Sent from a friend (ex) who lives down under. Q. What do you get if you cross the English cricket team with an OXO cube? A. A laughing stock. Q What is the height of optimism? A: English batsman putting on sunscreen. Q. What is the difference between an English batsman and a Formula 1 car at high speed? A. Nothing! If you blink you will miss them both. Q. What do English batsmen and drug addicts have in common? A. Both spend most of their time wondering where their next score will come from. Q. What does an English batsman who is playing in The Ashes have in common with Michael Jackson? A.They both wore gloves for no apparent reason. Q. What is the difference between Cinderella and the Pommy cricket team? A. Cinderella knew when to leave the ball. Q. What's the difference between the Pommy cricket team and a funeral director? A. A funeral director isn't going to lose the ashes.
If it looks too good to be true - it probably isn't true and not a mention of Mr.Scally nor my neighbour !(honestly) (keeping up my New Year resolution of sincerity) Last week I went to my local Tesco to buy a new television. I had seen their ' Tesco Direct' website advertising 42" Panasonic, all singing & dancing sets at £ 100 ( normal price £ 449 ). I tried to place an order online - and actually was able to add to my basket - but the website kept crashing at the point where I was to proceed to checkout. So I decided to make a 'special journey' so as not to miss out on a bargain. I tried to use the computor terminal next to the desk in the Technical Department of Tesco. I checked the details ( including price and availability of the television - all was good ! ) - but THAT terminal crashed at the same point as mine. So I was forced to seek the help of a 'customer advisor'. The young man used his laptop to bring up the item from the Tesco website. You should have seen his reaction when he saw the price. I swear he was trying to hold back tears. He told me that he had recently purchased the same television - but had paid a hell of a lot more. He was obviously so taken aback by the advertised price that he called to a colleague from a rear office to "Come & have a look at this." The female colleague arrived at the desk - and upon seeing the price her jaw immediately fell open in amazement. The assistant(s) then tried to process my purchase - but despite several attempts, the website would not allow any procession to checkout. A research by the assistant led to the announcement that the website had made an almighty faux pas with their prices. ( some other television sets were also being offered at considerable discount ). What 'should' have been advertised was £ 100 off the original price - thus making the correct 'sale' price £ 349. Tesco had discovered their mistake and was placing a stop on all attempted purchases of these sets. Naturally I was disappointed to learn the news of the 'real' price. I had made another wasted journey ( at least I hadn't got half way to Stevenage this time ). I was reasonably impressed with the 'correct' price of the television - but it didn't have quite the same appeal as the figure that was advertised. I enquired if there was anything that the staff could do to reduce my disappointment - hoping that they might offer a further discount to compensate me for my time & effort. NO. I also enquired if they would consider a gesture of goodwill to reflect my wasted time, effort and loyalty. NO. By now my euphoria at the prospect of grabbing a bargain was being overtaken by the despondency at knowing that I was going home empty handed, having wasted my time, effort and transport costs ( just like the Stevenage trip ) I then asked the assistant about the legality and responsibility of their website prices. I got a response that was more resolute than the defence of the Gills this season. I was quoted chapter & verse from Tesco's terms & conditions. ( No. 13.2 if anyone is interested ! ) I won't bore you with those details - suffice to say that they can do what they like - if a price is mis printed, the item can be withdrawn from offer of sale. I swear that the expression of utter amazement on the faces of the assistants in front of me had now been replaced by what looked like smugness ! I again 'tried it on' - asking if there was anything that they would consider to appease my extreme disappointment - after all I do still want to purchase a television - and theirs wasn't the only shop offering January sales ! NO. I then went into 'stupid' mode. I said that the Tesco motto of Every little helps doesn't clarify the intended beneficiary. I suggested that they should run an advert with petrol at 5 pence a litre - and when motorists arrive at their forecourts with 'empty' fuel tanks, they would be told that there was a price mis print - " It should have said 5p off a litre ." - Of course by now you'll have drivers with empty tanks and unable to avoid having to buy fuel just to be able to drive away. ( I know I didn't have to buy a television - but I am using a principle to its' extreme point.) So - why don't they just advertise EVERYTHING for free - and when the public turn up Tesco can decide what price to charge. ( It amounts to the same as my experience.) .... there we go - and with sincerity intact ( I never resolved humility )
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=44219570 (Contributed by mo786uk) Do shops have to sell goods at the advertised price? The simple answer is NO! - you cannot force a shop to sell you something - this applies to correctly and incorrectly priced items - this applies to ALL types of shops - whether they are online internet stores or offline physical stores - internet shops can to refuse to honour prices even after they have taken your money - if you think a retailer is intentionally trying to misleading with pricing then you should report this to your local Trading Standards, which can be done via Consumer Direct (08454 04 05 06) A more detailed explanation of the law can be found below. A shop has advertised a product at £10. I have tried to buy it but they have said the product is actually £20 and they made a mistake. Do they have to sell me the product at the advertised price of £10? This is a question best answered from both a civil and criminal point of view. Civil law = your rights as a consumer against a business. If your civil rights have been breached you can take a business to civil court and one remedy is monetary damages. Criminal law = action that can be taken by a public body to prosecute a business for breaking the law. This usually ends in a fine or prison. Civil When you buy an item from a shop you and the shop are entering into a contract. Let take an example of buying a product from a supermarket. You go into the shop and see a price label for £10. This is an invitation to treat. This is basically the shop saying we will take £10 for the item if you are willing to offer it. When you take the item to the till you are making an offer. Which is basically saying 'I am willing to offer you £10 for this item'. The £10 you are offering is consideration. This is you promising to pay them £10. The shops promise or consideration is the item they are going to give you for the £10. Most contracts have to have some form of consideration (although not all). Finally, the shop can decide whether to accept or not. At this stage they can still refuse to sell you the product and they are under no obligation to. Only when they have accepted your offer is the contract complete and they are bound to sell you the product for £10. Both parties must be willing to enter in a contract and there must be a meeting of the minds. This is where both sides are totally clear what the terms of the contract are. Clearly if the shop and customer disagree on the price there cannot be a meeting of the minds. Some shops will sell you an item for the price they have marked it just for the sake of good customer service but they are not under a legal obligation to do so. So, effectively there can be no contract until the shop accepts. From a practical point of view it is pretty easy to see this in practice in a real life shop as the contract usually complete when they take your money and give you the item. Its a bit more difficult with online transactions because it is not always clear when a contract has been formed. In the past online retailers would accept as soon as you made a payment. However due to a few cases where shops lost money through pricing mistakes most shops now only accept your offer when they send the item out. This means even if you pay for an item, the shop has not actually accepted your offer even though they have taken your money - this means they can cancel the order. You should read the terms and conditions of the retailer to see what their stance is on pricing errors and when the contract is formed. Finally, there may arise a situation where you have managed to pay for an item at a lower price and the shop has only realised after you have paid for the goods and taken the item (where the contract is complete for all intents and purposes). In this scenario the shop has sold you the item and you are not under an obligation to pay the difference, although you can do if you want to. Criminal Does a shop have to display prices? The Price Marking Order 2004 is the legislation that makes shops have to display prices for goods. Prices must include VAT and be clearly legible. Items do not have to be individually price (i.e they can use a price list) but the prices should be available so that the customer does not have to ask for them. There is currently no law that specifies that prices must be displayed for services. This is currently controlled by the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 under misleading omissions. What this means is that there is no blanket answer for every situation, instead it depends on whether the lack of price can influence customers decision to buy. Lets say you go to a bar and order a lemonade. There are no prices listed. Chances are you expect the drink to cost around £1. If it does in fact cost £1 you are probably happy with that and the lack of a price list hasn't influenced your decision to buy. Now lets say the lemonade costs £5. Clearly this could now mean you would not have ordered the drink had you know this. This sort of scenario is where the lack of pricing could be a misleading omission. In my opinion its a bit of a flaw in the law(!). Was it a simple mistake or are the shop purposely misleading customers with incorrect pricing? This is all covered by the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. Without going into too much depth it can be a criminal offence for a shop to mislead consumers about the price of a product and the way in which it was calculated. This legislation also prevents businesses from purposefully taking orders for a product they know they cannot supply so that they can get you into their shop (bait advertising) or from taking orders for a product but then trying to get the customer to buy another product (bait and switch). Mind you there is criteria for deciding what these are, but I have simplified it here for you. So finally, the question is was it just a mistake? This really depends on whether the shop changes the mistake ASAP and whether they do it often. In the grand scheme of things a pricing error is no big deal for the authorities to bother taking action on. I would however suggest that you report all incidents where you believe the shop has tried to deceive you. The more information the authorities have the easier it is for them to see which companies are clearly breaking the law.
brb Thanks for all of that ^^^^^ As you know I have studied civil law as it relates to 'treat, offer & consideration.' - although the information you have provided might be useful for others not so well informed. I knew that Tesco was not in any breach of legislation - nor obliged to sell me anything for any price. However you do make an interesting point about when a contract is formed with online sales. One of my sons also tried to make a purchase of a television. His credit card was debited. A confirmation e mail was received with an order number. This transaction was then aborted two days after I had tried to make my purchase - I would have thought that Tesco could have informed him of the situation a lot sooner - especially as he was due to pick up the television the day after he placed his (accepted) order. He was told that the television was only available from a Tesco store 24 miles from his home. ( my local Tesco ). I 'stopped' him from making what would have been a wasted journey - to wait a day to await the 'expected' notification of cancellation. As you know, I always consider the morals of a situation - that is why I explored the possibility that Tesco might like to soften my disappointment with some gesture to entice me not to take my custom elsewhere - but it fell on deaf ears. Oh well, if you don't ask you can't expect to get !
Despite the law, I still believe if a transaction has taken time or cost money, then Tesco's should feel obliged to make a gesture of goodwill. ie someone travels to a location to make a specific purchase...that purchase is placed but then rejected...it may have cost you petrol money to go to that store in the same way as returning faulty goods. Like you say if you don't try, you don't know. I have before and once face to face with the manager, they tend to see your way of thinking, even if it is a discount on an alternative purchase...lol
Could this idea be tweaked to incorporate football matches If you don't like what you see, you can leave when you like - and process your matchday (season) ticket, through a turnstile, - to get a refund on a fully paid up ticket- dependent on how long you stayed ..... if you stay to the end the gates can be open to allow a quick clearance of the ground (although you would probably have been killed in the crush to get out at Colchester ) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25733143
£ 16.8b (billion) & still not satisfied - well they do say that money can't buy you happiness - so you must be really miserable http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25773409
Apparently the answer is 49 pence - Looks like I would have been justified with murder with the potential savings I would have made on the televisions I mentioned last week. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-east-wales-25823177
Let's face it - I have seen many 'crimes' at Priestfields http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/listen-drunken-man-united-fan-3053682
In the days when I had my own business which traded online I was very careful to include among the T&C's words to the effect that the confirmation of the placing of an order was not the contract and that the contract was only formed when we debited the payment card - I worked on a pre-authorisation basis which meant that no payment was actually taken at the time the order was placed, but collected when the order was dispatched which enabled me do do that. I guess that an online supplier could in fact only consider that the contract was formed when they dispatched the goods (that would probably be the most sensible thing, in fact, to protect their interests) even if they did actually collect payment at the time of order, providing of course they refunded any money they had taken if an order was not dispatched. This is of course assuming that there is no intention to mislead in any particular offer or transaction.
Just been watching the debate on TV: Scottish Parliament Welsh Assembly Irish Assembly So when can we have an English Parliament? Let them all have their independence, 32 million people identify themselves as English only anyway. Vote yes for independence.
Well what would you have done ? I'm driving behind a bus. It signals 'left' (on the approach to a bus stop ). It begins to slow down and starts to 'pull in' towards the nearside kerb. To add to the picture of the scene, there is a small traffic island in the middle of the road a few yards further ahead of the bus stop. Given the manoeuvre of the bus I assumed it was going to stop at the bus stop to either pick up or drop off a passenger. I signal then moved out to begin to overtake the bus at the point where it had reached the bus stop, and very soon I am alongside the middle of the bus. Now the bus driver abandons his obvious manoeuvre and doesn't stop at the bus stop - instead the bus pulls out a little, away from the nearside kerb and begins to pick up speed - forcing me to have to venture further into the opposing lane than was comfortable --all at a point where I am now 'being fed' into the traffic island in the middle of the road - which, despite my comparative low speed, I would have struggled to avoid. I was literally forced to accelerate hard and cut in front of the bus as it continued to reduce the gap between me and the traffic island. Then the stupid bus driver decided to use his horn - presumably as an instrument of rebuke rather than to 'alert' me of his presence. I'm not sure who was more stupid - the bus driver or the Clerk of the Council to approve traffic islands in such close proximity to bus stops.
I've got a stinking cold (manflu), can't sleep - wife says it's too early for her - so hence the time of this post. I'm in the wrong business --- Tricology! ---- and I never resolved to give up swearing in 2014 ( just as well after this little story ) Our older son and girlfriend have announced their separation after 5 years together.( thankfully no children involved). All rather sad, but a fact of life. I decided to try to remain detatched - they're old enough to resolve their own affairs - although I have advised that they try to avoid the dreaded solicitors, otherwise there'll be no money left. My son & girlfriend decided that, as she earns more than him, she is in a more realistic position to take on the mortgage on their house and increase it so as to 'buy out' my son. My son has put up £31,000 of his own(my) money for the deposit & expenses (nothing from her) - plus paying a fair amount of their monthly budget - but still has the interests of the girl at heart. He wanted to ensure himself of her financial stability in the future. He sat down with her and worked out the figures. ( after she had been given an offer of an increased mortgage by their bank. ) My son grossly overestimated what the girl's monthly expenses would total ( by at least £200 by my reckoning). Despite my son's cautionary figures, it left his girlfriend with a minimum of £300 per month after ALL bills were paid. I still reckon it would be easily £ 500............. this would be her social fund ! So how did she greet these figures ? " That's not enough - my hair costs £ 100 each week.............................and then there's my nails" I did have one of those " Oh ffs " moments I know that Simply Posh will accuse me of trying to understand the logic of a woman - but I think it would be more productive of me to try to find a brick wall resilient enough to withstand male headbanging.
Firstly sorry to hear about your son's situation. Erm...I'm probably not the best person in the world for this sort of advice but I suppose your son could try it from the angle of capital within the property...what's 50% of nothing? Now i know reverse psychology could be played by his ex partner, but depends how much she wants that roof over her head. Although the downside is if she call's his bluff, the house goes up for sale and they (he) lose the £31k already invested in devaluation, which is probably just the interest up until now anyway, then they both still end up with 50% of nothing. Now you can see why people never come to me for legal or marital advice...
brb thanks for your sympathy - we thought we'd got rid of our sons when we gave them the money for their house deposits. As you have already suggested - if they sell the house, BOTH will lose huge amounts. As it is my son is looking to be bought out for considerably less than his(my) investment. His girlfriend will end up with a rather nice house ( for which she did not pay anything towards the deposit - even though she stated that she could have asked for financial help from her mum who has a VERY large sum at her disposal.) I really didn't want to get involved - nor even form any opinion in the unfortunate event - but - it seems that my son's (ex)girlfriend wants the house, ALL the furniture etc - and is not satisfied with an absolute minimum of £300 per month for a social fund ( although I must stress that this figure is definitely nearer to £500. It beggars belief that she can't realise the sacrifice / loss my son is prepared to suffer to ensure that she comes out quids in. Given the fairly extensive information I have provided, I would be genuinely interested with the thoughts of our female members, especially the likes of Simply Posh. You realise that, try as I might, I really cannot be impartial.
alwaysright...when we go to the next away game...remind me to tell you a story...it might not fit this situation but it might help in a small way. I might have already told you it privately not sure. Personally I would play hard ball. You said it all here for me... 'His girlfriend will end up with a rather nice house' - its only a nice house for her, if your son allows that to happen...and it can happen if she agrees to the basis of reasonable terms. Like i say otherwise its 50% of nothing. Your son has already lost his money and it will be difficult to recuperate that...so he has nothing to lose...but his ex partner has everything to lose 'nice house'. I'm certainly not suggesting my advice is right, but i do tend to take a more colder approach if people become unreasonable.
brb WE are applying logic ( not necessarily male ) - 'she' cannot see that my son is making ALL the sacrifices - whilst she ends up smelling of roses in terms of the house - which she would NOT have any chance of acquisition if it wasn't for the money we gave my son ( for them both at the time ). Am I unreasonable in thinking that there are cheaper hairdressers around - perhaps my neighbour could give me a telephone number - I could do with some more sex seeing that my wife wasn't forth coming ( post 673 ). - joking apart - you'll understand that in the changing circumstances of them both - both have to understand that they need to adapt to those circumstances. Well ladies - what do you think ?
always .... I can only answer for myself .... no idea whether it is the female perspective you are looking for I think your son is being taken for a ride My view is that he should get, at the very least, his money back .... she can either get it from the bank or from her mum Once they are apart whether she can afford to live is her problem, not his. She needs to learn to wash her own hair & paint her own nails ... a bottle of shampoo is relatively cheap & so is nail varnish
Simply Posh Thank you for your thoughts - and I'm not surprised that you have come to the same conclusion as myself. My son is realistic enough to know that he will not get any where near the investment he placed. (initially £31,000) AND over the 5 years he has contributed 40% of the bills. He is seeking £20K to use as part deposit on a (much more modest) place of his own. In theory 'she' will end up with the remaining £11,000 as a 'gift' - not including the fact that part of the redemption of what will be her mortgage has been paid for by my son for the last 5 years. The 20K will cost the girl a little extra per month - but I have calculated that she'll have a social fund close on £ 500. She is being ridiculous with regards to the cost of hair & nails and cannot see that if my son was to play hardball ( as recommended by brb ) she'll have nothing - certainly not enough money for a short back & sides.
