Shopping Discussion

Brick wants customers to refund it for website discount error

  • Last Updated:
  • Jan 9th, 2014 4:55 pm
Member
User avatar
Nov 7, 2005
422 posts
41 upvotes
Edmonton
I don't think the Brick would be seen in court anyway. The minute they were served they'd give it to their legal department and tell them to make it go away. I understand that companies that are in the public eye in a huge way don't want to be see on court dockets, ever. They'd probably give in to the few that filed a suit and that would be it.
_______________________________________________________
Can I has deal?
Banned
Dec 30, 2013
284 posts
40 upvotes
Toronto
LostInTruth wrote:
Jan 1st, 2014 11:51 pm
To be honest, I don't think the deal should be honored. Have no opinion on the Brick either.

If someone made the purchase, it's because the 50% originally offered was better or as good as a competitor. I do think they should do 10% off the original purchase.
Bingo! Someone who actually has some common sense and isn't a spoiled entitled halfwit.

Point is basically, they never saw the final price until they checked out, so up until that point, they were ready to buy it anyways, meaning the price advertised was good enough.

GJ for simplifying it for the rest of the people.
Deal Expert
Jun 14, 2001
15556 posts
1010 upvotes
cHiNgChInG99 wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2014 8:45 am
GJ for simplifying it for the rest of the people.
Lets simplify it even more:

None of customers The Brick/Leons would have had to deal with this issue if they bought it from Costco or WalMart to begin with.
Banned
User avatar
May 12, 2004
9759 posts
4097 upvotes
Ottawa
cHiNgChInG99 wrote:
Jan 1st, 2014 1:50 pm
Now, does this level of education sound like some minimum wage paid PR rep on the Brick Floor?
I have been out of our schooling system for quite a few years now, but I would hope to God that any Canadian with a grade 11 education would have a clear understanding of equalization payments in Canada. Otherwise our public education system is a complete failure.

So no I don't consider your 'level of education' to be very impressive, unless of course you're 12 years old, in which case kudos and they need to bump you up a few grades.
Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it.
- Mark Twain
Banned
Dec 30, 2013
284 posts
40 upvotes
Toronto
Cas77 wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2014 11:21 am
I have been out of our schooling system for quite a few years now, but I would hope to God that any Canadian with a grade 11 education would have a clear understanding of equalization payments in Canada. Otherwise our public education system is a complete failure.

So no I don't consider your 'level of education' to be very impressive, unless of course you're 12 years old, in which case kudos and they need to bump you up a few grades.
Have you read the thread?
Do you see how some people think this is some Quebec perk without acknowledging its cost to the rest of the taxpayer base?
Do you realize how many people don't realize that the existence of these little entitled laws the OPC gives Quebec is actually costing them cash in frivolous claims?

If Equalization payments are indeed taught in grade 11, then it would seem that the vast majority of the people talking about The Brick in this thread don't have that, based on their posts.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 9, 2005
3360 posts
1368 upvotes
Ontario
The Brick is asking for refunds from customers?

That's an interesting spin.

I hate the Brick with as much as a consumer can hate retailer, but I'm not convinced they're looking for "refunds".

So a buyer clicks on "Buy" and it comes up a price they weren't expecting "What? OH hey. That's not the price we agreed upon, I'll take it!", becomes "What? OH hey, that's the price we agreed upon, I demand more"
Kaboom! Kaboom! KABOOM!
Banned
Dec 30, 2013
284 posts
40 upvotes
Toronto
TCWeasel wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2014 3:29 pm
The Brick is asking for refunds from customers?

That's an interesting spin.

I hate the Brick with as much as a consumer can hate retailer, but I'm not convinced they're looking for "refunds".

So a buyer clicks on "Buy" and it comes up a price they weren't expecting "What? OH hey. That's not the price we agreed upon, I'll take it!", becomes "What? OH hey, that's the price we agreed upon, I demand more"
*facepalm* Fail all around bro.

People really need to educate themselves on the basis of contract law, when you are submitting an online order, the confirmation you receive is the confirmation that your order has been received, not that it has been accepted. BY submitting the order, the client is making an offer to buy the item at the price listed on the order. So if a $1000TV was advertised for $500, and checked out for $250... the client is "offering" Brick $250 for the TV.

The brick is full well within its legal rights to cancel the order as they are not "accepting" the offer.

Seriously, everyone in this thread seems like this is the first time they've seen a glitch on a website that won't be honored.
Deal Addict
Jul 13, 2012
4485 posts
561 upvotes
Ottawa
cHiNgChInG99 wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2014 3:43 pm
*facepalm* Fail all around bro.

People really need to educate themselves on the basis of contract law, when you are submitting an online order, the confirmation you receive is the confirmation that your order has been received, not that it has been accepted. BY submitting the order, the client is making an offer to buy the item at the price listed on the order. So if a $1000TV was advertised for $500, and checked out for $250... the client is "offering" Brick $250 for the TV.

The brick is full well within its legal rights to cancel the order as they are not "accepting" the offer.

Seriously, everyone in this thread seems like this is the first time they've seen a glitch on a website that won't be honored.
The problem is, though, that contract law (and indeed, most law) was developed before computers and automation. Since a sale involves and offer and acceptance of the offer, at what point is the offer actually accepted? When the order is taken? When payment is received? When the item is shipped? Or, assuming no human working for the seller manually approves the order, is the offer actually ever accepted?
Deal Addict
User avatar
Dec 9, 2005
3360 posts
1368 upvotes
Ontario
cHiNgChInG99 wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2014 3:43 pm
*facepalm* Fail all around bro.

People really need to educate themselves on the basis of contract law, when you are submitting an online order, the confirmation you receive is the confirmation that your order has been received, not that it has been accepted. BY submitting the order, the client is making an offer to buy the item at the price listed on the order. So if a $1000TV was advertised for $500, and checked out for $250... the client is "offering" Brick $250 for the TV.

The brick is full well within its legal rights to cancel the order as they are not "accepting" the offer.

Seriously, everyone in this thread seems like this is the first time they've seen a glitch on a website that won't be honored.
You may wish to re-read my post. If that still doesn't help, re-read it with your sarcasm detector on. If that doesn't help, to hell with it.
Kaboom! Kaboom! KABOOM!
Deal Guru
User avatar
Nov 30, 2009
12178 posts
579 upvotes
Toronto
Cas77 wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2014 11:21 am
I have been out of our schooling system for quite a few years now, but I would hope to God that any Canadian with a grade 11 education would have a clear understanding of equalization payments in Canada. Otherwise our public education system is a complete failure.

So no I don't consider your 'level of education' to be very impressive, unless of course you're 12 years old, in which case kudos and they need to bump you up a few grades.
To be honest, equalization payment and Quebec itself is a whole other topic, and I'm sure many see it the way cHing does, but would rather not admit it.
[QUOTE]I wish there was a way to know you're in the good old days before you've actually left them.[/QUOTE] ~Andy Bernard, The Office (U.S.)
Member
Nov 16, 2013
447 posts
72 upvotes
Mississauga
I have read all the comments here. I think the key point is how Brick has handled it all along.

The same day, Delta had errors and we all know what they did.......

Think about this event from branding of Brick and Delta.

One company admitted the error and still honoured it and other company (Brick) is admitting the error and refusing to honour it.

It is not a question of technicality and legality of the issue here. This is called cost benefit analysis where the amount of money spent vis a vis negative publicity should have been considered by Brick and I am sure they would have made the right decision. Sadly advisors to Brick did not consider the long term impact.


Trust is the most important factor and with this, I am not sure how many will trust Brick ever.........

This was a golden opportunity for Brick to create goodwill amongst customers which would have lasted for very long time but alas they never thought thru it deeply.

I read one of the article from one university professor that it was a great opportunity for Brick to get positive PR and take this as advertising cost as this would have remained in people's mind for ever. But it seems Brick never got the sound advice and choose to act in a self destructive mode.

Now it would cost them millions to create any kind of positive vibe about them. Already the term "BRICKED" is in use.

Now no matter which way it goes, Brick has lost it already and I am sure this would reflect in balance sheet.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 11, 2005
19020 posts
1476 upvotes
cHiNgChInG99 wrote:
Jan 2nd, 2014 2:30 pm
Do you see how some people think this is some Quebec perk without acknowledging its cost to the rest of the taxpayer base?
Do you realize how many people don't realize that the existence of these little entitled laws the OPC gives Quebec is actually costing them cash in frivolous claims?
Consumer protection laws are not a "Quebec perk" and you don't "file a claim".... all provinces have consumer protection laws. The ability to not be charged further for an agreed upon price after the fact is enshrined into consumer protection laws in many provinces, and US states, and European countries. If these laws did not exist then any company could, at any time, demand further payment for an item purchased. Image you pay $500 for a company to bring you a truck of gravel, and when they get there with the load they demand another $250 for delivery.

In fact, I just checked New Brunswick consumer protection law and yes, you would win in a lawsuit over this here as well.
8(1)In every contract for the sale or supply of a consumer product, other than one to which subsection (2) applies, there is an implied warranty given by the seller to the buyer
(a)that the seller has a right to sell the product, or will have a right to sell the product at the time of its delivery to the buyer;
(b)that the product is free, or will be free at the time of its delivery to the buyer, and will remain free from any interest, lien, charge or encumbrance not actually known to the buyer before the contract is made; and
(c)that the buyer will enjoy quiet possession of the product except so far as it may be disturbed by any person entitled to any interest, lien, charge or encumbrance actually known to the buyer before the contract is made.
Also the idea that this law would cost Quebec any kind of money per year is just totall silliness. The only money Quebec would out on in this case is the PST on the purchase and the tiny amount of extra corporate income. But odds are high that money will just be spent elsewhere by the consumer and Quebec will make that tax anyway. So this argument is a moot point.
To be nobody but yourself - in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else - means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight; and never stop fighting. -- E. E. Cummings
Deal Guru
User avatar
Oct 24, 2012
11421 posts
2397 upvotes
Montreal
brunes wrote:
Jan 8th, 2014 7:12 am
Consumer protection laws are not a "Quebec perk" and you don't "file a claim".... all provinces have consumer protection laws. The ability to not be charged further for an agreed upon price after the fact is enshrined into consumer protection laws in many provinces, and US states, and European countries. If these laws did not exist then any company could, at any time, demand further payment for an item purchased. Image you pay $500 for a company to bring you a truck of gravel, and when they get there with the load they demand another $250 for delivery.
What you are talking about is that once a contract is made, it cannot be altered (price, product, etc).
Now, it is debatable on whether the order receipt confirmation is a contract, or if it's just a "yes I know you want to buy it".
However, in QC, the real perk is the law on advertised/displayed price accuracy. It isn't a voluntary thing like in Ontario, it is a legal obligation.
So even if The Brick manages to prove that the order receipt confirmation is not a contract, they cannot avoid the fact that they have to deliver the product at the price displayed in the order confirmation.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 11, 2005
19020 posts
1476 upvotes
alkizmo wrote:
Jan 8th, 2014 9:11 am
What you are talking about is that once a contract is made, it cannot be altered (price, product, etc).
Now, it is debatable on whether the order receipt confirmation is a contract, or if it's just a "yes I know you want to buy it".
There is no debate. The contract was done and the purchase completed. This is how transactions work. The instant you give a merchant money for a product, a contract has been made. If the merchant does not live up to the agreed upon transaction, then that is when consumer protection laws kick in, and you take their butt to court.
To be nobody but yourself - in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else - means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight; and never stop fighting. -- E. E. Cummings

Top