Moved to Forum: Original Link — Confirmed price error from Harvey Norman
Nokia lumia 930 windows phone Orange Pre Order $5
Releases late August.
Clearly a price mistake and only orange will show up in cart for $5. I have purchased one and was charged $5 on account.
Lets see how long it lasts
i said they products were perfect and are suitable for me. ACCC bla bla bla…. QCAT… BLA BLA BLA lolz
Interesting.
I'd feel kind of bad tying up court time over something a bit trivial though.
What section / type of complaint am I looking for? Don't mind doing a bit of reading but not sure where to start.
Tenants try it on all the time at Qcat
I think its in the fantasy section of the bookstore. Right next to 'things that will never happen'
Lol. Yeah think I'll let it go.
Once they take payment and confirm that normally constitutes an acceptance of the offer and a valid contract has come into existence which is then binding on both parties to the contract.
I don't think this is valid given cl 5(4) of their terms of sale. It seems once payment is received, that's when the offer is communicated. Happy to hear your thoughts on this.
Please stop the circlejerk. Harvey Norman is not going to get in trouble unless you claim they're bait advertising. If you want to get back at them, complain to the ACCC that their constant 'price errors' are incredibly misleading, and when the ACCC have enough complaints, HN will get a warning and remain on the ACCC's radar for some time (which they may already be).
Please stop being so entitled, and think about who you may actually hurt if you zealously go after Harvey Norman. Regardless of whether HN gets into a class action or merely receives bad publicity - some poor sod will probably get fired, employees will get a pay cut/freeze, corporate profits will remain the same, and things will go back to normal.
Not an up to date Australian Consumer Law book though.
Common law does not overwrite statutory law.
When something that usually costs 100's of dollars, shows up as 5, even a "big organization" is not going to have much trouble arguing it was a mistake.
How come all i got was a refund confirmation email no reason why or anything.
If you go to www.qcat.qld.gov.au you will find some info.
Also, to Eivad:
What makes you think that eveything a company writes in its T&Cs is valid and enforceable? Theoretically, HN could have in its T&Cs that Gerry Harvey gets to sleep with your wife five times if he so chooses every thime you buy an item from the store. Or that every time you make a complaint you have to pay $50 for the privilege of doing so even if they are at fault. This could be in the T&Cs but neither clause would be enofrceable and valid.
You can of course choose to do what you like but let me put it this way:
I have never missed out on a deal here where hundreds of other people had their order cancelled, simply because I took them to the tribunal or threatened to do so. As I said, I got games at bargain prices, a Dell tablet (instead of the Optus one) for $99 etc.
So you can either just keep complaining about these things or do something about it. As long as nobody (or not enough) people do something about companies like that, companies will keep doing it and treating customers and normal people like dirt and without respect.
I did not order a phone as I saw it too late so I won't take HN to QCAT this time but be sure that I will the next time I order something and the company tries to wiggle out of it because of an alleged mistake, too much success in their sale (TGG game sale) etc.
I am originally from Europe and have never ever had these problems with alleged mistakes made on websites, cancelled orders, suddenly being out of stock etc. and I do not think that is due to the people running the companies over there being smarter or more customer oriented. I know that every time a company tried to do it there was a real, tangible customer backlash and the company was taken to court by many people and the consumer associations. Repeat offenders get punished severely and levied with very high fines.
I had other issues such as the mail service losing things and not wanting to provide compensation as that was written in their T&Cs. But guess what: they did after I pointed out that they can write whatever they like in there (and it does not mean it is valid), and that I would take them to court over it, including the European Court as they were a monopolist for who there are special rules to avoid abuse and exploitation of customers.
Dear Customer,
We refer to your order dated 15/08/14.
Due to a technical error, the Nokia Lumia 930 Windows Phone - Orange (2712700) was advertised at $5 on our website on 15/08/14. The correct price of the product is $727.
Our records indicate that you made an offer to purchase the Nokia Lumia 930 Windows Phone - Orange (2712700) at the price of $5.
Pursuant to clauses 5(7) & 5(8) of the Harvey Norman Online Terms and Conditions of Sale (available at www.harveynorman.com.au/terms-and-conditions/), Harvey Norman Online may, in its sole and absolute discretion, accept or reject any offer made by you for any reason (or no reason), including an error in the advertised price for, or description of, the products on the website, or an error in your Order.
As such, we have not accepted your order and would like to arrange a full refund of the payment made by you. Your refund will be automatically processed with the next 1-2 business days.
We apologise for any inconvenience this error may have caused you, and note that the product remains available for pre-order.
Please do not hesitate to contact our Harvey Norman Online Customer First Team should you have any questions.
Yep they are going to have a lot of angry customers
yes trent. very angry
Early bird will become angry one now.
What would happen if you made the mistake and "offered: them $5000 for the phone? Do you think HN would then write this same e-mail and let you out of the deal? ;-)
I know it includes "an error in your order" but I am certain you would not hear from them at all. They would not send this e-mail but take the money and hope you won't notice.
Aren't you doing the same thing? Placing the order knowing full well that it is a price error and instead of alerting them, you are secretly hoping that they won't realize and send the order out?
ahh well, I ended up "paying" for my order with the refund I got from TGG so it's not like i was planning to use it anyway…
I think all of the people involved should complain to the NSW Fair Trading. If we made a mistake, as if we could get out money back. Harvey Norman makes millions of dollars profit, they can afford it.
Lets get together and form a bit of people power to make a statement that us small people will not always get willingly screwed.
Lets all complain and see what happens. If 300 people complain, that gives it a lot more chance than if 2 people complain.
What do you guys think?
Nobody screwed you over. You knew that it was a price error, and proceeded with the transaction regardless.
Yeah it was only $5 so worth the try. I'm not even fussed if they don't refund the $5
Just curious, what has HN ever done to you personally to make you want to pursue this kind of attack? Did HN kill your dog with their TV, illegally underpaying you/your family/friend who's employed at HN, or just because they arent fulling your order of a phone which was an obvious price error? Basically taking advantage of other peoples mistakes.
If you want to be heard and have it your way, I suggest rolling on the floor crying and screaming at their store that you want the phone for $5, it seems to work for 5yr olds so I guess it might work for some here.
Not sure why you think you 'deserve' a $700 odd price error from a Company.
Any company can make pricing errors.
It's not like knowingly sold defective products that caused injury or death…
For some minor errors close to cost, I think they just let it through…
FWIW, I have bought a Lumix FT5 camera from Harvey Norman two weeks ago. The price appeared as $218 (down from $400)+. I phoned up a store and asked if they had stock. They looked it up on the system, the dude said it was almost 50% off and had two in stock. I paid for it online (he said it was better than trying to hold it aside for me).
I think it may be a pricing error, as it went up $100 in the afternoon. Thought I wouldn't get it when I turned up the next day, but they happily handed over the (paid for) camera. It is currently $338. It wasn't a almost free camera, but it was a fair saving (much lower than Amazon US, or anywhere else in Australia).
The Olympus TG850 was listed as $258. Current price is $358. The FT5 is now $338. I paid $218. Maybe it wasn't a price error, but I was pretty happy and my wife was happy with the underwater camera for Snorkelling.
Bloody hell everyone get over it. It was worth a try but it didn't work out.
Stop whinging like a bunch of kids.
If it was worth a shot, then maybe to plenty of people its worth another shot.
It is one thing to take a punt on the mobile for $5, though it is another thing to waste government resources by contacting the ACCC / Fair Trading etc.
Waste you say. That is why they are there, ACCC and FT and the small claims courts. Not for other people, not for millions of dollars, but for this type of thing. Even if just to prevent this becoming the HN (or any retailers) tactic of choice.
You know what is a waste, not using them.
Even if just to prevent this becoming the HN (or any retailers) tactic of choice.
Tactic of choice? I thought it was a pricing mistake.
And thats a choice you decide. Others let courts decide.
Stop Whinging, as Consumers you have to remember we are offering to 'buy' a product. A business/company has absolutely no obligation to accept your offer of purchase.
This site will be call 'Ozlosers' in the near future by the sounds of it.
How are we "offering to buy a product" if it straight away charges your account? The retailer "offers" a product for consumers to purchase, and a consumer accepts it by purchasing that item.
The system cannot decide to not take your money. It HAS to accept your payment because if it does not, it cannot determine whether the customer intends to purchase or not.
That said, just because you forcefully put money into their account doesn't mean that the transaction is complete. It is not complete until they have decided to ship it to you.
They should learn from Amazon payment system then. Authorisation only not charged until shipped. Charging then refund is dodgy. Consumers are risking the company goes bankrupt before we receive the refunds making us its unsecured creditors.
@wtfnodeal: Just do a chargeback with your credit card company. I had to do that once, when the store I bought from folded.
@eug
I think the point was as in all legal arguments, one of semantics. If they (in this case HN) have access or control over the money, then they have taken the money. There are means available to HN, to have the payment secured, without ever leaving the control of the buyer, ie: money does not change hands.
A contract is determined by courts as:
-Offer
-Acceptance
-Consideration -(legalese for something of value (usually money) passing to the seller)
When these 3 steps have occurred, we have a binding agreement in law.
No matter who we say the offeror is, and who the offeree (acceptor) is, as is posited by the argument the deal was an invitation to treat, we have moved beyond that when money changes hands.
If they (in this case HN) have access or control over the money, then they have taken the money.
Is this the case when there is a third party involved, e.g. Paypal or a credit card? Does the seller get immediate access to the money?
What is the effective difference between the seller putting a hold on the buyer's credit card, and charging then refunding? In both cases the buyer won't have access to the credit anyway.
BTW I was responding specifically to the part where wtfnodeal says we are taking a risk when paying as the company might go bankrupt before we receive our goods.
Is this the case when there is a third party involved, e.g. Paypal or a credit card? Does the seller get immediate access to the money?
BTW I was responding specifically to the part where wtfnodeal says we are taking a risk when paying as the company might go bankrupt before we receive our goods.
I gathered that, but that comment was said in the context of control of the money. It demonstrates that payment has shifted from the buyer, to the seller, or a nominated agent, in this case PayPal or HNs banking provider. As an agent, the passing of money from buyer to the agent, is the same as it passing from the buyer to the seller directly. If those agents make HN wait a few days, that is not the depositors responsibility.
Its about who has control of the money, the buyer, or someone else. If the buyer has lost control of the money, it would be difficult IMO to prove a transaction has not occurred.
i dont know where courts have drawn that line. They would have to have done so I would think, but not necessarily if it hasnt made its way to a court yet. ie: So far the HN terms and conditions have made most people just go away.
So far the HN terms and conditions have made most people just go away.
I hope that continues to happen, at long as it is a genuine mistake that doesn't happen frequently.
If businesses keep getting (self-)penalized by large amounts every time they make a harmless pricing mistake (we all knew very well it was a pricing mistake), the cost of business would go up (i'm sure it costs more to hire competent web staff!) which would raise prices across the board for everyone. If we made an honest mistake we would hope that others would let it slide, wouldn't we?
They have an obligation to prevent this occurring too. I said it earlier, make an honest mistake in your car, see how often you get off.
Plus, it would create a loophole in bait and switch advertising laws too, if all they had to say was "oops, honest mistake". At the very least I believe the popularity of a site helps it boost its Google rating (ie: where it appears on search pages, p1, or p309 for example) so who knows what tactics a business might employ. Its not like its pennies at stake in that regard.
You dont employ web engineers to do plain old data entry.
They have an obligation to prevent this occurring too. I said it earlier, make an honest mistake in your car, see how often you get off.
With cars, you can kill someone, their entire family, or an entire busload of school children with one mistake. There is so much more at stake, so the laws should reflect that.
With pricing errors, especially extremely obvious ones like this, as long as they are genuine and infrequent, I sure hope people think about putting themselves in the other party's shoes and seeing things that way as well.
Regardless of whatever the law decides, everyone was fully aware that the price was incorrect. Anyone who actually bought it knew very well that it was a mistake.
Those who still kicked up a stink after HN said it was an error are really only thinking of themselves. The world would be a lot nicer if people didn't only think of themselves all the time.
Plus, it would create a loophole in bait and switch advertising laws too, if all they had to say was "oops, honest mistake".
What would they gain apart from a lot of angry people?
At the very least I believe the popularity of a site helps it boost its Google rating
IMHO there are much, much better ways of doing SEO without angering a bunch of people and toeing the law.
You dont employ web engineers to do plain old data entry.
Web staff as in staff who work on the website. Not web designers/engineers/builders.
But they did accept our offers
I have a notification saying so, they accepted the money from paypal
I even have a email saying
Hi XXX. Sorry, your order has been delayed. It shouldn't take too long. We'll contact you as soon as it's ready.
Order number: XXX Issue date: 15/08/14
Items on back-order Qty 3
Nokia Lumia 930 Windows Phone - Orange
Bonus 96 HOUR SALE
Bonus Pre-Order NOW! Available Late August
If they had not accepted my offer why would they tell me my order was delayed and on backorder?
Because its just an automated computer system.
I think Gerry owes us another "professional" certificate, preferably framed.
Everyone in their right mind knew this was a mistake and it would not be honoured. Why are people still making a big deal out of it?
People feel entitled to everything. If the tables were turned and they were the seller, I bet most of them would say no way.
So is it true that Harvey Norman brought down the OzB site yesterday as revenge?
Unlikely, but there was some Cisco based old school router issue in the last few days (or so Im led to believe). Might be related. Apparently a huge chunk of the webs inter-connectivity is still based on old school Cisco routers, which had a Y2K type issue the other day. I have no idea how true it is though.
Well you're fun at parties.
For NSW residents, the "Fair Trading" department website is here
https://www.cas.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/icms-public/complaint…
There is nothing to complain about. Harvey Norman reserves the right to decline order made on the site and not sell it to you.
For the relevant thread where I explained it in detail, click here
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/147028#comment-2027416
"As a general rule, a display of goods at a fixed price in a shop window or on a shelf in a self-service store is an invitation to treat and not an offer. An offer may be made by a prospective buyer. At this stage, the retailer may accept or reject that offer.
"Similar principles would seem to apply where a supplier of goods or services indicates their availability on a website: that is, the offer would seem to come from the customer (eg. when he clicks the appropriate button) and it is then open to the supplier to accept or reject that offer."
- Duhaime.org
Good luck taking them to court/tribunal.
Tldr;
You morons.
Got office works to price match…
Lots of shops have signs that clearly state no refunds.
Just cuz they have it written down as such, doesn't make it so.
ACCC time let's hit Jerry where it hurts!
HMMM… So people are supposed to waste their time looking for items they want to purchase and then make an offer at the advertised price and see if it is accepted… cmon…
No. Companies like HN are supposed to spend time and resources to prevent pricing errors get advertised or at least our offers not accepted in the first place.
How long did it take you to realise or think this was most likely a pricing error?
I don't know why people keep doing this to themselves, it happens every time there's a price error on HN.
So it happens a lot does it?
Shouldn't they just be more careful?
In the same vein, shouldn't people not try to take advantage of other people's mistakes when they're fully aware that it was a mistake, then proceeding to rant and rave about it even though they knew very well what was going to happen?
If a cashier gave someone a $20 note as change instead of a $5 note and the person was aware of it, should they quietly take it and walk away, or let the cashier know about the mistake and return the $20?
yeh. experience price error issue quite alot when shopping. recent experience experience in kmart when purchase a $10 shirt it is suppose to be $25. they honour the error.
but here is different. the phone they have is $727 to $5 so HV will not do it.
Got my refund today.
So did HN honor the deal?
No, everyone, including PayPal customers, received a refund, I believe.
yep
me too ….