On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:41:12 +0000, MM wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:10:30 +0000, Cynic
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 00:01:38 +0000, Alex Heney
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>Incidentally, if the shelf price was higher than the till price (which
>>>>has happened to me), would you be just as adament that you should pay
>>>>the shelf price rather than the till price?
>>>>
>>>>If not, why not?
>>>
>>>Because the law requires otherwise.
>>>
>>>The store MUST charge the lower of the two prices, or remove the item
>>>from sale altogether.
>>>
>>>They CANNOT legally sell the item at the higher price.
>>
>>They certainly can.
>>
>>>Or do you believe that the Price Marking regulations are a window
>>>dressing law with no actual effect?
>>
>>So if the teenager doing a holiday job at the supermarket marks a £750
>>HD telly as £7.50, you reckon I could (a) legally demand to buy it at
>>that price or (b) would not be permitted to buy it at the correct
>>price of £750 if I begged on my bended knees?
>>
>>What if the price was altered on the shelf to the correct one?
>
>What AH was saying, which seems perfectly fair practice, is that
>provided the store ensures that no one is in the process of buying the
>item, then the store can change the label. If the risk is that not
>every shopper can be interrogated at the same time, then the item may
>not be sold at the higher price.
>
>MM
That is something he made up - there is no legal basis for it
whatsoever.
|