The
Bush 28in integrated digital TV with DVD recorder and stand
appeared for £0.49 on the Homebase.co.uk and Argos.co.uk websites,
both part of Argos Retail Group. Thousands of orders were placed,
one person seeking as many as 80 sets. But the orders have been
rejected and refunds are being given.
The company has sent emails to those who placed orders
explaining that there was "an accidental error on the price shown"
during the period from midnight on 27th August to 07:00
on 28th August.
According to Struan Robertson, editor of OUT-LAW.COM and a
technology lawyer with Pinsent Masons, Argos got it right. "Pricing
errors will happen from time to time," he said, "but companies can
protect themselves against potentially huge losses with a good
e-commerce process."
The key is to address pricing errors in the terms and
conditions, to make sure these conditions are accepted by customers
when they order and to send an order acknowledgement that doesn't
undermine that protection, according to Robertson. And this is what
Argos did.
Its terms and conditions (taken from Homebase.co.uk but very
similar to those on Argos.co.uk) include the following
provision:
"While we try and ensure that all prices on
our website are accurate, errors may occur. If we discover an error
in the price of goods you have ordered we will inform you as soon
as possible and give you the option of reconfirming your order at
the correct price or cancelling it. If we are unable to contact you
we will treat the order as cancelled. If you cancel and you have
already paid for the goods, you will receive a full refund."
The payment page of the Homebase website includes a checkbox and
the words: "I have read and agree to the
terms and conditions of this purchase."
This is sufficient for Homebase to incorporate its terms and
conditions in the sale, whether or not a customer actually reads
them. Many sites get this wrong: the terms and conditions exist,
but if they are difficult to find, the company may be unable to
rely on them.
When the payment is complete, an email goes to the customer
headed "Thank you for your order". It includes an order number and,
importantly, it states: "This email is only an acknowledgement of
receipt of your order which has been passed to our team to be
processed."
So the customer knows his order has been placed; but at this
stage, no contract has been formed with the customer. This is
crucial to avoiding liability for pricing errors. The terms and
conditions also contain these words:
"Acceptance of your order and the completion
of the contract between you and us will take place on dispatch to
you of the products ordered unless we have notified you that we do
not accept your order or you have cancelled it (please refer to
Returns and refunds)."
Accordingly Argos has an opportunity to spot pricing errors –
perhaps flagged-up by a surge in orders for a particular product –
and to politely decline orders. Emails went to customers on
31st August explaining why the company "had to reject
all orders placed at the incorrect price" with reference to the
relevant sections of its conditions. The email included an
apology.
In 1999, Argos.co.uk offered Sony Nicam TVs for £2.99 each, instead of £300. Its subsequent
refusal to fulfil orders – albeit supported by its e-commerce
process even then – made Argos a whipping boy for bargain hunters
who thought that a contract is formed when card details are taken
online. In fact the laws on e-commerce give retailers flexibility
to decide when a contract is formed.
But others are less savvy than Argos. Robertson says: "Recently
we learned of a large site trying to cancel orders for Sony Vaio
laptops priced under £2 each. The site had done everything
wrong – its conditions were awful – and customers had strong
grounds for challenging the refusal to fulfil their orders."
The BBC quotes a solicitor saying that all transactions
would be void because "if the deal is too good to be true, it is”.
Robertson disagrees. "That is a very flaky defence for any website
that has concluded a contract. It has never been tested in
court and it is not a legal ground that Argos needs to rely
upon."
Robertson concluded: "Retailers must not take comfort from their
prices being obviously wrong. It makes much more sense and it's
also much easier to get the e-commerce process right."
Disclaimer: We hope you find OUT-LAW’s content useful. It’s prepared by the lawyers at Pinsent Masons. Please remember, though, that it’s intended as general information only. It’s not legal advice. If that’s what you’re seeking, please
contact us. See also: our
full disclaimer
