Passports: HOME | EUROPE | AMERICAS, AUSTRALIA and OCEANIA | ASIA | AFRICA | OTHER DOCUMENTS
National Anthems:[ www.national-anthems.net ] ++
Travel:[ Europe ] [ Asia ] [ USA-Canada ] [ Latin-America ] [ Africa ] [ Australia ] [ more ]
[ Australia legal ] [ U.K. legal ] [ U.S. visa ] [ Immigration ] [ Marriage based U.S visa ]



Re: Shelf price labels Posted on: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:40:12 +0000

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:33:04 +0000, Peter Parry
wrote:

>On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:53:12 +0000, Alex Heney
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 04:01:13 +0000, judith
>>wrote:
>
>>He can indeed say it is an error.
>>
>>He can only "correct" that error without committing an offence by
>>selling at the lower price.
>
>He can correct the error by taking "such steps as are reasonable to
>prevent those consumers from relying on the indication". This can be
>by telling them when they present the item for payment what the
>correct price is and giving them the option of buying at the higher
>price or not buying the goods.
>

So there is absolutely and utterly no point whatsoever in having this
law?

Because that would certainly be the case if he could legally do that.

I believe that this law only makes any sense at all if those steps
inform the customer *before* he reaches the point where payment is
requested.

And it is completely irrelevant whether that is automated at the till
or not, although your suggestion in another post that automated tills
didn't exist in 1987 is way off the mark.

They were used in cash-and-carry's in the mid-late 70's (my dad worked
on maintaining the computers used by NCR in those systems), and were
in many supermarkets by the mid 80's.

>>If he says "it is an error the price should be x (where x is the
>>higher price)", then he is committing an offence.
>
>You are suggesting he commits an offence by telling someone the
>correct price?

He commits an offence by displaying the misleading price.

But the price is only misleading if he is only willing to sell at a
higher price.


>
>>>The store MUST charge the lower of the two prices, or remove the item
>>>from sale altogether.
>
>>It does not put it in those words, but that is the effect of it.
>
>Only if you make the erroneous assumption the act of forming a
>contract is integral to the legislation when in fact it is irrelevant.

I have never suggested it might be relevant.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Common sense is what tells you the world is flat.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
1477712. Re: Shelf price labels
1477717. Re: Shelf price labels
1477721. Re: Shelf price labels
1477723. Re: Shelf price labels
1477727. Re: Shelf price labels
1477733. Re: Shelf price labels
1477736. Re: Shelf price labels
1477757. Re: Shelf price labels
1477760. Re: Shelf price labels
1477780. Re: Shelf price labels
1479990. Re: Shelf price labels
1479993. Re: Shelf price labels
1479995. Re: Shelf price labels
1480000. Re: Shelf price labels
1480001. Re: Shelf price labels
1480002. Re: Shelf price labels
1480004. Re: Shelf price labels
1480043. Re: Shelf price labels
1480135. Re: Shelf price labels
1480136. Re: Shelf price labels