Legal question: Misrepresented Price Online: 99.5% Discount, then order canceled - what to do?

It's your word against a corporation's word. You are IN!!!

If a deal is too good to be true, it probably is. I believe that obvious errors or ad misprints can be nullified as was done to you.

I should note, that it specifically gave the retail price, gave their price, and gave the total savings (in terms of dollars and percent). Thus, the ad specifically stated this was a tremendous discount.

Almost saved money wrote:

Apparently, the product ad placed by the company for a different product was matched with to the description of the $29,900 product. This company doesn't even carry the expensive product.

Apparently you are acknowledging that it was an actual mistake and not a deliberate bait-and-switch or some other surreptitious scheme.

You can try, but I doubt you'll get what you want (a fancy product for a ridiculously cheap price) as it appears to have been an honest or technical mistake. Easy to argue that no reasonable person should have assumed a $29,900 product was being offered for $129 just because a webpage said it was.

It sounds like you have no claim to pursue

Almost saved money wrote:

I should note, that it specifically gave the retail price, gave their price, and gave the total savings (in terms of dollars and percent). Thus, the ad specifically stated this was a tremendous discount.

That is all automated. It's not like some human actually typed in those savings numbers and should have known better.

(I.e. it's possible they meant to discount product SKU 123456 to $129 but instead discounted product SKU 123457 to $129. The computer did the rest (looked up the original price, calculated the savings and presented the webpage).)

"What to do"?

Take this as a life lesson - that things that seem to be to good to be true, often are.

Next question?

I'm no legal expert, but I'm not so sure that you can really claim any kind of damages here. What have they taken from you? Are you any worse off now than you were before your dealings with this company?

Transportation Engineer wrote:

If a job is lost in all of this, I would think that the person to blame would be the worker who made the mistake, not the customer who ended up in the middle of said mistake. If I f***ed up in my job and my team put out a report that claimed that a proposed light rail line could draw 12,000 passengers per hour when the realistic estimation was actually 200 passengers per hour, would my firing be the fault of the city that hired our firm? No, it would be my fault.

Where did he imply that the customer would lose his job? It's just silly to assume that he was referring to the customer. Obviously it would be the person that made the mistake.

Previous poster was correct in saying you've got no case because you lost nothing. Zero chance of you receiving any compensation when you lost nothing to begin with. In addition, no attorney would ever take your case in front of a judge because they would ruin their own reputation. A judge would bitch slap the attorney so fast it would make both of your heads spin. It's sad that your first reaction to not being allowed to screw this company because of an honest mistake is to sue them.

Agreed wrote:

Previous poster was correct in saying you've got no case because you lost nothing. Zero chance of you receiving any compensation when you lost nothing to begin with. In addition, no attorney would ever take your case in front of a judge because they would ruin their own reputation. A judge would bitch slap the attorney so fast it would make both of your heads spin. It's sad that your first reaction to not being allowed to screw this company because of an honest mistake is to sue them.

Perhaps you should go back over your offer and acceptance notes.

What has he lost? He has lost the ability to obtain a $29,000 item for $130.00. One can't go around agreeing to sell things and then backing out of the sale. This is a fundamental principal of contract law.

hipster doofus wrote:

Perhaps you should go back over your offer and acceptance notes.

What has he lost? He has lost the ability to obtain a $29,000 item for $130.00. One can't go around agreeing to sell things and then backing out of the sale. This is a fundamental principal of contract law.

Okay hipster doofus, I'll see you and raise you, since you are so cocky.

Where is his detrimental reliance?

How was his reliance, if any, reasonable?

The Party's Crashing Us wrote:

Where did he imply that the customer would lose his job? It's just silly to assume that he was referring to the customer. Obviously it would be the person that made the mistake.

I said nothing about the customer losing his job. I said that the worker should lose his job for the mistake.

Next Principle wrote:

hipster doofus wrote:

Perhaps you should go back over your offer and acceptance notes.

What has he lost? He has lost the ability to obtain a $29,000 item for $130.00. One can't go around agreeing to sell things and then backing out of the sale. This is a fundamental principal of contract law.

Okay hipster doofus, I'll see you and raise you, since you are so cocky.

Where is his detrimental reliance?

How was his reliance, if any, reasonable?

I am not convinced that one would need to show reliance here - mere expectation damages (or whatever you want to call them) should be enough. Reliance is more reliable, but breach of contract is different from tort (as you likely know) in that proving actual loss is not required to be awarded damages.

I wasn't trying to be cocky. I was merely responding to the tone of "Agreed's" post.

*none of this constitutes actual legal advice or practicing without proper qualifications.

Transportation Engineer wrote:

If a job is lost in all of this, I would think that the person to blame would be the worker who made the mistake, not the customer who ended up in the middle of said mistake. If I f***ed up in my job and my team put out a report that claimed that a proposed light rail line could draw 12,000 passengers per hour when the realistic estimation was actually 200 passengers per hour, would my firing be the fault of the city that hired our firm? No, it would be my fault.

If your client had the slightest clue (enough to be able to hire you and determine if your bid was in line) they would look at the error and think something was way off and call you. The OP (if he has the slightest clue) should have realized this was an error and not a legit offer to sell.

Next Principle wrote:

hipster doofus wrote:

Perhaps you should go back over your offer and acceptance notes.

What has he lost? He has lost the ability to obtain a $29,000 item for $130.00. One can't go around agreeing to sell things and then backing out of the sale. This is a fundamental principal of contract law.

Okay hipster doofus, I'll see you and raise you, since you are so cocky.

Where is his detrimental reliance?

How was his reliance, if any, reasonable?

Why on earth would he need to show detrimental reliance in a contract case? This isn't fraudulent misrepresentation. It is a simple contract. By your analysis virtually NO ONE could ever win a breach of contract case.

The OP DID have "the slightest clue" - that is why he was so quick to jump on the deal. It happens with airlines all the time. They offer flights for a few dollars (see flyertalk.com - I think that is the name) and people jump in and buy them before the airlines realize their mistake.

This happens all the time. The person never gets the item. I am betting that they even have text on their web site that says this. Here is what Best Buy saysErrors on Our SitePrices and availability of products and services are subject to change without notice. Errors will be corrected where discovered, and Best Buy reserves the right to revoke any stated offer and to correct any errors, inaccuracies or omissions including after an order has been submitted and whether or not the order has been confirmed and your credit card charged. If your credit card has already been charged for the purchase and your order is cancelled, Best Buy will issue a credit to your credit card account in the amount of the charge. Individual bank policies will dictate when this amount is credited to your account. If you are not fully satisfied with your purchase, you may return it in accordance with Best Buy's Return Policy.

hipster doofus wrote:

Agreed wrote:

Previous poster was correct in saying you've got no case because you lost nothing. Zero chance of you receiving any compensation when you lost nothing to begin with. In addition, no attorney would ever take your case in front of a judge because they would ruin their own reputation. A judge would bitch slap the attorney so fast it would make both of your heads spin. It's sad that your first reaction to not being allowed to screw this company because of an honest mistake is to sue them.

Perhaps you should go back over your offer and acceptance notes.

What has he lost? He has lost the ability to obtain a $29,000 item for $130.00. One can't go around agreeing to sell things and then backing out of the sale. This is a fundamental principal of contract law.

Transportation Engineer wrote:f I f***ed up in my job and my team put out a report that claimed that a proposed light rail line could draw 12,000 passengers per hour when the realistic estimation was actually 200 passengers per hour, would my firing be the fault of the city that hired our firm? No, it would be my fault.

Sounds like the light rail in Seattle!