Be Excellent To Each Other

There were complaints at the annual drinks party that the only drink available was tea, and it would have been nice if the hostess would provide an alternative drink at the next annual event, which was to happen the following evening. Cola was mentioned, making, as it does, an excellent-ish drink on its own as well as not separating when being debased with a little kick of vodka.

Today our intrepid hostess toddles off with her old lady's shopping trolly, pink with white blossoms, to pick up the requested refreshments...

I went to Londis, being the nearest shop. I quite like the staff in our local Londis - they are all friendly, with the exception of two old crones that always work together (every other member of staff runs the shop alone) who are always really rude to me. They were of course there this morning. Sigh.

I took down a 2 litre bottle of Diet Coke. They always have a big yellow price band on the top, printed onto the label, which reads '£1.85', though the shelf price says that the normal price (presumably for un-priced bottles) is £1.99.

When I took it to the till it was scanned in as £2.53.



£2.53.

'two pounds fifty three' she says, and holds out her hand.

I explained that the GIANT yellow band on the bottle says £1.85. She said that there had been a notice put up in the shop to say that prices had gone up due to VAT, and that though they might not have changed the shelf prices yet, the new correct price would be charged at the till.

I said that the VAT price did not account for the price rising by 68p, or 54p if ignoring the price on the bottle and going by the shelf price, and could they charge what they wanted on pre-priced goods?

Her reply was the words 'two pounds fifty three'. That's it. No answer to my question or my point on the skewed mathematics.

'or don't you want it?' was what came next, after I took a few seconds to try and take it in.

'no, thanks'

I walked to M&S and bought a bottle for £1.89 in the end, but my question is this:

How does the price rise to £2.53 from the start price? Also, are shops allowed to sell pre-priced items (items with prices printed on the packaging) for whatever price they fancy? It doesn't say 'rrp' or anything like that, just '£1.85'.

I know the price on an object / shelf isn't binding, but knowingly still having the wrong price up nearly two weeks after the change is pretty sneaky.

By my reckoning, a £1.85 price before the VAT rise should be £1.89 after.

Also, I imagine Coke wouldn't look too well on people sticking an extra 60p on to the prices they put on the bottle.

No, they aren't. Which is why in cash and carry bulk buy places, the non-price marked cans and bottles are more expensive, as a shop can charge what they like. The pre-priced items should be sold at the price marked, if you really hate the crones, it might be worth a call to trading standards...

Pretty sure they are.

Displaying goods on a shelf does not constitute an offer for sale. The offer and acceptance occurs at the checkout, as Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots (1952) shows.

EDIT: Like when the 16 year old gave me a tenner to buy him a bottle of beer. He seemed surprise to receive the bottle of beer and no change. "It's £1.86 in there" he said. "It is £10 out here" I said.

I don't think it's trading standards you need to tell - I think it's Coca Cola Schwepps who will care.

I bought a couple of cans of squirty foam in Screwfix at the weekend. 3.99 on the shelf, 5.49 or something at the till

The guy made the VAT change excuse but then catching my change of expression rapidly corrected himself and muttered something about a change of supplier, and that it was actually a different stock code.

I actually believe this as apparently there was something nasty in the old foam which has now been replaced with something less nasty but more expensive, but even so the VAT excuse was at the forefront even when it's blatantly not true.

It's not a shelf price, it's a price forming a constituent part of the product's label.

But! I'm all for shops happily selling individual packets of crisps with "Part of a multipack, not to be sold separately" bands on them, so I can't really decry it. There's no contract formed in that regard in cash'n'carries. At least, not when I shopped in CostCo.

I consider stating that a 33% price hike is "because of the change in VAT" to be right out of order though. An open, honest "because I'm a profiteering cunt" is perfectly acceptable, on the other hand.

Contract exists between the supplier and the seller, as Gaywood said.

There was some case or other involving car tires, which was basically tire company told firm A that they could only sell them in packs of 4 or whatever, Firm A then sold them to Shop B who sold them individually, and Tire Company got shitty with Shop B over this who, rightly so, told them to "go fuck themselves" and it ended up in court and the court said "No! You can't dictate to Shop B what they do, there is no form of contract with them, you scallywags" and all was well.

Dodgy little corner shops are renown for ripping off their customers, I'd say. I used to go in one years ago and they almost always tried to short change me.

Hearing stories like this, no wonder we've all fucked off to Sainsburys. (Of course, I appreciate they'll never be as cheap as a large supermarket and nor would I expect them to be, but this story just takes the piss. Also, whilst we're on the subject, how many times have you been sold a multipack bag of crisps/drinks can/Mars bar or whatever - often sub weight as compared to the bona fide singular item - at full price, from such stores?)

As for the VAT thing, I guess some retailers always welcome any figleaf/excuse to whack up their prices out of all proportion. It doesn't help when a sizeable chunk of their customer base is frankly innumerate, either.

Exactly - so Coca Cola sell them to CostCo with "multipack-only" branding, CostCo sell it on to Your Friendly Independent Proprietor without any such T and/or C (beyond the product labelling), who then split/charge however they like.

The corner shop down the road from the old Norton Towers was sneaky about it - when the "2 for £2.50" labelled bottles were in but they had non-labelled stock as well, there'd rather suspiciously only be a single promotional bottle out. But when they had no option, the promotion was honoured.

And the offer and acceptance occurs at the checkout.

Pleased we are in accord.

I do wonder if that's the (secret) motivation behind fiddling with VAT.

Not only does it make extra money for the government, they've probably worked out that the change allows an additional bit of "free" extra profit for retailers as some of them are guaranteed to take the piss, let's say it works out to an average 5% additional scalping of the customer, which is supposedly a crap-load of additional cash flowing about in the economy, they can then claim it has "grown" by x percent due to sound fiscal management.

Still, at least inflation hasn't been fuelled by the Bank of England printing money in recent years.

...

Oh. Wait.

Aren't you proud we are taking our economic policies from Zimbawe?

I want a trillion pound note, and I want it now!

Current inflation is entirely deliberate, because it makes our massive debt cheaper. The trick is stopping it going through the roof.

I love the way they have to use a euphemism like 'Quantitative Easing', presumably because no-one can actually bring themselves to use the far less disingenuous term 'printing money'.

I note the pound has sank by 20% this last year alone and inflation is now at ~4% - big surprise eh. Labour/Bankers = cunts etc.

I thought the invitation to treat stuff worked in such a way as to the offer and acceptance being done at checkout time, however what shops can't do is price items low before checkout, then say no and charge a higher amount. Either side can say no at any time, for any reason, but the shop can't say no and then offer the item at a higher price than originally stated, as that falls under false advertising and misrepresentation?

Nah, false advertising/misrepresentation's when you're selling something as being one thing but it's actually another. Price is irrelevant.

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 Act seems to suggest that it might be illegal in the UK to advertise at one price and try to sell at another. I've no idea if this applies here though.

Like Grim..., I'm pretty sure that if a price is displayed on a product's label, that's the price that has to be charged. I don't suppose there's any law against charging under that price, but overcharging for it is illegal, I think.

I have no citation for this though, other than what I was told by my parents, who used to remove such price-marked labels and replace them with others when they ran a pub

I think Grim... argued the opposite.

I think so too

I wasn't taking about the price on the shelf (which was £1.99) but the label which wraps around the bottle, with the coca-cola label, barcode, ingredients, etc had a big yellow strip printed on it with the price £1.85 in mahoosive letters.

I get that the shop can say 'this skirt is 20p' on the hanger, and they aren't obliged to sell it at that price if there is a pricing mix-up and it was supposed to be £20, but on pre-priced goods where the price is printed on directly by the manufacturer - are they allowed to charge whatever they fancy for those, or are they supposed to charge the price printed by the manufacturer?

Yup, Consumer Protection Act states that it is a criminal act to state a price that is misleading, by whatever means, as to the real price of an item. Unintentional misleading is fine, as long as the business takes action to fix the misprice when they are made aware.

Ah, OK, everyone was posting when I was typing that.

So, we don't know yet. People all think different things. We need someone in the business

s5(4)(g)*seems to suggest so, but I don't think I've got access to any subscription databases anymore, so can't look up any case law over it terribly easily. However, the consumer can always say 'no' and walk away, which I suspect would be the attitude the courts would take.

*(g)the price or the manner in which the price is calculated;

True, but after the consumer has walked away, the business has to rectify the mistake now they are aware,

They can charge whatever they want for the goods.

As I said, earlier, the price on the label exists only, really, as a contract between the manufacturer and the wholesaler. The retailer, who buys from the wholesaler can charge what they want for it, as there is no contract between the retailer and the manufacturer.

The offer and acceptance part of the contract occurs at the till.

I think that is just the RRP or recommended retail price and you can legally ignore it and charge what you want. Legally fine but you won't find many people shopping in your store.

I've really got to start going to bed earlier.

Sure, they can take a bottle marked £1.85, make a clear price change (to £1.99) in this case and sell them for that price.
What they can't do is charge £2.53 at the till, with no indication that will be the price.

I don't think that would really wash terribly well, over a £1.85 bottle of cola, though.

Looking at the OFT guidance, it seems to suggest that such a practice is only 'unfair' if it causes "the average consumer to make a different decision" and

So, given that, I think it's fine.

Like, say, for example, putting the bottle down and going to somewhere else to buy it?

So it's a self managing problem really.

Yeah, but Mimi isn't your average comsumer! It should be "the average consumer, or a generally awesome consumer, to make a different decision"

Well, yes, natch, but I don't think they then need to go scrubbing the labels from the products in fear of proceedings.

Oh indeed, but that doesn't stop the practice being the best kind of wrong.

After the VAT increase I decided to look at the prices of what my computer stuff cost me before it went up.

I went to Overclockers and saw that they had an enormous banner saying WE WILL PAY THE EXTRA VAT !!!oneone blah blah.

They gave a discount code that you needed at checkout.

However when checking the new prices and removing the 2.5% they worked out 2.5% more than I paid in December

So what they had done, basically, was add 5% to the prices, allowed you to remove 2.5% so you were indeed paying the VAT increase.

Mind you looking around it would seem most things are going up. After reading a glowing review of the Silverstone Raven RV02 in Custom PC back in November I decided it was worth a look at for my friend's new computer. Price listed in CPC and before Christmas was £102. The price now is £150. So there is clearly lots of price hiking going on, regardless of the VAT increase.

Bear in mind that if you apply the increased rate of VAT to an old price that had the old rate of VAT on it, you pay 2.1% more, not 2.5% more.

End of Christmas/January sales, too.

The price before the VAT increase was 5% lower than the new price with the new VAT. So removing the 2.5% they were 'giving back to you' still had the product priced at 2.5% more (which you're right, has a price increase as well as the VAT increase on) than it was before.



Prices were from November. Mind you, it's common knowledge that computer part prices are very volatile. Ram cost what it does now in Jan 08 and by March 08 tripled in price until about two months ago when it came back down again.

If you would like real answers to these types of retail questions please ask me.

There is a world of difference between a shop selling at an incorrect price and the fact that when price changes are applied to a whole store the staff might miss price labels that need changing.

You cannot advertise for a lower price than what is then charged at the till point.

You cannot simply display no price label (although think of your local corner shop and how rigorously this gets enforced).

You may display a higher price and then charge less at the till point with no repercussions.

Shops are allowed 4 weeks from 4th Jan to get price labels changed to account for the VAT increase. After this it will be illegal to show no price or an incorrect lower price again.

You can sell a price marked pack for whatever you want regardless of the RRP.

A customer cannot force a shop to sell them a product at a price displayed on a shelf. Indeed, the shop can refuse to serve any customer as long as it isn't on the grounds of race, sex, religion etc.

Sorry, Mr Russ. I thought someone worked in this area but couldn't think who it might be. OK, a few questions for you.



Those two things seem to work against each other, though.

Isn't the price on the marked pack advertisement of its price? It has a label with a price on. It doesn't say RRP, it's just a price. Being a giant price splashed on the pack, I can't see how this isn't advertising the price?

Also, does the four week period given to re-price everything account only for the discrepancy in price found with the VAT rise, or can they just charge prices willy nilly (because 68p isn't accountable by the VAT rise alone.)

So, in the case which I started the thread for.

There are two prices on display for the item.

£1.85, printed on the bottle.

£1.99, a shelf label, beneath the bottle.

Is it OK to then ask for £2.53 at the till?


As someone says, it is a self-fixing problem in a way, because people are less inclined to buy. But, I think, many will. I actually couldn't, as I only had £2.40 on me, but a) the woman is rude so it felt confrontational and b) it feels a little embarrassing. It would have been more so if there were people behind me waiting to be served as it makes you feel as if you are being petty and causing a fuss. Even though I was there alone I felt a bit flustered.

Are you sure the 1.85 didn't have RRP anywhere in really tiny letters:)

They are ok to charge 1.99 for it because they have advertised it using the price label. It is the label that forms the advertising, not the packaging.

They were wrong to try and charge you 2.53 at the till, but right to give you the option of not buying it. You can't force them to sell it to you at 1.99 but you can report them for incorrect price labelling.
(of course it may have been an innocent error on the part of their pricing department-mistakes happen).

The 4 weeks is only to account for VAT changes, yes. If they tried that with a VAT exempt product you can report them regardless of the 4 week period. And evidently a jump of 54p is far more than the 2.1% rise anyway.

If you had anyone apart from the old crones you can suggest that they override the till price out of good customer service.

Yes, I am 100% sure. It is the same as the all-but-empty bottle that was still in the fridge. I came hom and checkd it, it doesn't mention RRP or anything else. The only writing on the yellow label, the only characters are £ 1 . 8 and 5



Well, obviously they cannot force me to buy it, just because I have carried it to the till.



OK, that's what I was after. I doubt I shall bother reporting them, but what I really wanted to know if it was OK to willingly and knowing do his - price items more at the till than they are on the shelves (whilst making allowances for the VAT increase).

So just to be 100% clear, I was right, right?

Russ, your lot are really pushing to unify the brand aren't they?

It is not OK. This is the part that is specifically legislated against. As if you had a banner up going "everything is a pound!" and then when you got to the till going haha not really.

As I say, I would make certain allowances anyway to allow for mistakes, or centrally changed prices when the store's price label printer is knackered, or a till database being out of date compared to the rest of the network.

If it is across a lot of products, or multiple occasions, or lots of products simply not priced then inform the manager you are reporting them.