Tesco misprice policy discussion area

redfox

Bennifred wrote:

I was told by a cs in Tesco today that "actually we don't have to sell at the lowest advertised price - the price printed on the packet is the one that we are liable for"!!!

that is totally incorrect and I think that CS person ought to familiarise themself with the section of The Consumer Protection Act that covers misleading pricing PDQ!

"It is a criminal offence for traders to give a misleading price indication about goods or services. That applies in whatever way the price indication is given, whether written in a notice or leaflet or given verbally. For example, you may see a shelf edge price ticket showing £5 for the item, then you are charged £5.10 at the checkout"

spa2k

Bennifred wrote:

I was told by a cs in Tesco today that "actually we don't have to sell at the lowest advertised price - the price printed on the packet is the one that we are liable for"!!! :eek: This was over some Finest bacon - price on packet £2.48 - SEL £2.06. I had two packs. I expressed surprise, but she assured me it was so, but said she'd r&r as a matter of goodwill "on this occasion"! I just said "Thank you" nicely

The cs is not correct. If we are advertising a product at a lower price then that is what we should sell it for, full stop.

edit: Redfox beat me to it!

ben500

Bennifred wrote:

I was told by a cs in Tesco today that "actually we don't have to sell at the lowest advertised price - the price printed on the packet is the one that we are liable for"!!! :eek: This was over some Finest bacon - price on packet £2.48 - SEL £2.06. I had two packs. I expressed surprise, but she assured me it was so, but said she'd r&r as a matter of goodwill "on this occasion"! I just said "Thank you" nicely

Absolute balderdash if two prices are displayed they have two choices sell at the lower price or don't sell at all. If they sell at the higher price an offence has been committed and r&r also applies, r&r whilst voluntary in its introduction (if you call introduced in order to avoid prosecution voluntary that is) as a part of the national marketing campaigns it comprises part of the offer to treat and they are indeed obligated to fulfill it as long as they advertise it so.

Bri_4

Martini wrote:

What on Earth is a non-genuine customer?
If you have bought an item you are a customer.

I had a new overcharge rule stated to me in Bedford last week!
Sir, You haven't left the premises with the overcharged goods so the best we can do for you is to refund you what you have been overcharged!
But I have left and come back in, the rest of the shopping is in the car, and I've come back in with the mispriced goods.
That's not left the premises sir, it's still Tesco property!

I dare say if someone is shoplifting then they don't walk behind them to the edge of the car park? This would be heavenly for shoplifters if so, because yuou could see if you had been clocked by security. So if they say that to you Martini they must also allow shoplifters to leave the building?

JOEL on this same point a bit ago (I'm working my way up the thread and am on page 107) you said you don't give refunds to people you suspect are looking specifically for mispriced goods (aka non-genuine customers). There is no mention of intent in the mispriced policy so how can you refuse to implement the clear policy on the grounds of your suspicion, (regardless of the basis for that suspicion, proven or otherwise).

fwiw the CS people at my local store are great. I do have an irk with a guy on electricals who wouldn't take my MP3 player back (updated the firmware and it never worked again) because I threw away the rather poxy headphones that came with it.

elliot330

redfox wrote:

that is totally incorrect and I think that CS person ought to familiarise themself with the section of The Consumer Protection Act that covers misleading pricing PDQ!

"It is a criminal offence for traders to give a misleading price indication about goods or services. That applies in whatever way the price indication is given, whether written in a notice or leaflet or given verbally. For example, you may see a shelf edge price ticket showing £5 for the item, then you are charged £5.10 at the checkout"

Redfox,
Are you 100% sure that is correct? The wife tells me that the advertised/displayed price, misleading as it is, is only an offer and only once the product has been scanned at the checkout and the new price given do you actually agree to the price enter into a contract to purchase the goods. Our refunds are only down to Tesco's policy and goodwill gesture. Unfortunately the OH isn't here at the moment otherwise she could confirm...

I shall don my flame suit and wait to be flamed :eek:

Elliot

redfox

it is very clear on the DTI website so I think it can be taken as correct, yes

there's a FAQ here

elliot330

redfox wrote:

it is very clear on the DTI website so I think it can be taken as correct, yes

there's a FAQ here

Apologies Redfox, I stand corrected.. :beer:

Wait till she gets home.. :rotfl:

Bri_4

johanne wrote:

a member of staff in our store was dimissed for gross misconduct this week over the overcharge policy. He bought 2 crates of budweiser beer on his break for a party that night - which is perfectly acceptable (were allowed to shop in our breaks)... he then genuinely realised afterwards that hed been overcharged so went to get his refund (while still on his break) - as per company policy...

Now why was he dismissed?.. Because the manager believes he purposely KNEW he was going to be overcharged for it and therefore get it for "free"... which is "purposely defrauding the company"! :rolleyes:

If this is how they treat their staff over the policy! Well... :rolleyes:

Blimey! Same thing again...the Policy makes no statement of intent so even IF the lad did this on purpose knowing it was an accidental mis price...IMO there's still no grounds for twisting the policy, now to the extent of needing to sack someone for trying to use it (rather than the std probs of refusing a refund).

USDAW = bunch of crooked dip**its IMO, all the way upto the top ranks..

spa2k

Bri wrote:

I dare say if someone is shoplifting then they don't walk behind them to the edge of the car park? This would be heavenly for shoplifters if so, because yuou could see if you had been clocked by security. So if they say that to you Martini they must also allow shoplifters to leave the building?

Indeed shoplifters are allowed to leave the building....this shows then that goods have been taken without intent to pay. Indeed suspected shoplifters are not shoplifters until they have left the premises with goods without paying for them.

BTW, I agree with you regarding USDAW!!

Regarding your MP3 player, from the stores point of view, you updated the firmware causing product failure....however if that was the only problem I'm fairly sure it would have been accepted as a refund, although as you had not got the earphones (if you had one of those ionix?? ones i know what you mean about the quality) then the store concerned would not have got credit for the returned item from the manufacturer thus causing a loss to the store for something that is not their fault. Hope that goes some way to explaining his decision (although he should have explained it to you!)

spa2k

a member of staff in our store was dimissed for gross misconduct this week over the overcharge policy. He bought 2 crates of budweiser beer on his break for a party that night - which is perfectly acceptable (were allowed to shop in our breaks)... he then genuinely realised afterwards that hed been overcharged so went to get his refund (while still on his break) - as per company policy...

Now why was he dismissed?.. Because the manager believes he purposely KNEW he was going to be overcharged for it and therefore get it for "free"... which is "purposely defrauding the company"!

If this is how they treat their staff over the policy! Well...

What the staff member concerned should have realised is that due to his actions all staff members pay is affected. Tesco effectively gave the staff member free stock. This has to be paid for by someone and therefore comes out of the company (admittedly vast) profits. Seeing as each and every member of staff gets a share of those profits, who suffers? Not only the chap claiming the refund but every other member of staff in the company and every single shareholder (i'm sure that there are some on this board). "Only one refund" i hear you say! What if one member of staff in each store did the same...how much would this then total?

I can totally see the managers point of view and agree with the staff members dismissal....why should the rest of us suffer due to other staff members greed?