Argos/Homebase 49p telly discussion thread

amancalledchip

its not the fact how many you ordererd.(an incorrect assumption on my part, not that thats the real point. )

its that you think youve been hard done by because you are a student, and you had money debited from your card, money that you cannot afford to pay.(BTW, had it of come off,and you would be getting the sets, they wouldnt arrive tommorrow, chances are it would be about 7 to 10 days, the refund will be applied quicker than that, so, it means unless you had the TVs already sold and the money to repay you credit card you would have been in debt , and incurred chearges......)

this forum is about saving money, not pay interest on a credit card would be included in that.

had the deal come off great, it didnt.
just accept it,move on....

dadada

alanshave wrote:

I think some people on these forums really need to take a step back here, when did I ever say that I ordered hundreds of these TV's? Thats right, I didn't. So why assume that I did and start insulting me and other students?!! Some people are just too quick to pass judgement.

Infact I ordered 2 tv's and 2 three year warranties, and if thats greed then I really am sorry! lol. I get the feeling a few people owe me apologies. Namely astep70uk, jay05, dadada, c_smith and amancalledchip.

On the subject of morals dadada, it is my understanding that moneysavingexpert is "about saving money on anything and everything – finding the best deals and beating the system". Consumer revenge as Martin himself puts it.

But truly, after joining this website and being very impressed with it and its members, i'm left shocked at the maliciousness of some.

I don't owe you an apology.

I never accussed you of anything.

" ... On the subject of morals dadada, it is my understanding that moneysavingexpert is "about saving money on anything and everything – finding the best deals and beating the system". Consumer revenge as Martin himself puts it ... "

Perhaps you might like to tell that to a Vietnamese sweat shop worker ?

Or an unemployed UK worker who has recently had their job outsorced to India ?

Or the relative of one of the people who caught BSE from a meat product ?

Or one of the people recently made redundant from Pitney Bowes, who were the subject of MSEer consumers " beating the system " on a " Free "offer to businesses.


Notice how " Martin " never comments on these particular threads.

I bet he is ashamed of the monster he has created.

tonyg_2

(...hope noone has posted this already) there is an article in The Times covering both the Argos/Homebase and also the recent Dell mis-prices. The link is as follows:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1759207,00.html

divadee

As Martin says 'Please be nice to ALL moneysavers'. If not this thread will have to be closed as well.


Thank You

rolpaula

divadee wrote:

As Martin says 'Please be nice to ALL moneysavers'. If not this thread will have to be closed as well.


Thank You

smile

divadee

Taken from the times article.



Which?, formerly known as the Consumers’ Association, said that GUS, the parent company of Argos and Homebase, did not have to honour the contract.

A spokeswoman said that the company could rely on the “doctrine of mistake”, adding that “if it had been advertised at £200, then that would be a different situation”. She said that it was the “too good to be true” element to the offer that meant the company was not expected to honour it.

No blanket law governing shoppers’ legal rights when buying over the internet. Argos can dictate terms of sales contracts as long as they are published in their terms and conditions.



When customer goes online and sees price tag attached to goods, there’s no guarantee they are entitled to that price. Because the medium of sale is a website, Argos has the right to decide at what stage an offer and acceptance forming a contract takes place.

Once an online purchase has taken place, vendor has automatically to send confirmation e-mail to customer. This does not constitute acceptance amounting to a contract and does not guarantee the customer the goods at that stated price. Acceptance does not take place until the product is dispatched to the customer. Until then, according to the Terms and Conditions of Argos, the retailer is entitled to withdraw the offer.

SO there we have the full legal position.

dadada

divadee wrote:

As Martin says 'Please be nice to ALL moneysavers'. If not this thread will have to be closed as well.


Thank You

Is anybody not being nice ?

A poster ( alanshave ) raised the issue of what was " morally right ".

A few other posters have discussed this and other points.

I don't detect anyone not being nice.

It looks like a conversation or discussion between responsible adults.

It would be great for Martin to personally comment.

divadee

dadada wrote:

It would be great for Martin to personally comment.

Martin is away at the moment busy filming his new tv series. So is not around at the moment. So he is unable to comment. As Which? (formally the consumer association) through the times article has clarified the law on this issue, then I dont see the point in carrying the 'discussion' on.

Dave=m55

divadee wrote:

the times article has clarified the law on this issue, then I dont see the point in carrying the 'discussion' on.

Laws been 'clarified' for days on this, still people wrongly beleive that when monies been removed etc etc.

Its like a never ending circle.

Still beleive that this should be well and truely closed as well.

Poppy9

divadee wrote:

Taken from the times article.

Which?, formerly known as the Consumers’ Association, said that GUS, the parent company of Argos and Homebase, did not have to honour the contract.

A spokeswoman said that the company could rely on the “doctrine of mistake”, adding that “if it had been advertised at £200, then that would be a different situation”. She said that it was the “too good to be true” element to the offer that meant the company was not expected to honour it.

I agree here that those who ordered knew it was a mistake.

No blanket law governing shoppers’ legal rights when buying over the internet. Argos can dictate terms of sales contracts as long as they are published in their terms and conditions.

As there is no law for internet sales it has not been tested in a court of law whether their T&C vary buyers rights under normal contract rules. No-one's T&C may take precedence over your rights in law.

When customer goes online and sees price tag attached to goods, there’s no guarantee they are entitled to that price. Because the medium of sale is a website, Argos has the right to decide at what stage an offer and acceptance forming a contract takes place.

Do they? Has this been tested in law?

Once an online purchase has taken place, vendor has automatically to send confirmation e-mail to customer. This does not constitute acceptance amounting to a contract and does not guarantee the customer the goods at that stated price. Acceptance does not take place until the product is dispatched to the customer. Until then, according to the Terms and Conditions of Argos, the retailer is entitled to withdraw the offer.

As mentioned above only their T&C state no contract until dispatch of goods. It doesn't mention the fact that they have taken payment for the goods. As no law governing internet sales surely normal laws of contract apply. Taking money implies acceptance. I remember from studing business law many years ago it being drummed into us that in a contract Consideration doesn't have to be equal or fair it just has to be present. Wish I could remember the cases which substantiated this showing unfair contracts being upheld in law.

SO there we have the full legal position.

No we don't - we have a newspapers view on the position. Untested in a court of law.

Just for the record - no I didn't order as I knew I wouldn't get so didn't want to give my CC details needlessly. I knew I would not have the resources to contest in a court of law and I knew that it was a mistake on the website.