vikingdirect.ie 51'' Samsung for €6.49

A viral marketing campaign at it's best.

Anyone who responded is now on the viking mailing list. Very handy for viking.
 
And that is wrong, fair enough they cancel the order but it really annoys me they may have engineered the whole thing to profit.
 
I know nothing about this particular offer by Viking other than what I have read here but as there are a reasonably large outfit I think that as a gesture of good will towards those eagle eyed shoppers who spotted the deal and made a payment they should have offered to refund double the payment made. They might even do it yet and ring Joe Duffy or put it on Facebook and make themselves look good with a bit of "sales spiel" thrown.
 
Did everyone have to sign up to order a tv? I wonder how many of those thousdands will go back in and delete their account.

Their mailing list just gained a lot of new members
 
10to1 said:
...in my opinion there is a binding contract regardless of their terms and conditions
Click to expand...

I'd like to hear from one of the legal expert on this one, but my take on it is their terms and conditions form part of the contract.

For those who think this was a deliberate ploy, I seriously doubt a company of the size of VD (€30M turnover in 2011) would risk the reputational damage this is doing.
 
"I'd like to hear from one of the legal expert on this one"

Your wish..............

There was no binding contract. No decent solicitor would take a case against Viking. No Judge would make an order compelling Viking to sell at that price. So, no-one is going to get anywhere except (maybe) by whining. And what on earth people are mouthing off about wanting their contracts honoured is waaaaaaaaaaaay beyond me!

It's not the principle of the matter. It's not contract. It's just downright stupidity.

Although I do rather like the idea that it might have been a marketing ploy!

mf
 

From my post above,


 
Both consumer bodies gave bad advice as it is clearly established that a mistake does have relevance in contract law (of many differing legal jurisdictions), especially if the "non-mistaken" party should have had reasonable doubts about the price.
Advising people to pursue this matter thru the courts shows an ignorance that borders on the irresponsible.

No reasonable person could have been without doubts or suspicions regarding a six euro price on a TV such as this one.

Even the dodgy guy who whispers in one's ear that he's got a great deal on a TV wouldn't be selling it so cheaply.

Most people knew this was an innocent mistake and tried to exploit it, regardless of the loss to the company. It seems to be the belief of normally good honest people that the retailer should be punished/penalised for making such a mistake- and that they, the honest customer, should get away with their almost free purchase.

Is that what you believe,Ronan ?
 
Let this be a lesson not to accept everything the NCA says as gospel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register