5 ms·

So, 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 s

by ars 3y ago

So, 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 ago
I 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 ago
  Even 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 ago
  Agree. 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 ago
A 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
Loser pays legal fees once they lose, until then you're on the hook. And there's always the chance you will lose. HP (or, insert big entity here) has too much money to throw at lawyers, so usually it does not really make sense for a small party to sue a big one. Better to just accept the loss, walk away, and go do something more productive than generate more income for lawyers.
- gzer0 3y ago
  And this is why Texas allows for small claims court, where no lawyers are allowed for either side and it’s a $199 filing fee up to $20,000 in damages. Interested to know if something similar exists in the UK?
  - whatshisface 3y ago
    How can a corporation represent itself without a lawyer?
    - pmontra 3y ago
      I'm not from there but I take a guess: they send a manager that must not be a lawyer.
    - ars 3y ago
      They are required to send an employee of the company (a manager usually) who does not have a law degree to represent them.
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    Not sure what Texas' relevance here is? In Washington it's $50 and up to $10,000. That being said, yes it does: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/small-claims/making-a-small-claim/ https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-syste...
  - rjwilmsi 3y ago
    Of course. Small Claims process in the UK has a fee of about 10% of claim value and covers claims up to £10,000. If you win the other party has to repay those fees. No legal fees allowed. So would be the right process here - presumably as HP are in breach of contract the laptop buyer would win a case for a claim of the extra cost of the same laptop at full price.
pdpi 3y ago
A newspaper intervented and arranged for an amicable resolution. If they had taken this to court, I'm sure they'd have won, but they were happy to accept a refund plus a voucher, so they didn't. The 20% off voucher is a slap in the face, though. I'd never come out of this situation and still buy a laptop from HP, so it's effectively nothing.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  And no doubt the voucher is for "full priced items, no deals or sales, may not be combined with any other offer"...

by ars 3y ago

poizan42 3y ago

I 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 ago
Even 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 ago
Agree. 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 ago

A 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

Loser pays legal fees once they lose, until then you're on the hook. And there's always the chance you will lose. HP (or, insert big entity here) has too much money to throw at lawyers, so usually it does not really make sense for a small party to sue a big one. Better to just accept the loss, walk away, and go do something more productive than generate more income for lawyers.

gzer0 3y ago
And this is why Texas allows for small claims court, where no lawyers are allowed for either side and it’s a $199 filing fee up to $20,000 in damages. Interested to know if something similar exists in the UK?
- whatshisface 3y ago
  How can a corporation represent itself without a lawyer?
  - pmontra 3y ago
    I'm not from there but I take a guess: they send a manager that must not be a lawyer.
  - ars 3y ago
    They are required to send an employee of the company (a manager usually) who does not have a law degree to represent them.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  Not sure what Texas' relevance here is? In Washington it's $50 and up to $10,000. That being said, yes it does: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-system/small-claims/making-a-small-claim/ https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/legal-syste...
- rjwilmsi 3y ago
  Of course. Small Claims process in the UK has a fee of about 10% of claim value and covers claims up to £10,000. If you win the other party has to repay those fees. No legal fees allowed. So would be the right process here - presumably as HP are in breach of contract the laptop buyer would win a case for a claim of the extra cost of the same laptop at full price.

pdpi 3y ago

A newspaper intervented and arranged for an amicable resolution. If they had taken this to court, I'm sure they'd have won, but they were happy to accept a refund plus a voucher, so they didn't. The 20% off voucher is a slap in the face, though. I'd never come out of this situation and still buy a laptop from HP, so it's effectively nothing.

FireBeyond 3y ago
And no doubt the voucher is for "full priced items, no deals or sales, may not be combined with any other offer"...