On 20 Mar, 16:50, Baldoni wrote:
> Cynic formulated on Thursday :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:21:38 GMT, Baldoni wrote:
>
> >> I was told long ago that an item had to be sold by the price on that
> >> item regardless if the item cost more than the actuall price wrongly
> >> placed on item. =A0Also I was told that on no account must new price ta=
gs
> >> be placed over old price tags.
>
> >> The customer can insist on this. =A0That is how it used to be anyway.
>
> > The law certainly is not like that now, and I don't believe that it
> > ever was like that. =A0It would mean that if someone were to wipe a few
> > zeros off the price written on a windscreen in a car dealer's lot one
> > night, you'd be able to rush into the showroom as soon as it opened
> > and demand to buy a =A350000 car for =A35.
>
> > The law is, and AFAIK has always been, that the customer cannot insist
> > on being sold anything at all. =A0The customer is making an offer for
> > the goods at the till, and it is for the person at the till to decide
> > whether or not to accept the offer.
>
> > Of course, there are some shops that will agree to honour any shelf
> > price or even to match the shelf price of any other store in the area
> > - but that is for marketing and goodwill reasons, not because they are
> > obliged to do so.
>
> I once saw a store assistant insist that she sold a pan for less than
> it was worth because it was priced less than it's value. =A0I took her
> words at the time to mean that it was the law. =A0Glad to have cleared
> that up after all that time, 27 years !
I suspect she wasn't employed as the stores legal expert though .... |