Shop refused to sell item

the_porn_baby

I went in to a well known music store today to buy a power supply for a piece of musical equipment I bought online. The guy asked me where I got the equipment - I said online - and he said he couldn't sell me anything for that product because I didn't buy it in the store.

Is this legal?

I could have gotten the part online for €5 less but I said feck it I'll give the shop the business.
The guy was extremely flippant about the issue too.

MrPudding

A shop has no legal obligation to sell you anything.....seems kind of stupid not to.

MrP

Oryx

Its not very nice, but hardly illegal. A shop doesnt have to open if it doesn't want to, and they dont have to take your money if they dont want to.

Sounds like he was cheesed off losing sales to online sellers and so didnt want to oblige you. Daft if you ask me.

Or to give him the benefit of the doubt.... perhaps theres some usage issue with the item you wanted (you know possible power incompatiblity with an item from overseas?)

rubadub

Maybe somebody bought the wrong power supply for some other item and it broke the equipment, then they went back to the shop complaining.

Seems very odd. Certainly not illegal.

the_porn_baby

There's no incompatibility issues with the supply because they're universal. It's obviously because everything is being sold cheaper online - but the only reason he gave was "we were told not to sell them" if the product wasn't bought there.
I'll never buy anything there again. I'll just suffer the shipping time and buy the damn thing online.

Grolschevik

A few years ago, when buying a piece of electronic kit, I was told by an assistant in a well-known music store that they were reluctant to sell specific stand-alone power supplies. The reason he gave is that, when stuff is stolen -- say, at a gig -- the thieves often don't get a chance to snatch the power supply, so they'd go looking to buy a replacement from the shop. Naturally enough, the shop didn't want to facilitate/encourage that. So he told me to:
a) Look after my original power supply (supplied with the gear I bought) as well as I could;
b) Keep the box and receipt as proof of original purchase, should I ever need to replace the power supply.

Those concerns might have now generalised into a universal policy not to supply peripheral items on their own...

Cabaal

Wow, what a ejit, appears his thick headedness just lost the business a sale and most likely a customer who might have gone back to buy other things in the future

Cabaal

Grolschevik wrote:

A few years ago, when buying a piece of electronic kit, I was told by an assistant in a well-known music store that they were reluctant to sell specific stand-alone power supplies. The reason he gave is that, when stuff is stolen -- say, at a gig -- the thieves often don't get a chance to snatch the power supply, so they'd go looking to buy a replacement from the shop. Naturally enough, the shop didn't want to facilitate/encourage that. So he told me to:<SNIP>....

Could you not use this same example for power cables for laptops etc, hardly a good policy

rubadub

the_porn_baby wrote:

It's obviously because everything is being sold cheaper online

I dont see that as being obvious, since it makes no sense at all as mentioned. If power cables were somehow subsidised/loss leaders then maybe, but why turn down a sale? that is like a checkout girl asking if you bought your dvd player in tescos and then refusing to sell you a scart lead.

The thieving makes some sense, just bring in the broken one. What shop was it, I would love to go in looking for it, get refused then start looking at expensive equipment in the shop, tell them you want the lead and that piece of kit and see the reply, then tell them to **** off either way.

Sam Vimes

KatieK wrote:

Its not very nice, but hardly illegal. A shop doesnt have to open if it doesn't want to,

that depends. shops in shopping centres have to abide by the centre regulations

Oryx

Commander Vimes wrote:

that depends. shops in shopping centres have to abide by the centre regulations

I was speaking generally, to illustrate that 'mr shopkeeper' can make up his own mind whether to be a good businessman or not.

Red Alert

it sounds really bizarre.

also note to the OP - the power supply you want is probably available in Maplin or somewhere, almost all are pretty standard voltages and as long as the supply has a HIGHER current rating than the device at the same voltage you're good to go.

DanGerMus

Not sure if it's exactly related. But if an item is advertised at a certain price and you offer to pay that, they have to sell it at the advertised price. But as for having to sell to you at all, i doubt they are obliged. The thieving thing kinda makes sense, though it never would have occured to me, lol. Also compatability cos they might have checked everything in the shop and okayed it. but as said before they are probably wary of unknown equipment and dont want to be blamed for exploding it.

Duff_Man

thats crazy dude bet ya i know which shop!;) i work in a well known one myself and the only reason i wouldnt sell you a power supply is if it belonged to a item on display cause its for that item! other than that they should have sold it to ya man! its a shame cause its really just putting more and more people off buying in a shop!

Beano

happygandalf wrote:

Not sure if it's exactly related. But if an item is advertised at a certain price and you offer to pay that, they have to sell it at the advertised price. But as for having to sell to you at all, i doubt they are obliged. The thieving thing kinda makes sense, though it never would have occured to me, lol. Also compatability cos they might have checked everything in the shop and okayed it. but as said before they are probably wary of unknown equipment and dont want to be blamed for exploding it.

No they dont. Irrespective of what price they advertise they are under no obligation to sell you anything. An advertisement does not constitute the offer part of the offer and acceptance required for a contract.

Random

Muppets. You could try asking for the manager to see what the reason is, if only to satisfy my curiousity

Sangre

happygandalf wrote:

Not sure if it's exactly related. But if an item is advertised at a certain price and you offer to pay that, they have to sell it at the advertised price. But as for having to sell to you at all, i doubt they are obliged. The thieving thing kinda makes sense, though it never would have occured to me, lol. Also compatability cos they might have checked everything in the shop and okayed it. but as said before they are probably wary of unknown equipment and dont want to be blamed for exploding it.

No they don't have to sell it to you at the advertised price. It is an offence, however, to purposely mislabel the price of goods.

DanGerMus

Sorry i wasn't clear in my wording. A shop could refuse service to someone with good reason. I didn't mean to imply that they have to sell it to you. But they can't say that they're not selling it to you because they displayed the incorrect price and then try to get you to pay more for it. You are entitled to it at the advertised price. Any way like i said it's not direclty related to the OPs situation. But you would be entitled to an explanation as to why he won't sell it to you.

Sangre

happygandalf wrote:

An advertised price actually does constitute the offer part of a contract.
I know this because i covered it as part of a law module in college. The problem as a consumer is it's difficult to proove the price afterwards.

I'm sorry but that's completely wrong. The displayed price of a goods is not an offer but rather an invitation to treat, this was made clear in Boots v Pharmaceutical Society, one of the first cases you would do in contract law.

The offer is when a consumer brings said item to the cash till, the acceptance is when the shop keeper decides to accept your money for the goods at the agreed price. There is no binding contract until the shop accepts your money.

If this wasn't the case a shop that incorrectly labels a 2 grand TV as €2 would be forced to sell it at that price, a ridiculous notion. Some shops (normally supermarkets) do operate a policy that they will sell at the advertised price, they are under no legal requirement to do so. Similarly if the situation you described was in fact true then Boots could not operate as it would be in violation of Pharmacy Regulations (namely that a contract would be completed before a pharmacist can view the goods being bought).

While there are a few exceptions to this they don't apply in everyday life and normally require some unfairness on the part of the owner.

In the same way as an online site offers a price and you bid or purchase or agree to buy it. That online site cannot revoke the offer once you except it no matter what. Thats under EU law. It's just that on the high street it's harder to prove it because you don't have confirmation emails or the like to fall back on.
This is there to protect the consumer from shops advertising falsely to entice you in and then stick you with extras. In Ireland and the EU the price displayed is the price you pay.

Regarding your point on online sites, the fact you mention auction sites and retail sites as one and the same shows a lack of understanding on the issue. They are considered completely different and aren't even covered by the same directive. Regarding sites where you purchase goods the same rules should apply, its basic contract law. You purchasing isn't actually paying but offering to pay. I'm nearly certain this is true because of a recent play.com incident (and common sense). There is consumer protection law in the EU covering long distance sellors (i.e. websites like play) but I don't think any of it applies to this situation from what I remember.

Sites like ebay aren't covered by that Regulation. Any item you bid on should form an agreement between the seller and the bidder, the site shouldn't be able to enforce the agreement. Ebay could be different in their rules but this isn't because law tells them to do this.

Random

happygandalf wrote:

Sorry i wasn't clear in my wording. A shop could refuse service to someone with good reason. I didn't mean to imply that they have to sell it to you. But they can't say that they're not selling it to you because they displayed the incorrect price and then try to get you to pay more for it. You are entitled to it at the advertised price. Any way like i said it's not direclty related to the OPs situation. But you would be entitled to an explanation as to why he won't sell it to you.

Once they make you aware of the correct price before payment and haven't set out to deliberitly mislead you (sorry for that awful spelling!) then you're not entitled to sweet fa.

DanGerMus

Ok. i edited my post before you posted because basically i thought i was gone off topic and to make my points clearer was gonna have to write a lot more.
Maybe i've been missinformed but with what little i covered one thing was that the advertisement did constitute the offer. And when i did cover it i was told that a retailer would be obliged to sell it to you at the displayed price. I'll admit that i'm not as well informed as you. Maybe it should have included the phrase "in certain cases". This is what i was getting at, it can happen that a price is displayed incorrectly but it could be considered reasonable for the person to think that it is the proper price and then a retailer can be obliged to sell.

As for the e-tailers i have had personal experience of a site labeling a Car incorrectly and then having to sell it to someone. It was my uncle and they had accidently entered the milage in the Price on the site. They tried to revoke the offer but he had a copy of an email from them. So that was considered a contract. Also i wasn't includeing "third party" bid sites like e-bay. i know they are not the same as they are merely facilitating an auction.
Lastly i have already retracted my last post because after reading it i realised i hadnt been clear in the specifics that i was gettin at.

DanGerMus

Actually screw it, no excuses, i was wrong very very wrong. i was misinformed on some parts and lacked understanding on others. Any clarity my post lacked was probably due to the lack of clarity in my own mind on the subject. And i was off topic too. Thanks for the references sangre now i feel better informed and i wont make the same mistake again.

the_porn_baby

I tried a few electronic retailers before the music shop and it wasn't available. The makers of the unit very sneakily made the connection to the unit at an odd size so a generic 9v supply won't work. The music shop is the only one in Dublin selling these at the moment so presumably they can afford to turn people away (although I always thought they weren't doing great).

I also asked the guy if they only had enough supplies to cover the amount of units in the shop and he said they had a surplus, but couldn't sell one of them.

I ordered the supply online anyway, but I am going to go back to shop and pretend I want to buy one. I'll have an argument prepared this time because that guy seriously p*ssed me off.

Beano

Sangre wrote:

I'm sorry but that's completely wrong. The displayed price of a goods is not an offer but rather an invitation to treat, this was made clear in Boots v Pharmaceutical Society, one of the first cases you would do in contract law.

The offer is when a consumer brings said item to the cash till, the acceptance is when the shop keeper decides to accept your money for the goods at the agreed price. There is no binding contract until the shop accepts your money.

If this wasn't the case a shop that incorrectly labels a 2 grand TV as €2 would be forced to sell it at that price, a ridiculous notion. Some shops (normally supermarkets) do operate a policy that they will sell at the advertised price, they are under no legal requirement to do so. Similarly if the situation you described was in fact true then Boots could not operate as it would be in violation of Pharmacy Regulations (namely that a contract would be completed before a pharmacist can view the goods being bought).

While there are a few exceptions to this they don't apply in everyday life and normally require some unfairness on the part of the owner.


Regarding your point on online sites, the fact you mention auction sites and retail sites as one and the same shows a lack of understanding on the issue. They are considered completely different and aren't even covered by the same directive. Regarding sites where you purchase goods the same rules should apply, its basic contract law. You purchasing isn't actually paying but offering to pay. I'm nearly certain this is true because of a recent play.com incident (and common sense). There is consumer protection law in the EU covering long distance sellors (i.e. websites like play) but I don't think any of it applies to this situation from what I remember.

Sites like ebay aren't covered by that Regulation. Any item you bid on should form an agreement between the seller and the bidder, the site shouldn't be able to enforce the agreement. Ebay could be different in their rules but this isn't because law tells them to do this.

Any chance a friendly passing mod could sticky this info at the top? The same discussion seems to take place regularly and the same misinformation passed as fact.

rubadub

If you have an odd sized connection all you have to do is get a 9V supply that is more than capable of powering the device. Then snip off the wires on the end of both and twist them together and cover with tape. When I say power it should say something like 9V 500mA. So your replacement should be 9V 500mA, 9V 650mA or anything higher.

The only thing you have to watch for is polarity, i.e. connect the correct wire to the other, there should be only 2. If doing this I would plug the old connector into the device, hook up one wire and tip the other off the spare one. If the unit shows signs of power you know you have it right. If not the short time and low voltage should not be enough to cause any damage (dont blame me if it fries!)

Sangre

happygandalf wrote:

Actually screw it, no excuses, i was wrong very very wrong. i was misinformed on some parts and lacked understanding on others. Any clarity my post lacked was probably due to the lack of clarity in my own mind on the subject. And i was off topic too. Thanks for the references sangre now i feel better informed and i wont make the same mistake again.

No worries. Hope I didn't come across as arrogant, just didn't want someone reading that and then trying to use the information in the shop!

You're confusion might arise from cases like Lefkowitz. There it was essentially held an advertisement will be an offer and not just an invitation to treat if it would cause injustice. So to take the example from the case, here a shop owner put up an offer which caused people to stand outside his store early and queue. He later tried to revoke the offer but it was held he couldn't as it had been accepted by the customer who queued for hours then offered to pay the advertised price.

Of course then there are unilateral offers but they rarely (if ever) apply to commercial ads, usually they are rewards e.g. 500e reward if you find the dog, once you return the dog they can't not pay you as you've accepted a binding contract by looking for the dog.

hmmm, this has gone quite off topic...

DanGerMus

Yeah but this is much more interesting. Plus i think it's settled that he didnt have a case cos at the end of the day a retailer has the right to refuse service, in most cases. Lets take a case where similar items side by side, say a E2500 tv and an E1800 one.Both sonys both lcds only differing in minor esthetics and some specs. But the prices had been mixed up. Where a person could be seen to honestly believe the price. Would someone have a case then. I bring it up because personally i think it's much more likely to happen like that than say a E2 price on a tv worth E2000.
I'm actually haveing this problem right now ,with an online site though. I've been waiting weeks and it seems that the have uped the price of my item since. They keep giving excuses and have mentioned "problems" with the item and that they hope to resolve them in the next week or so. They have already accepted payment and have debited my credit card.

rubadub

happygandalf wrote:

I'm actually haveing this problem right now ,with an online site though..

I would have said no straight off

happygandalf wrote:

They have already accepted payment and have debited my credit card.

But I am not sure now you say that.

This happens a lot with online stores, if you check bargain alerts it happens a bit. Viking had really cheap wrongly priced USB sticks but many companies will still sell, viking did. Cdwow sent a few discs at one stage but told others they had ran out, probably truely did.

These laws are protecting the business too, otherwise I could have a mate walk into currys and stick a €2 price tag on a plasma and then demand it at that price myself.

Sangre

With your TV example a customer would have no case. As you may know a binding contract requires offer, acceptance and consideration. The incorrect price tag on the TV is only an invitation to treat (or invitation to offer). The offer is when you go to the till and offer to pay for the TV at the advertised price. There is only a contract when he accepts your money as payment at that agreed price.
However, what will normally happen is he will scan the TV and the true price will come up. The cash operator will then tell you the correct price at which you can purchase the TV, this should be the 'counter-offer'. A couter-offer revokes any previous offer so you're initial offer at the incorrect price is invalid. To form a contract you must agreed to pay for the TV at the new price.
So, short answer you'd no case.

I'm fairly sure the same priniciples apply for online examples where you 'paying' is in fact only an offer to pay. If they'd debited your card at a price different to what you originally agreed thats a whole other matter though

DanGerMus

Well it's obvious that a E2 tag would never be accepted on a E2000 tv. But the likes newspaper magazine ads posters. where they mixed the prices of other items? and put 1800 hundred euro on it.

parsi

One thing to bear in mind is that sometimes the company may honour the erroneous price for goodwill/publicity reasons even though they legally do not have to.

This happened with (amongst others) Kodak a few years ago when they sold one of their easyshare cameras for a piffling price (I ordered two) and eventually accepted the price even though it was an agreed error (and most folk who ordered knew that).