GHL On Sale - BRS

[Kershaw]

If anyone that bought the dosers for 29$ Actually gets them. I’ll gladly pay 100 plus shipping for one. I could use one and they are way out of the wifes approved budget lol.

 

[JNalley]

@Dolphins18 @FishyFishFish don't get personal guys, this thread was going great with people getting along pretty well and without being twisted with each other. I know plenty of people I disagree with on a subject, who might even be spoiled entitled brats in my eyes who know how to party, and people I genuinely like who are sticks in the mud at a party. One stance on one argument does not make a person a villain.

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

If it is a mistake they certainly do not need to honor the incorrect price..... They can decide to do so, but are under no obligation to sell at a loss.

That would be one thought, but it's not one based on legal reasoning or contract law; sellers sell at loses all the time for lots of reasons and that is not a legal reason or defense to avoid a contract.

 

[Not an IT guy]

That's all based on your cookies and auto population of those ads.

Go search mattresses for a few minutes and then login to Facebook. That's a fun one

You are all being tracked.

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

You are all being tracked.

Duck Duck Go instead of Chrome helps.

 

[JNalley]

Duck Duck Go instead of Chrome helps.

Brave browser or TOR browser... even DDG for Chrome is meh...

 

[42ELITASREV]

My goodness, this has been one of the most entertaining forum threads I've read in a long time. Some people on this board sure take themselves and the chance someone else may or may not get a good deal on the internet awfully seriously.

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

That would be one thought, but it's not one based on legal reasoning or contract law; sellers sell at loses all the time for lots of reasons and that is not a legal reason or defense to avoid a contract.

Here is a contrary thought...show me the law that says a company must sell at a mistaken price. There are plenty of laws that say they cannot willfully misconstrue or use deceptive practices...but I would bet willing to be that there is not a law that REQUIRES a completion of a sale that is of a clear mistake. The immediate changes of pricing as soon as they were aware demonstrates it was most likely an error.

 

[biecacka]

Who is excited to see their shipping status updated tomorrow???? Haha

honestly, I have really enjoyed this thread and I have been here since the beginning. I didn’t order anything and have no skin in the game to speak of. However, it has been informative in some sense seeing the different positions taken by individuals. I am proud that it has stayed friendly overall.
i look forward to seeing what comes in the following days….

corey

 

[Brian_68]

That would be one thought, but it's not one based on legal reasoning or contract law; sellers sell at loses all the time for lots of reasons and that is not a legal reason or defense to avoid a contract.

Legally they do not have to sell at a mistakenly marked price, it is is not a contract if an honest mistake, and there is no legal recourse if they do not honor.

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

Legally they do not have to sell at a mistakenly marked price, it is is not a contract if an honest mistake, and there is no legal recourse if they do not honor.

I used the same 'unilateral mistake' doctrine point...jeez..how many pages back?!?

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

Here is a contrary thought...show me the law that says a company must sell at a mistaken price. There are plenty of laws that say they cannot willfully misconstrue or use deceptive practices...but I would be willing to be that there is not a law that REQUIRES a completion of a sale that is of a clear mistake.

Your cart is in front of the horse. Once you have offer, acceptance, and consideration you have an enforceable contract. No one denies this occurred here. BRS advertised a price of a commodity. People purchased and tendered consideration. BRS ran payment of the credit card.

It is BRS's burden to raise a defense that lets them get out the already formed and enforceable contract.

Mistake of fact is a difficult defense to prove. OUt of all the contract cases i have handled, this is vague outlier defense that rarely comes up. The standard of proof that BRS must prove is clear, cogent, and convincing evidence as to EACH element of the defense--which are numerous--not just a preponderance.

Last, there are evidentiary issues for BRS to overcome, to effectively even raise the defense, because the contract is not ambiguous.

 

[biecacka]

Here is a contrary thought...show me the law that says a company must sell at a mistaken price. There are plenty of laws that say they cannot willfully misconstrue or use deceptive practices...but I would bet willing to be that there is not a law that REQUIRES a completion of a sale that is of a clear mistake.

I don’t think such a law exists. Even if so, I bet most companies would rather just sell the few items at the wrong sale price and be done with the conflict. It’s good PR. However, the same company doesn’t want to get into the habit of doing that (making the price error or selling to it). I think it was you that said it in the first few pages, it’s almost a lose lose situation for them.
Sell at the discounted rate and upset those that didn’t get that deal, others that recently ordered said items at full price, and upset potential future customers if something like this happens again and they don’t honor the sale price. Then if they just refund everyone their money then people are upset calling it bad business etc.
So what will BRS do???…….

corey

 

[Brian_68]

On the BRS site, this should clear any questions up if they can correct even after you placed the order:

Inaccuracy Disclaimer​

From time to time there may be information on our web site that contains typographical errors, inaccuracies, or omissions that may relate to product descriptions, pricing, and availability. Bulkreefsupply.com reserves the right to correct any errors, inaccuracies or omissions and to change or update information at any time without prior notice (including after you have submitted your order).


Any action relating to the use of the website or any transaction with Bulkreefsupply.com must be brought in the state or federal courts located in the County of Golden Valley, Minnesota. Last Updated: March 2020

 

[JNalley]

On the BRS site:

Inaccuracy Disclaimer​

From time to time there may be information on our web site that contains typographical errors, inaccuracies, or omissions that may relate to product descriptions, pricing, and availability. Bulkreefsupply.com reserves the right to correct any errors, inaccuracies or omissions and to change or update information at any time without prior notice (including after you have submitted your order).


Any action relating to the use of the website or any transaction with Bulkreefsupply.com must be brought in the state or federal courts located in the County of Golden Valley, Minnesota. Last Updated: March 2020

It has already been determined that a buried page on a website is not enforceable. If they had had this disclaimer at any time during the signup or checkout process it would have been enforceable, but simply having a page with legal mumbo-jumbo cannot save them in this instance.

 

[i_am_mclovin]

It has already been determined that a buried page on a website is not enforceable. If they had had this disclaimer at any time during the signup or checkout process it would have been enforceable, but simply having a page with legal mumbo-jumbo cannot save them in this instance.

So they just have that on their page for practice? After all of its not enforceable, why even have it.

 

[Brian_68]

It has already been determined that a buried page on a website is not enforceable. If they had had this disclaimer at any time during the signup or checkout process it would have been enforceable, but simply having a page with legal mumbo-jumbo cannot save them in this instance.

That is not correct, you need to have it available on the website and it is actually easy to find. It is not needed every time you check out, legally.

 

[JNalley]

That is not correct, you need to have it available on the website and it is actually easy to find. It is not needed every time you check out, legally.

see here:

@JosephRyan take notice: @Mywifeisgunnakillme made me agree. Why? (Specht v. Netscape Communications. Corp. (2002): Placing an innocuous link at the bottom of your home page where the visitor has to scroll down to find it (and may not notice the link) won’t provide proper notice. (Specht v. Netscape Communications. Corp. (2002). Notice needs to be prominent and stand out so the average website user can’t miss it. Your visitors shouldn’t have to “stumble upon” a link to any of your website agreements.

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

So they just have that on their page for practice? After all of its not enforceable, why even have it.

It could have been enforceable if it was incorporated by reference during check out and the buyer agreed to those terms. It just so happens that the disclaimer was not a term or even referenced during checkout. I do not believe a disclaimer on a retail website is automatically incorporated into a purchase agreement that makes no mention of it.

 

[fishface NJ]

prices where corrected on the website.