Reatailer claims products on the shelf are not actually for sale. Need advice Please.

[JOCKEY31]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

I was in a large chain retailer and picked up a bunch of stuff that scanned at low sales prices. When I went to check out I was told that the items were going to be part of a promotion in a few days and that they would not/could not sell them to me.

When I asked why then were they on the stores shelves (various items from various departments) I was told that the store had an ongoing sale that had ended yesterday and that they hadn't had time to reorganize the store and remove those products from the shelf. I argued that the excuse had no bearing on the situation, because the store had been open all day (it was around 5pm when I was there) and the store by being open to the public was responsible for what was on the shelves for sale.

Have they broken the law by not selling me? Should I press them for restitution?

Thank you.

 

[Mnemosyne]

Should I press them for restitution?

Restitution?

You mean you want a refund of the money that you didn't spend on the items that they wouldn't sell to you?

 

[JOCKEY31]

Possibly wrong term on my end, sorry.

I am looking for some compensation for being screwed out of not being allowed to buy some products at great prices.

I was asking if what they did was legal and if I should press them to make up for it.

If you walked into, let's say a Target store and filled up half a cart with items at clearance prices and then were told you couldn't buy them, what would you do and or want?

 

[TheGeekess]

Possibly wrong term on my end, sorry.

I am looking for some compensation for being screwed out of not being allowed to buy some products at great prices.

I was asking if what they did was legal and if I should press them to make up for it.

If you walked into, let's say a Target store and filled up half a cart with items at clearance prices and then were told you couldn't buy them, what would you do and or want?

I've gone into Target stores, picked up something marked down and paid full price (didn't notice until I got home, 40 minutes away from that store).

But otherwise? I'd leave the cart there and walk out.

 

[quincy]

Possibly wrong term on my end, sorry.

I am looking for some compensation for being screwed out of not being allowed to buy some products at great prices.

I was asking if what they did was legal and if I should press them to make up for it. ...

Mnemosyne hit on the major problem. You did not purchase any goods (at their regular price or at their sale price) so you suffered no economic harm.

Although it is a popular belief that retailers must always honor the marked or scanned prices on items, this is not true. If there are legitimate reasons for prices being different than what is scanned, or if there are mismarked products due to simple mistakes ($2.94 instead of $294), if the errors are caught before purchase these prices do not need to be honored by the retailer (although, depending on the size of the error, many retailers will give the consumer the lower price anyway, in a gesture of good will).

Consumer laws that focus on the pricing of goods tend to focus more on the way the goods are advertised. Advertisements intentionally misrepresenting the goods or the quantity of goods being sold, and advertisements offering goods at false or deceptive sales prices - designed to lure consumers into the store with the promise of bargains and low prices - have resulted in more than a few class action suits in recent years against some major retailers.

I would probably do what TheGeekess has said she would do - leave the filled cart at the register and walk out (in a huff, if it makes you feel better ).

 

[LdiJ]

Mnemosyne hit on the major problem. You did not purchase any goods (at their regular price or at their sale price) so you suffered no economic harm.

Although it is a popular belief that retailers must always honor the marked or scanned prices on items, this is not true. If there are legitimate reasons for prices being different than what is scanned, or if there are mismarked products due to simple mistakes ($2.94 instead of $294), if the errors are caught before purchase these prices do not need to be honored by the retailer (although, depending on the size of the error, many retailers will give the consumer the lower price anyway, in a gesture of good will).

Consumer laws that focus on the pricing of goods tend to focus more on the way the goods are advertised. Advertisements intentionally misrepresenting the goods or the quantity of goods being sold, and advertisements offering goods at false or deceptive sales prices - designed to lure consumers into the store with the promise of bargains and low prices - have resulted in more than a few class action suits in recent years against some major retailers.

I would probably do what TheGeekess has said she would do - leave the filled cart at the register and walk out (in a huff, if it makes you feel better ).

I would probably ask for the manager, and if that got me no where then I would walk out.

 

[JOCKEY31]

Mnemosyne hit on the major problem. You did not purchase any goods (at their regular price or at their sale price) so you suffered no economic harm.

The economic harm was in not being able to purchase the products. Something that, to me anyway, sounds wrong. I get what you and the others here are saying, I just don't understand how it can be alright or legal for a retail operation to allow a customer to come into the store, shop and then be told that 30-35 different items are not actually for sale.

My frustration with them is in the fact that they (the corporate office) ignored me for months until finally contacting me recently. I feel they owe me an apology for the incident and some kind of good faith gesture for the harm caused. In my book that would be the $250 of savings I was not allowed.

I do appreciate everybody's thoughts. At the least it tells me that I am fighting an uphill battle...

Thank you.

 

[Just Blue]

Mnemosyne hit on the major problem. You did not purchase any goods (at their regular price or at their sale price) so you suffered no economic harm.

The economic harm was in not being able to purchase the products. Something that, to me anyway, sounds wrong. I get what you and the others here are saying, I just don't understand how it can be alright or legal for a retail operation to allow a customer to come into the store, shop and then be told that 30-35 different items are not actually for sale.

My frustration with them is in the fact that they (the corporate office) ignored me for months until finally contacting me recently. I feel they owe me an apology for the incident and some kind of good faith gesture for the harm caused. In my book that would be the $250 of savings I was not allowed.

I do appreciate everybody's thoughts. At the least it tells me that I am fighting an uphill battle...

Thank you.

They DID NOT CAUSE YOU HARM.

Perhaps disappointment...but not "harm".

 

[quincy]

The economic harm was in not being able to purchase the products. ... I feel they owe me an apology for the incident and some kind of good faith gesture for the harm caused. In my book that would be the $250 of savings I was not allowed. ...

Looking at it in a different way, you actually SAVED a lot of money by not purchasing all the products, so you realized an economic benefit rather than suffering economic harm.

I think offering you an apology and perhaps a discount coupon for your trouble would be a smart move on the part of the retailer, though - even if there is no legal obligation for the retailer to do this (at least no legal obligation is apparent from what you have posted).