# Tesco guarantee on pricing errors



## Brooklyn (11 Oct 2008)

I was Tesco today and picked up an item which was marked at a reduced price. When I brought it to the till it scanned at the original (unreduced) price. I pointed out the error to the shop assistant, she went to go check the shelf and came back confirming that yes, the price was supposed to be reduced. She keyed in the reduced price and I pointed to the sign on the wall which states that if you are charged more than the shelf price Tesco "guarantees" to give you the item free. She told me this did not apply because I hadn't completed the transaction yet. I thought this was absurd and asked for a manager, who agreed to give me the item free. My questions are:

1) Is that sign legally binding (I know there is not normally an obligation to give the customer the marked price, but it does say that Tesco "guarantees" it will do so)

2) If so, can they legitimately refuse to honour the guarantee if I point out the error to them _after _the item is scanned at the till but _before _I hand over the money for it?


----------



## susie1 (11 Oct 2008)

the guarantee only applies if you have paid for the item, which you did not, so you were not overcharged.  i think it was a bit cheeky of you to complain, fair play to the manager for refunding you though which i'm sure was only a good will gesture.


----------



## Brooklyn (11 Oct 2008)

susie1 said:


> the guarantee only applies if you have paid for the item, which you did not, so you were not overcharged.



Can you back this up with a reference?  Every dictionary I have to hand says that "charge" means to _ask _a price or fee, which happened at the point my item was scanned at the till. It's not clear to me how it is that money has to be exchanged first.  



> i think it was a bit cheeky of you to complain



 It appeared to me, and still does, that I had an entitlement under their policy. What's cheeky about asking for it?


----------



## Bubbly Scot (11 Oct 2008)

Brooklyn said:


> Every dictionary I have to hand says that "charge" means to _ask _a price or fee, which happened at the point my item was scanned at the till. It's not clear to me how it is that money has to be exchanged first.


 
It's a bit pedantic in my opinion. I'm not familiar with the exact wording of the poster but I always understood it to mean if you are overcharged, as in you have paid the money over, then you are entitled to the refund. I am sure this is the meaning most people take from the wording. What the assistant originally did seemed fair enough, keyed in the correct price and let you continue. I've posted elsewhere that I found a mistake in the price charged for some books so I continued with the purchase, paid the full price, then went over to the desk for a refund.



> If so, can they legitimately refuse to honour the guarantee if I point out the error to them _after _the item is scanned at the till but _before _I hand over the money for it?


 
This is why we always have small print.


----------



## rmelly (11 Oct 2008)

Brooklyn said:


> Can you back this up with a reference? Every dictionary I have to hand says that "charge" means to _ask _a price or fee, which happened at the point my item was scanned at the till. It's not clear to me how it is that money has to be exchanged first.


 
Can you clarify EXACTLY when you pointed out the incorrect price? Was it just after she scanned it, or after she asked you for the money?


----------



## Brooklyn (11 Oct 2008)

Bubbly Scot said:


> I found a mistake in the price charged for some books so I continued with the purchase, paid the full price, then went over to the desk for a refund.



... which seems like a needless complication for both of us. Surely the whole point of the guarantee is that Tesco wants its customers to feel confident that any discounts advertised on the shelf will be rung up at the till - and that would not have been the case in my transaction today. I could understand them refusing to apply the guarantee if it had been the shop assistant who noticed and pointed out the error, but it wasn't. It was entirely my own intervention.

On the definition of "charged", if someone sends you a bill for a certain amount, isn't it fair to say that they "charged" you that amount when they sent you the bill? That is how I would understand the term anyway.

Does anyone have a proper _legal_ definition?



> This is why we always have small print.


No small print on the sign.


----------



## Brooklyn (11 Oct 2008)

rmelly said:


> Can you clarify EXACTLY when you pointed out the incorrect price? Was it just after she scanned it, or after she asked you for the money?



Not really applicable. It was at a self-service till, I had rung up the item myself and the machine was ready to accept my money.


----------



## Bubbly Scot (11 Oct 2008)

Brooklyn said:


> ... which seems like a needless complication for both of us.


 
Not for me, as far as I was concerned, had I contacted an assistant after scanning (it was a self scan check out) and pointed out the error then she would have rung in the correct price and that would have been an end. What you describe as a _needless complication _was, to me, well worth the €14.97 refund. The way you handled it seems more complicated than it needs to be but I do see where you're coming from with your request for clarity even though I find it a bit pernickity.


----------



## susie1 (12 Oct 2008)

Brooklyn said:


> Can you back this up with a reference? Every dictionary I have to hand says that "charge" means to _ask _a price or fee, which happened at the point my item was scanned at the till. It's not clear to me how it is that money has to be exchanged first.
> 
> 
> 
> It appeared to me, and still does, that I had an entitlement under their policy. What's cheeky about asking for it?


 
on previous experience, after being overcharged, the receipt must be presented as proof of purchase and verified against the display price, in your case, you DID NOT have a receipt therefore you were not charged for and did not pay the incorrect price as it was corrected prior to purchasing.

whats cheeky is that you had the item at the lower price and still wanted it for free


----------



## Brooklyn (12 Oct 2008)

susie1 said:


> on previous experience, after being overcharged, the receipt must be presented as proof of purchase and verified against the display price



In other words you don't have a reference.

The scenario you describe is somewhat different. The receipt in that case is not only proof of purchase, it's proof that a higher price was demanded. Whereas I already had the proof of the price differential - it was on the screen at the till. 

I found the exact wording of the sign. It says "in the unlikely event of you being charged a price at the checkouts that is higher than the price mounted on the display, we will give you that item absolutely free and without quibble".  I'll ask again,* does anyone have a legal reference to show that you are only "charged" for an item once you pay for it*?



> whats cheeky is that you had the item at the lower price and still wanted it for free


I still don't see what's cheeky about wanting them to live up to their advertised policy.


----------



## Brooklyn (12 Oct 2008)

Bubbly Scot said:


> What you describe as a _needless complication _was, to me, well worth the €14.97 refund.



My point wasn't that it wouldn't be worth it, but that it shouldn't be necessary. If the only difference between getting the item free is whether you ask to get it for free before or after you pay the price they're asking, that seems like a silly technicality. The issue remains that the item is in their computers wrong and they wouldn't have known it if I hadn't pointed it out.


----------



## rmelly (12 Oct 2008)

I have to say that technically Brooklyn you are correct, however as the other posters have said (where this policy exists) it is easier to allow it go through with the wrong price and then claim to ensure there is no ambiguity.


----------



## Bubbly Scot (12 Oct 2008)

Brooklyn said:


> I'll ask again,* does anyone have a legal reference to show that you are only "charged" for an item once you pay for it*?


 
Perhaps it would better help your point if you found a legal reference to back up your interpretation of the posters. As Rmelly pointed out,you are _technically _correct.

Personally, I'll keep doing it the way I do, but just in the bigger shops. In small or local shops I wouldn't expect any sort of refund, just the price shown.


----------



## Hurling Fan (12 Oct 2008)

I do my shopping on line with Tesco and occasionally get charged the incorrect price for something i.e. different than what is advertised online.  When I ring to point this out I have never got a full refund just the difference.  Wondering if this policy of a full refund would also apply to their online shopping ... anyone know?


----------



## Complainer (12 Oct 2008)

Presumably, they must get away with fooling each customer once with this. The second time, the customer will just wait until after the money has been said to raise the query.


----------



## Brooklyn (12 Oct 2008)

Bubbly Scot said:


> Perhaps it would better help your point if you found a legal reference to back up your interpretation of the posters.



I've looked in a couple places but I don't see a legal definition of "charged" anywhere, which is why I'm asking if anyone else knows of one. In the absence of a formal legal definition, the dictionary definition seems to me the next best thing... and that backs up my interpretation.



> In small or local shops I wouldn't expect any sort of refund, just the price shown.



Me either, but Tesco has that sign, so it's reasonable to expect it.

And yes, I certainly will complete the transaction next time. Ironically part of the reason I didn't do it this time was because I thought it would be less hassle for the shop assistants as well as for myself (from my own experience in retail, it's a lot more complicated to process a refund). That's me taught, I guess!


----------



## bond-007 (12 Oct 2008)

Invitation to treat


> A shop owner displaying their goods for sale is generally making an invitation to treat (_Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists_ [1953] 1 QB 401). They are not obliged to sell the goods to anyone who is willing to pay for them, even if additional signage such as "special offer" accompanies the display of the goods. (But see bait and switch.) This distinction was legally relevant in _Fisher v Bell_ [1961] 1 QB 394, where it was held that displaying a flicknife for sale in a shop did not contravene legislation which prohibited offering for sale such a weapon. The distinction also means that if a shop mistakenly displays an item for sale at a very low price it is not obliged to sell it for that amount


----------



## Brooklyn (12 Oct 2008)

Thanks bond-007, but I said in my OP that I was aware of that and that's not what I was asking.


----------



## bond-007 (12 Oct 2008)

The way I would see it is that they have not charged the higher price until money changes hands and the transaction is completed. Until the money changes hands all bets are off.

I would see no obligation on Tesco to give anyone the item for free, even if they have a sign that purports to do so.


----------



## Guest128 (13 Oct 2008)

bond-007 said:


> The way I would see it is that they have not charged the higher price until money changes hands and the transaction is completed. Until the money changes hands all bets are off.
> 
> I would see no obligation on Tesco to give anyone the item for free, even if they have a sign that purports to do so.




Why do Tesco bother putting up the sign then? As the OP said, they were at a self-service checkout which was ready to accept the cash, including overpriced item, so whether they complained before paying or 5 seconds after overpaying is splitting hairs in all fairness.


----------



## bond-007 (13 Oct 2008)

I would say that 5 seconds would make all the difference if the matter was to go to a judge. 

I know a few people that deliberately go around tesco looking for these errors. The take their items to the price checker and find their mispriced items from there. They then pay and immediately claim their money back. The management of the particular Tesco has told these people that the offer is no longer available to them.


----------



## Guest128 (13 Oct 2008)

bond-007 said:


> I would say that 5 seconds would make all the difference if the matter was to go to a judge.
> 
> I know a few people that deliberately go around tesco looking for these errors. The take their items to the price checker and find their mispriced items from there. They then pay and immediately claim their money back. The management of the particular Tesco has told these people that the offer is no longer available to them.




Fair enough if it went to a judge they would be that strict I agree, but in the spirit of customer satisfaction etc, I would think the store would be less so and not renege on the advertised offer...

Regarding the people looking for these errors, is that not just bargain hunting taken to the next level? _*If*_ they are not breaking any law, why should the store say the offer is no longer available to them? Thats like casinos saying you can no longer play when you get too good and actually start winning money....


----------



## ubiquitous (13 Oct 2008)

FLANDERS` said:


> Thats like casinos saying you can no longer play when you get too good and actually start winning money....



Dunno about casinos, but many bookies do exactly that. The term they use for profit-making punters is "sharks".


----------



## Guest128 (13 Oct 2008)

ubiquitous said:


> Dunno about casinos, but many bookies do exactly that. The term they use for profit-making punters is "sharks".



Oh casinos are the pits! Take card counting for example, its just a strategy to play 21/blackjack. Its not illegal, you are not holding extra cards, looking at the deck somehow etc. - you just remember what has been played already and use that to gauge what to bet. When you get too good at it, the casinos like to (rather heavy-handedly) remove you and ban you from playing, simply for being too good at their game!


----------



## woods (13 Oct 2008)

bond-007 said:


> I know a few people that deliberately go around tesco looking for these errors. The take their items to the price checker and find their mispriced items from there. They then pay and immediately claim their money back. The management of the particular Tesco has told these people that the offer is no longer available to them.


I would say that these people are serving a civic function if they cause Tesco to be more carefull and doing a favor to the rest of us who do not have the time to check our bills.
Thumbs up to them.


----------



## bond-007 (13 Oct 2008)

I think the final straw was when one person found a 42 inch HDTV mispriced.


----------



## Guest128 (13 Oct 2008)

bond-007 said:


> I think the final straw was when one person found a 42 inch HDTV mispriced.



Brilliant! Would love to have seen the look on the managers face


----------



## Brooklyn (14 Oct 2008)

bond-007 said:


> I would say that 5 seconds would make all the difference if the matter was to go to a judge.



Presumably though the judge would have to find some basis in law for the distinction... and nobody yet seems to have found one...


----------



## ubiquitous (14 Oct 2008)

Brooklyn said:


> Presumably though the judge would have to find some basis in law for the distinction... and nobody yet seems to have found one...



Did you not bother reading the previous posts, for example this one:


> A shop owner displaying their goods for sale is generally making an invitation to treat (Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists [1953] 1 QB 401). They are not obliged to sell the goods to anyone who is willing to pay for them, even if additional signage such as "special offer" accompanies the display of the goods.


----------



## Brooklyn (14 Oct 2008)

ubiquitous said:


> Did you not bother reading the previous posts, for example this one:



Well, you don't seem to be reading very carefully, because that one has nothing to do with what I was talking about in the post you quoted.


----------



## ubiquitous (14 Oct 2008)

Brooklyn said:


> Well, you don't seem to be reading very carefully, because that one has nothing to do with what I was talking about in the post you quoted.



Well maybe you should express yourself a bit clearer then because I haven't the foggiest what your query is so.


----------



## Towger (14 Oct 2008)

Over the weekend I was in the Dunnes Stores in the Sandyford Industrial Estate, admiring the unfinished apartment blocks and wondering if they will still be in the same state in 20 years time. Anyway, Dunnes have a special on baby milk  , so I dually bought two tins. At the till, their POS system refused to scan in the second tin, the nice young man said he thought it had a restricted ingredient (ie paracetamol). So we called the manager over who said that 'head office had restricted milk to one till per customer, as there was a shortage of baby milk.' It was news to me that Margaret Heffernan was interested in the welling being of the people. Problem was quickly solved by scanning the tin through separately.


----------



## Celtwytch (15 Oct 2008)

Towger said:


> At the till, their POS system refused to scan in the second tin, the nice young man said he thought it had a restricted ingredient (ie paracetamol).


 
Paracetamol in baby milk???  Never heard the like!


----------



## teachai (15 Oct 2008)

Back to the Basic Issue: When are you charged?

You are charged when money is requested

Whether you hand money over or not is immaterial. 

However, Tesco should clarify their offer.  Ideally it should say if an Item is rung up on a till with a price that is higher than the marked price, then the item will be given free to the customer.


----------



## Mina (17 Nov 2008)

This thread is very interesting. Last weekend I was refused a refund on an overcharged item at Tesco (Jervis Street branch) on the grounds that the offer doesn't apply to the self-service tills _at all_! Of course the signs don't say that! I wonder do they have different policies in different stores or are the assistants just told to use whatever excuses they can think up to not have to give the refund!


----------



## Brooklyn (19 Nov 2008)

Mina said:


> I wonder do they have different policies in different stores



They seem to have different policies in the same store. My "incident" occurred at Jervis Centre too 



> or are the assistants just told to use whatever excuses they can think up to not have to give the refund!


Think you hit the nail on the head there.


----------



## SlurrySlump (19 Nov 2008)

Never ever ask the person on the register for the refund. Go to the customer service area where they have the authority to give you the item for free.


----------



## bond-007 (19 Nov 2008)

The important thing is to complete the transaction at the register first and then complain to customer services.


----------



## chrisboy (19 Nov 2008)

bond-007 said:


> I think the final straw was when one person found a 42 inch HDTV mispriced.



Wow! I hope the person who found this one gave a heads up to a few other shoppers!


----------



## Mina (19 Nov 2008)

bond-007 said:


> The important thing is to complete the transaction at the register first and then complain to customer services.



That's exactly what I did! It was customer services who told me the policy did not apply to self-service tills.


----------



## bond-007 (19 Nov 2008)

Sounds like they are making it up as they go along. Now I know why the discourage you from using manned checkouts.
Does anyone have the fine print of the guarantee?


----------



## kada_fd (19 Dec 2008)

hi, i was also wondering about this and the pricing on tesco's online..
yesterday i ordered some groceries and recieved them this afternoon, 2 things were misspriced,1 had a difference of 5euro and the other over 2euro, i sent an email to the customer services as soon as i noticed..
today the offers are still the same prices online, granted the cost may not have been put on my laser card yet and was wondering what tesco's do in cases of online orders and mispriceing


----------



## thedaras (21 Dec 2008)

Can I tell you all how I was treated in Tesco;
I purchased an item the value was around 129 as this was what the sticker said on the shelf,it was on special offer and had been reduced .
When I looked at my recipt as I would usualy do ,just a quick check before I leave any shop ,i noticed that i had been charged the original price,so i went straight back in to customer services.There a woman called a manager and they had a discussion,I hadnt a clue what was going on and asked them to hurry up and make a decision as i had to go.they said something to checkout lady on customer services and she asked for my laser card.I asked her what was the situation as I was looking for the item at the price on the sticker or if not then I wanted a refund.
She said |YOU ARE GETTING IT FOR FREE!! 
I was totaly shocked!!
I knew nothing of this refund/pricing error notice and never saw any sign.
So HAPPY CHRISTMAS TO TESCO.
I have an item valued at 150 or more and I got it FREE.
So in fairness it works and it worked really well in my case.


----------



## pansyflower (21 Dec 2008)

> and I got it FREE.



Where??!!??


----------



## sandrat (22 Dec 2008)

bet they took the sticker down quick smart! happened to my sister with a playstation game before marked as half price she got charge full price and ended up getting it free


----------

