8 ms·
HP says I should have known its £399 laptop bargain was too good to be true
- wccrawford 3y agoIt's pretty clear to me that even to HP employees, that bargain wasn't "too good to be true". And putting them through all that crap over it? Yeah, no.
- andy99 3y agoPretty ridiculous especially when all of the advertising of those computers is designed to be utterly confusing and impossible to compare for the customer. One could easily picture a 70% off sale on a computer with a different sku and a made up "regular price" advertised as a deal, it's basically how the industry operates. So it's funny to see HP claim she should have known better. Edit: here is a US example, advertised as "Save 75%" https://www.hp.com/us-en/shop/pdp/hp-elitebook-x360-1040-g8-notebook-pc-wolf-pro-security-edition?jumpid=ma_cyber-sale_product-tile_top-deals_5_9a8u4ua_hp-elitebook-x360-10 https://www.hp.com/us-en/shop/pdp/hp-elitebook-x360-1040-g8-... (I have no idea if this is a good deal or not, point is that such "savings" are a common occurence)
- dboreham 3y agoSome countries (e.g. UK) have laws about this: you can't just make up a high price then advertise a big discount from that price. The higher price has to be "real" (usually defined as they were selling actual units of the thing to customers for that price for so many weeks, within so many weeks of the sale date).
- rootusrootus 3y agoThe US definitely has rules on what constitutes a sale price. Though how often the FTC goes after retailers, I don't know. Probably only when someone complains.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- pavlov 3y agoI remember reading that France has hundreds of price inspectors who secretly visit stores all year taking down the prices. When the annual discount season comes around, they compare the discount prices to the data compiled through the year to ensure the advertised discount percentages are real and representative of the long-term pricing trend (instead of, say, yanking up the price briefly before the discounts start).
- gumby 3y agoSeems like we almost have this capability for online retailers thanks to sites like camelcamelcamel. Just needs the appropriate plug ins. The canonical way to thwart this in meat space is to have channel-specific SKUs (e.g. same product sold at Best Buy and Costco but with different model numbers).
- mh- 3y ago> channel-specific SKUs I'm sure this would eventually make its way online if the FTC started enforcing the existing sale price rules. When I worked at Best Buy in 2000, this was already standard practice for appliance manufacturers as well as some PC brands.
- swores 3y agoChannel specific SKUs is common already, but would it be legal to use the same trick for same-channel seasonal sales? I'm not aware of it being done, but maybe it is and I just haven't noticed. For example, sell product all year round as item sku-0001 for $100, while also listing an identical product as item sku-0001b which costs $150 but is not promoted at all. Then the day before black friday, stop selling item sku-0001, and promote item sku-0001b for $105 with a flashing "30% off!!" sign? If you're a third party trying this on Amazon then it has downsides such as lack of reviews, poor ranking etc. on sku-0001b that most of the year nobody is buying. But if you're a retailer with your own online shop, then you just say that the reviews are for this family of products and display the sku-0001 reviews on the sku-0001b page while promoting sku-0001b heavily during the black friday campaign... And then the day after the sale ends, item sku-0001 magically reappears for its usual price of $100 ($5 cheaper than sku-0001b's sale price, but no flashing banner to promote the fact) and sku-0001b spends the next months to a year not being bought or promoted again.
- cafard 3y agoIn the 1980s, the Attorney General of Maryland beat up on a number of department stores for this sort of thing.
- callalex 3y agoFor me there’s a big red banner at the top of the page stating that I can even save 84%!
- ars 3y agoSo, according to the article "a contract was formed", but despite that HP gets away with just giving them "20% off"? If there really was a contract he should sue HP to honor it, my understanding is in the UK loser pays legal fees, so if he's sure about contract law there's no downside (I would suggest double checking the law on this though).
- poizan42 3y agoI don't think the issue at hand here is the letter of the law, but rather when a bargain is "too good to be true" which is up for interpretation.
- londons_explore 3y agoEven if it was too good to be true, I suspect that the sending of a confirmation by the company makes it a valid contract. Law famously doesn't take into account the proportionality of consideration - which is why the famous 'peppercorn rent' exists. [1] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppercorn_(law) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppercorn_(law)
- rjwilmsi 3y agoAgree. It's about whether a buyer would reasonably expect the price to be correct. UK law for consumer goods and sales, I would say generally doesn't require the buyer to be an expert. Laptops are items that are frequently included in sales and clearance sales at 50% off or more do happen. £400 is still a normal price to pay for a laptop. So I'd say the buyer could reasonably expect a laptop discounted to £400 to be the correct price, therefore HP were unreasonable to try to blame the buyer.
- Gunax 3y agoA contract may have been formed, but maybe the contract has a clause that exempts pricing errors. Without reading the contract, we cannot know. But given that the context was constructed by HP, there are likely multiple legal escapes.
- Maxion 3y ago
- anm89 3y ago[flagged]
- callalex 3y agoWhat technology are you referring to?
- i386 3y agoUnder Australian law this would have had to be honored by HP
- jszymborski 3y agoSame in Canada, as I understand it.
- s1artibartfast 3y agowhy do you say that? Under UK law, this deal should have been honored too, but wasn't. Are you saying that nobody breaks the law in Australia?
- unixhero 3y agoDude how did you extrapolate that?
- monkeydreams 3y agoOh, they will try ( I'm looking at you, Dell), but you can quite easily stick by your guns and refuse to accept anything other than product delivery. If they have taken your money they have to provide the goods or an appropriate replacement. If they keep refusing you can start reporting them to various authorities such as ACCC and they start wearing penalties and have to deliver anyway.
- gumby 3y ago> Are you saying that nobody breaks the law in Australia? That’s right, we got it out of our system more than a century ago. (TBH for a country settled by supposed crims, Aus is a surprisingly law abiding place)
- londons_explore 3y agoUnder UK law it's the same. If OP fought in court, they would get that laptop.
- kleiba 3y agoUnder German law, I think HP would have been fine. I think the important part is that (apparently) HP made a mistake when they put out that special offer. Whether or not a customer should be able to recognize it as such is secondary. Everyone makes mistakes and that fact is recognized under German law for situations like that (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erkl%C3%A4rungsirrtum https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erkl%C3%A4rungsirrtum). But of course, the customer should then be reimbursed.
- crazygringo 3y ago> Royal Mail told me, apologetically, that HP requested the return of the laptop while it was out for delivery, a request so rare no relevant tracking update existed. So the driver scanned the “refused delivery” option. I'm genuinely curious -- how does this even work? This isn't something I've ever heard of anybody being able to do, for the sender to cancel delivery mid-way. Is this someone anyone can do? Only large corporate customers? Or something in a custom contract? How does the delivery service even handle it -- do they manually call the driver on the phone and be like, "hey never mind about that one package"? This all just seems so random.
- adastra22 3y agoI've done this (or rather, had the sender do this) multiple times. I'm surprise that Royal Mail was surprised.
- pests 3y agoAnyone can do it for personal shipments on UPS.com I realized last week when I needed to re-route the package. The seller can do it and so can the buyer. But I also noticed the seller can just cancel the delivery. Immediately realized it could be used for fraud by pretending to prove the shipment.
- adastra22 3y agoIn my experience only the sender can do this.
- ipython 3y agoBut how do they validate the request came from the sender?
- mh- 3y agoThey probably only allow it for business customers. In which case there's a shipper account associated with the tracking number and they have online access to view/manage all outgoing parcels/deliveries. This used to be called Quantum View; a quick google suggests it still is.
- dboreham 3y agoFor reference, you can buy an HP laptop (14" Chromebook) at Costco for $230. So 399 quid ($500) seems not outside the realms of possibility for a specially discounted 17" machine.
- jnsie 3y ago> HP ignored my questions about how many customers were affected and why it repeatedly gave you false information. It stated merely that all affected customers had been notified. It says: “We are taking steps to ensure we deliver the first-class experience customers can expect from HP at all times, including with regard to communications with specific customers.” Corporate speak, especially when it is directly contrary to reality, is so frustrating.
- vic-traill 3y ago>You were contacted after my intervention and a refund arrived along with a 20% voucher nearly three weeks after it was first promised. Voucher? So you have to spend more money on HP products to claim a shitty 20% for HP having broken contract law? Am I interpreting this correctly? If so, wow.
- taylodl 3y agoHaving just finished watching "Pepsi, where's my jet?" on Netflix, all I can say is fuck Pepsi, and now fuck HP. I'm sick and tired of these big companies thinking they can run roughshod all over the world and their C-suite fat cats thinking they own the world and can do anything they want and not be beholden to the law.
- Dwedit 3y agoReally? The silly "Harrier Jet" commercial that was obviously a joke?
- willvarfar 3y agoSpoiler alert on the documentary, they had caveats on the canadian version of the ad but had deliberately put a lower number on the US ad to make it feel more real. Etc. The ad designer was saying 'don't put me on the stand'.
- taylodl 3y agoObviously a joke, eh? A commercial pitched to adolescents? A company that fought tooth and nail to make sure the case never made it to a jury trial? What's Pepsi so afraid of? You should be ashamed of yourself for being a corporate stooge.
- mcphage 3y ago> Obviously a joke, eh? Yes, the Harrier Jet offer was obviously a joke. > A company that fought tooth and nail to make sure the case never made it to a jury trial? Well they’re also a shitty company. Both things are true. > You should be ashamed of yourself for being a corporate stooge. I think our legal system would be much improved by expecting a certain level of critical thinking before lawyers get involved.
- morelisp 3y agoI was the target audience for the commercial. It was obviously a joke.
- 3y ago
- amne 3y agoIt could've been the best laptop on the planet and still would not buy. These guys are selling scanners that won't scan because "low ink". I'm going to assume the webcam will stop working after 100 battery cycles because .. power limits or something.
- phero_cnstrcts 3y agoOr also “low ink”.
- Animats 3y agoRight now, on HP's own site: HP Envy laptop: "Price starting at $1,299.99 - Save $600.00 - $699.99".[1] 50%-75% price reductions in laptops are not rare. [1] https://www.hp.com/us-en/shop/dlp/hp-envy-17-laptop https://www.hp.com/us-en/shop/dlp/hp-envy-17-laptop
- caminante 3y agoIt feels like they're adopting the Macy's markup to mark down marketing program. That said, the real question is how many people pulled the trigger on this... $500 fat finger markdown * 100 people = $50k. Now, 1k people...10k people... And MOST importantly, what would you do if you were HP? I don't know about you, but I would be calling corporate lawyers for options and pressing the brakes once it got past my paycheck in losses.
- whatareyousure 3y agoI genuinely believe both parties should want to buy/sell for a valid contract. People make mistakes and just because it's a big anonymous company to the author doesn't mean there are people behind mistakes.
- seabass-labrax 3y agoThat is indeed the law in the UK, and applied to this story. The key thing here is that the customer ('MM') explicitly entered their side of the contract by clicking 'purchase' and providing payment details on HP's website. HP could have declined at this point: their original email and special offer website was only an 'invitation to treat'. But in sending an order confirmation message to MM, HP had chosen to sell - and thus made a valid contract. Perhaps HP should have a human representative approving each offer and entering into contracts manually. However, I can't see that being likely or (from HP's point of view) entirely satisfactory.
- whatareyousure 3y agoPerhaps people should be more understanding.
- boringuser2 3y agoI don't know the specifics of the law here, but it seems problematic that a company would be legally considered the owners of an item that you have purchased and be able to unilaterally rescind your contract until it has arrived on your doorstep. 1. Who determines when the item transitions from their property to yours? It seems reasonable that it would be when they accept payment for your item, but it apparently isn't. 2. If the transition occurs at the customer's door, does this mean that a parcel delivered to the wrong location (let's say, a neighbor's door) is theirs? Does mere proximity legally make the item yours? Does the carrier decide to whom the item belongs, and, if so, when? I actually don't believe the "refused delivery" story because it superficially appears to be the only legal loophole that would allow the vendor to retain property of the item. 3. I'm not sure that it's equitable to allow a company to take a relatively non-trivial amount of money from a consumer and give them unilateral leverage in the contract. Even $100 is a non-trivial amount of money for a consumer of even modest wealth, whereas $100 worth of goods for a company is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percentage of value for even a modest merchant. If the aim of the law is to promote equity, it seems like a greater, not equal, onus would be placed on a merchant.
- jon-wood 3y agoOn the whole I’m much happier with convention being that the company owns the object being sold until a courier hands it over to you, especially in a world where most companies are selecting their courier based on who the lowest bidder is rather than quality of service. In your world, let’s say the lowest bidder courier has an overloaded route, and decides to toss your laptop into a river while claiming to have made delivery to your neighbour. You’re now on the hook to chase this down and get a refund for the value of the laptop. In my world I call up the sender and say “hey, your courier fucked up” and it’s now their problem. If they don’t fix it I run a chargeback of the card payment because the item I bought never arrived.
- boringuser2 3y agoThat would also be a breach of the contract. Why wouldn't it be contingent on the vendor to properly safeguard and transport your property? I can send my Rolex into a shop for repair, or hand it over physically, and I'm pretty sure I'm protected from someone throwing it into the Hudson river without it becoming their property. Just to note, most deliveries are contactless so a company really isn't capable of proving this supposed transfer of ownership. Seems like a nightmare for the company and the consumer.
- gravitronic 3y agoOnce a parcel is in the mail system, is it legal in the UK for anyone, including the sender, to pull it back out of the system?
- pmontra 3y agoIf they sold 1 laptop at a 1000 loss due to a mistake of theirs, it's probably more cost effective to let it go. If they sold 1000 of them, maybe they were debating the reputation damage vs the economic loss: with those numbers at least one of the unfortunate customers would make the mistake and the mishandling very public.
- hmcq6 3y agoUnrealized profits do not constitute a loss. There is no way they would be losing $1000 per laptop, maybe $100.
- rootusrootus 3y agoI'm a little impressed that HP stuck to its guns once the newspaper called. Usually once something looks like it is about to become a PR problem, the calculation is made that losing a few bucks on a single purchase is the cheaper option. Instead, now we're all taking about how shitty they are.
- lnxg33k1 3y agoIf HP refunded every time events would be leading to PR nightmares it would be bankrupt by now, it’s just a consistently shitty company
- rodgerd 3y agoIt's not the core of the story, but man: how HP have degenerated as a company. They were a gold standard for the quality of how they ran as a company and the products they sold. Now look at them.
- mongol 3y agoYes it is seriously sad. Today they are to be avoided at almost any price. But when I bought my HP48SX, it was my most loved possession, and the company checked all boxes.
- gumby 3y agoJust a reminder that HP also abandoned its “Don’t be Evil” policy (they called it “The HP Way”) though Google ditched theirs much more quickly.
- neilv 3y agoI wonder how far up the HP org chart that decision (to call back a direct sale shipment from the shipper) was made. Maybe doing so was aligned with that person's OKRs or KPIs, whether or not they considered that this would plausibly lead to complaints on social media (or to a news org consumer columnist?) that'd hurt the brand.
- MarkusWandel 3y agoIt hardly matters who's legally right and who's wrong here. The fact is, HP was once a class act. I wish I could find the writeup about the early HP35 calculator bug, where it was suggested that they just sweep it under the rug, and either Hewlett or Packard himself said no, we're going to do the right thing and fix every calculator we've shipped, period. That same boss would have said, it was our mistake, so we're going to honour the offer. A few hundred thousand bucks down the drain, but stellar reputation maintained. It takes a long time, and makes a lot of profit, to run such a reputable brand into the ground. By the look of it, the process is nearly complete.
- phendrenad2 3y agoIn those days HP was selling specialized equipment to a small market of specialists, and brand reputation was key. If HP were only selling to the HN crowd, they'd have been out of business years ago. But now they're in the consumer staple industry. A new crop of highschool and college students are minted every year, and the negative signal simply will not reach them. They will see the ads for HP and see it as just another of several interchangeable brands (like automobiles or Android phones).
- glaucon 3y ago>But now they're in the consumer staple industry. I don't think it's quite that simple, like almost all large manufacturers HP have different tiers of quality/prices to address different markets. Just as you say they have price sensitive models but they also have "price is not the main thing" models. That's not to say that any of HP's laptops are a good buy in the first place but it true for every manufacturer that there are a range of qualities and prices. The exception to this is Apple because they have distinctive approach to marketing which, in the laptop field, is unique (or if it's not unique I can't think of any other 'single tier' manufacturers).
- bastard_op 3y agoI have to assume this was not only one person, HP doesn't do anything for one person, so I'd have to imagine at a few hundred (or thousand) at least went out. This doesn't seem even that good a deal, the cheapest model, which I'd have to presume this to be is $649 US currently, so I can't imagine it was even worth their effort to action something like this, literally mass recalling them from the delivery trucks en route like they screwed up and sent everyone a $3000 laptop. More like some middle manager forced some random behavior because they screwed up the listing and didn't want to be held accountable to their boss personally. If it were actually worth more, it would be interesting to get in touch with others that had the same crap pulled on them and get HP on the TV news for being a Christmas Grinch and just a really nasty company in general for doing so to customers. As said, this could be construed as illegal behavior if anyone bothered to lawyer up for it, but for 300-400 return, just swear never to buying anything HP again, and tell all your friends what scum they are. I have never had anyone have a good experience with an HP laptop, consumer low-end ones particularly, and already tell everyone I know to avoid them if asked.
- floppiplopp 3y agofrom the company that brought you: printers! and ink cartridges!
- retrocryptid 3y agoSeems on par with HP common operating procedure. A decade ago we ordered a couple of laptops that were discounted by 15%. The story on the website was they were a generation past their prime, so they were new laptops being sold at a discount. When they arrived we discovered the keyboards didn't work. HP refused to honor their warranty commitment. HP was removed from our vendor list and that of the California state government agency we were providing support services for.