On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:52:39 +0100, "tim \(not at home\)"
wrote:
>
>"Cynic" wrote in message
>news:pu15u35ukquputlgae5jmfl277ik1eur96@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:21:38 GMT, Baldoni wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>
>No, it's so that they don't have Trading Standards coming in and charging
>them with a "misleading pricing" offence.
>
>The OP should complain to TS. Whilst Cynic is correct to say that they
>don't contractually have to sell at that price, the shop manager is
>completely wrong in saying that the shop cannot be held *criminally*
>responsible for the wrong price on the shelf if it can be shown that the
>problem is systemic.
Thing is, this is the first time a shop has refused point blank to
refund the difference, but at the time I did not know what the
cast-iron legal position is. I'm still not sure, since you and Cynic
appear to hold somewhat differing views. I would think it amazing that
any price label can be wrong "by accident", i.e. the staff can't be
bothered to check and it doesn't matter anyway, because they can
charge the new price no matter what. Could you see this as a 100%
"get-out-of-jail-free" card? I can.
MM |