RE: [ukha_d] NOT A Bargain] Kodak 3.1 Mp camera for £100

[Scott Crowther <scrowther@xxxxxxx>]

I remember a similar case a couple of years ago when a high
street retailer put widescreen TV's that were supposed to be =A31000
up on their site at =A310.00 (decimal point anyone).

If my memory's correct, it went to some sort of court in the end, but
the retailer won and didn't have to fulfil.

It was something to do with 'errors in pricing' in the sites T&C's.

However, it sort of leaves the door open for anyone to misprice=20
whenever they want to drag customers in and then make the sale anyway
by offering the '10% discount'.

dodgy.


Scott Crowther
Intamac Systems Ltd

t: +44 (0)1604 679262
e. scrowther@xxxxxxx
w. www.intamac.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Harrison [mailto:Mark.Harrison@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 07 January 2002 11:09
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] NOT A Bargain] Kodak 3.1 Mp camera for =A3100


In terms of "making a contract", the two parts are
"Offer" and
"Acceptance". One party offers to make a deal, and the other
party
accepts. Once this has happened, there is a legally binding contract.
(Of course, it's a good idea to get this in writing, because while a
convesation is enough, it's virtually impossible to prove if one party
wants to default on their obligations.)
=20
In normal (high-street) retailing, the vendor is NOT making an offer by
pricing up goods. Instead, the customer makes the "offer" -
"I'll pay
you =A3199 for a TiVo" and the retailer "Accepts" - "OK
squire, how would
you like to pay?".
=20
As such, if a retailer mis-prices goods, say puts the TiVo on at =A319.99,
and a customer offers to pay that figure, the retailer isn't YET in a
contract. (S)he's only in a contract if (s)he agrees. IE the retailer
can turn round at the till and say "sorry squire - that's a misprint,
it
should be =A3199".
=20
As such, if you OFFER to pay the price, and the website
"ACCEPTS", then
they have a legal obligation to sell you the goods SUBJECT TO THEIR
TERMS AND CONDITIONS, if they have made them available to you. Their
T&C
probably has a clause saying "subject to availablility" or some
similar
weasel words.
=20
HOWEVER
=20
>from
product, and a customer (or for that matter, anyone else) draws it to
their attention, they are obliged to make best efforts (? - possibly
only "reasonable efforts" - although in a shop, it's unlikely
that there
would be a material difference) to provide correct information instead.
=20
Mark Harrison=20
Head of Systems, eKingfisher=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark McCall [mailto:mark@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 7 January 2002 10:42
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ukha_d] NOT A Bargain] Kodak 3.1 Mp camera for =A3100


Grabbed a copy of the site just before it was changed...
http://www.automatedhome.co.uk/images/temp/kodak.jpg
<http://www.automatedhome.co.uk/images/temp/kodak.jpg>=20
=20
I have the HTML too.
=20
Any "legal" people on this list?  My experience of these things -
like
with ISPs - leads me to think they have a "get-out" clause for
this sort
of thing.  Seem to remember "invitation to treat" as well -
basically I
can put something in my window for sale at 1p but I don;t have to sell
it to you at that.
Another one for the "UKHA Legal Team"?? ;-)