What are the rules on incorrectly priced online sales?

I have just seen a pair of something being sold online that is
underpriced by about 200 quid. If I were to order these two items as a
pair, could the company demand the extra, or will I get them at the same
price I added them to my shopping basket for?

Is their acceptance of my order and subsequent debiting of my credit
card a contract of sale, or can they pull out of the deal before
delivery of the goods?

 

The debiting of your card is certainly a contract of sale, and an email
or webpage screen print confirming your order would be too.

<fx: strokes Kodak digital camera...>

 

if it was a TV then in the terms and condition it says they can cancel
the order if there was a pricing error, so no it's not binding

 

Is their acceptance of my order and subsequent debiting of my credit

IIRC there is a law, policy or something that says that if you know full
well that the price must be wrong and the price is an obvious error
then the product sale can be cancelled or full price paid.
It has been tested a few times in the last few years because of
the very same reason as you have found.

taz.

 

Kodak tried that with their digi camera cock-up, and it was decided
(albeit not in court) that they'd offered for sale, people had accepted
the offer, people had paid, and Kodak had acknowledged their purchases.
All electronically, but no matter.

With all those elements in place, you have a binding contract.

 

Thus spake taz unto the assembled multitudes:

Offering an item for sale at a given price, and your acceptance of the offer
at that price, forms a binding contract between you and the seller, so i
don't see how they could pull out without being in breach of contract.

Friend of mine's mum saw a washing machine on sale in a showroom and some
fool had mis-written the price tag on the machine as £25 when it shgould
have been £225. She marched up to the salesman and immediately asked for
the machine at that price (even though she didn't really need one). The
salesman realised immediately that there had been a cockup, but to his
credit he agreed to sell her the machine for 25 quid.

 

That's different. A price tag etc is an "invitation to treat" and does
not imply a binding contract. Unless you offer to pay that price, and
your offer is accepted.

 

I must of got my fuddled brain confused again
I was sure that there have been a few case's over
the last few years where this was tested and the seller
won out and got full price or cancelled the sale.
I know that if a price label on an item in a store is
priced wrong then that item must sell for the advertised
price. But I thought it was different for a web priced item.
Oh well back to the garage and inhale some more exhaust
fumes

taz.

 

Quite. One of the first things we were taught on my uni. law course
years ago. Consumer adverts do appear to be an exception to the general
principle though - I got the feeling that the line was diverted a bit to
go round 'invitation to treat' years back, for the benefit of retailers,
otherwise day-to-day ordinary mistakes would be hugely expensive.

Incidentally, I don't think eBay is an auction in the strict legal sense
of the term. They can say what they like about electronic 'fall of
hammer' but at the end of the day people are merely communicating via
the internet, although I agree it *looks* like an auction. I don't know
how much has been tested in court here, and I expect US and UK courts
might well take different views. I expect someone who really knows will
be along in a mo...

.... just don't get me started on PayPal, suffice it to say as a seller I
am most unlikely to ever use their 'service' again.

Regards,

Simonm.

 

SpamTrapSeeSig wrote

As a total non user, why?

 

I can't go into too much detail about my own circumstances right now,
but my own experience was relatively trivial and a salutary warning.

Suffice it to say if you're a buyer, I recommend PayPal, for the
wonderful 'buyer protection' they offer. It far exceeds both the law and
promises far more than other money-wiring service deem commercially
sensible. I mean that. It's neither irony nor sarcasm. You'll not find a
better deal on the planet, as many souls, some honest and some not, are
finding out on an hourly basis.

Just two caveats: Don't give them your bank details, and don't use them
to receive funds. Oh, and one thing to ponder on: if they're making huge
profits, AND they're offering very generous BUYER protection, how might
the equation be balanced?

The answer to this last I genuinely don't know, but I am resolved to
find out.

Have a look at www.paypalsucks.com if you want the gory details.


Regards,

Simonm.

 

True what the bloke in that article says, the "reasonable person"
stance. Otoh, the Kodak offer was a believable special offer, it being
100ukp when similar spec cameras of the day were selling at 300ukp.

I still think Kodak made a few quid on each one, just not as much as
they normally would have. Whatever, it certainly got them noticed by
thousands of buyers who wouldn't have bought one otherwise, and it
possibly generated an immense amount of customer goodwill when Kodak
honoured the deal.