasonable person would have assumed it was a mistake then they can back out of the agreement. End of.

There is not one argument here that holds any water. If you want to save a few pennies, I'd forgo writing your letters - it's a waste of time and money. If you take this to court you can expect at least £100 costs if B&Q defend it. If you lose the case then not only will you be that £100 (or so) out of pocket, but you MAY have to cover some of their costs as well.

Sorry that's not you wanted to hear, I can only assume that whoever contacted Consumer Direct must have omitted some key detail when explaining the situation.

Of course, some of you will ignore this and go ahead anyway in blind ignorance of the law. That is, of course, your prerogative and you never know your luck but you might first want to look up the doctrine of mistake plus the Argos and Kodak cases on the 'net. Do try and read them properly though.

Good luck bargain hunters.

You'll need it!!

iwantitnow

Hello1234 wrote: »

Hello everyone,

The previous poster "Welcome" @ 5:31pm has got it right, you've almost no chance of compelling B&Q to honour the agreement.

The reason has nothing to do with the terms and conditions or the "acceptance" of your orders that were communicated by email after payment was taken (incidentally the phrase "we reserve the right not to supply you at our discretion" is not an unfair term in the context that it has been written into the terms and conditions, and somewhat irrelevant anyway).

The law that B&Q may rely on is the "doctrine of mistake". This allows them, in laymans terms, to withdraw from the agreement on the grounds that you knew the offer was too good to be true. Mistakes do, unfortunately, happen and you cannot expect to take advantage of that in good conscience.

If you doubt that any reasonable person would not have made that assumption, then look through some of the comments posted in this thread:

"Just ordered one. I will let you know if they honour the order."

"I just phoned customer services and it is showing on all their screens at the £357 price so they said they have no reason to think it is priced wrong !! Bargain of the century."

"Like me you knew it was a misprice in the first place, so don't go on making out that you are naive."

"I knew it was a misprice, but if B and Q have terms in their T and Cs that shouldnt be there then they should be held to account."

Clearly there are enough people here who suspected there was a mistake, and greed is getting the better of your judgement. If B&Q can show the reasonable person would have assumed it was a mistake then they can back out of the agreement. End of.

There is not one argument here that holds any water. If you want to save a few pennies, I'd forgo writing your letters - it's a waste of time and money. If you take this to court you can expect at least £100 costs if B&Q defend it. If you lose the case then not only will you be that £100 (or so) out of pocket, but you MAY have to cover some of their costs as well.

Sorry that's not you wanted to hear, I can only assume that whoever contacted Consumer Direct must have omitted some key detail when explaining the situation.

Of course, some of you will ignore this and go ahead anyway in blind ignorance of the law. That is, of course, your prerogative and you never know your luck but you might first want to look up the doctrine of mistake plus the Argos and Kodak cases on the 'net. Do try and read them properly though.

Good luck bargain hunters.

You'll need it!!

And who were you before you changed your name to Hello1234. Your IP address looks familiar

DenBen

It's Lynne from B&Q!

I think that probably most of the 230 people who ordered this item have probably given up now. I know I abandoned hope around about Monday.

But B&Q have not handled the whole situation appropriately at all. They had email addresses and phone numbers for everyone who ordered online. And phone numbers for people who bought in store or on the phone. Despite this, they dragged their feet about informing purchasers of the situation, and allowed expectations to rise. Regardless of the ins and outs of the legalities, they've probably caused themselves a fair bit of aggravation still to come, I would think, from some disappointed buyers.

And I might even sue them for a replacement rug for my study floor, when my arty-farty family get paint all over it! :rotfl:

rb_1947

Hello1234, I think you're being disingenuous in quoting the "doctrine of mistake". Given that:
1) there were two separate items advertised in a "Sale" at the same price
2) the products clearly advertised the original price, the reduced price and the saving to be made in each case
3) we have since establish that there have been significant variations in price (see earlier posts where it has been established that the same product has been on sale for between £1600 - c.£5000. Hence it would not be unreasonable to expect the advertised price to have been genuine given the historical variances.

Therefore, it would be very difficult to recind the contract on the basis of doctrine of mistake.

Goodbye5678!

DenBen

Actually, regarding my previous post, I'd like to apologise for speaking for others. I only know of 1 of the 230 people who ordered this garden room who has pretty much given up, and that's me. I shouldn't make assumptions about the other 229.

kazmeister

DenBen wrote: »

Actually, regarding my previous post, I'd like to apologise for speaking for others. I only know of 1 of the 230 people who ordered this garden room who has pretty much given up, and that's me. I shouldn't make assumptions about the other 229.

228 - we were realistic from the start