Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

fights at a 99p shop

2»

Comments

  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited January 2014
    harveys gardener said:



    Against the law. Signs offering 50p per item are inviations to treat



    Not quite correct HG

    you are right they are.an invitation to treat. But contract law looks for offer and acceptance allied.to due consideration.

    the relevant case is carlill v carbolic smoke company which is over 100 years old but still is the relevant precedent

    The contract is made when you pay or agree to pay in the future. At the till not in the aisles
  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Jodaius said:

    harveys gardener said:

    F-Blocker said:

    To fill in the gaps on this story, it appears that it was a closing down sale as the shop lease was expiring and they couldn't renew it.

    At the last moment the landlord agreed to extend it and the store manager called off the sale halfway through trading hours. The problem was that the store was packed with people that'd come through the doors and filled their baskets when the "Closing down sale" signs were still up in the window. They got to the tills and the prices had doubled compared to what they expected to pay. I don't blame them for kicking-off.

    Against the law. Signs offering 50p per item are an "invitation to treat" so once the customer offered their 50p there is an implied contract.
    Common misconception but not true. An invitation to treat does not in any way create an obligation to sell. See http://www.findlaw.co.uk/law/small_business/business_contracts/500564.html

    Deliberate false advertising is illegal (e.g. putting up 50p signs with no intention of ever selling the items at 50p), but a change of prices due to a genuine change in circumstances like this is unlikely to be covered.

    Having said all that it's incredibly poor management on behalf of the store - comparing how much they would have 'lost' from letting it run for the rest of the day, against the reputational damage and lost customers across the whole chain.
    Completely correct
  • RalphMilnesgut
    RalphMilnesgut Posts: 1,751
    Why were they putting the prices back up after having a "half price closing down sale". Should they not have been closing down?
  • Jodaius
    Jodaius Posts: 562
    RalphMilnesgut said:

    Why were they putting the prices back up after having a "half price closing down sale". Should they not have been closing down?

    The story goes that they were closing down due to their lease expiring. At the last minute, the management negotiated a new lease with the landlord thus negating the need to close down.
  • fossdeneboy
    fossdeneboy Posts: 403
    There was in fact a 60p shop in Bognor Regis up to about 4 years ago .
  • DaveMehmet
    DaveMehmet Posts: 21,624
    fossdeneboy said:

    There was in fact a 60p shop in Bognor Regis up to about 4 years ago .

    Not true. It wasn't a shop but an estate agent.
  • Ormiston_Addick
    Ormiston_Addick Posts: 8,813
    If I recall correctly there was a near-riot at Asdas in Glasgow when they mistakenly advertised cases of Stella Artois for 99p rather than 9.99.
  • BIG_ROB
    BIG_ROB Posts: 5,274
    Ormiston Addick said:

    If I recall correctly there was a near-riot at Asdas in Glasgow when they mistakenly advertised cases of Stella Artois for 99p rather than 9.99.

    ...and at the local Harry Ramsden's, who mistakenly advertised deep fried Mars bars for 20 pence, instead of 2 quid.

Categories

“Marketplace”