Online purchase = implied contract?
September 29, 2009 1:33 PM Subscribe
I buy an item from a major online deal-a-day site. They withdraw the funds from my account. Does this constitute a legally binding contract that they will provide me with the item, or are they able at their discretion to refund the purchase price and walk away?
It's not a terribly important problem, really, but I'd like to know where I stand legally and Googling has come up short.
I bought an item online and the site took my money and shipped the item, but it was damaged in transit and returned to them. Weeks went by with no word from them, so I contacted them and asked for an update--was a replacement en route? They said, oh, we're out of that item, we'll refund the purchase price in a few days.
Well... I'm a little miffed at this (the customer service was frustrating so I'm perhaps irrationally confrontational at this point). Do I have any legal ground to insist that they send me the item rather than simply refund my money? I guess I just don't like the idea that they can back out from the deal unilaterally after borrowing my money interest-free for a month.
The amount of money involved is not large, less than $100, but the item is about 60% more elsewhere so I would really like to have them send me one if it's within my rights to insist that happens.
It's not a terribly important problem, really, but I'd like to know where I stand legally and Googling has come up short.
I bought an item online and the site took my money and shipped the item, but it was damaged in transit and returned to them. Weeks went by with no word from them, so I contacted them and asked for an update--was a replacement en route? They said, oh, we're out of that item, we'll refund the purchase price in a few days.
Well... I'm a little miffed at this (the customer service was frustrating so I'm perhaps irrationally confrontational at this point). Do I have any legal ground to insist that they send me the item rather than simply refund my money? I guess I just don't like the idea that they can back out from the deal unilaterally after borrowing my money interest-free for a month.
The amount of money involved is not large, less than $100, but the item is about 60% more elsewhere so I would really like to have them send me one if it's within my rights to insist that happens.
How can they send an item they don't have? Did you want the damaged one?
I think you're being 'irrationally confrontational' to use your own words.
I realize that doesn't answer your question, but hopefully does provide some perspective.
posted by caveat at 1:47 PM on September 29, 2009
I think you're being 'irrationally confrontational' to use your own words.
I realize that doesn't answer your question, but hopefully does provide some perspective.
posted by caveat at 1:47 PM on September 29, 2009
Response by poster: Yeah, I fully expect that moving on with my life is the best way to proceed. However, for my personal edification I would like to know more about the legal issues involved. (Plus, if I learn this is a legal and acceptable practice, maybe I won't feel compelled to boycott them, which would be nice since I like that site...)
posted by kprincehouse at 1:52 PM on September 29, 2009
posted by kprincehouse at 1:52 PM on September 29, 2009
Insist, insist, insist, but at some point you're going to have to be able to walk away and ask for the full refund including shipping costs. I would go to the BBB (if applicable for you) and look up the company to see what their reputation is (if any) and partially base your dealings with them on what you see there.
I don't think it's possible to legally require a business to furnish an item that they have run out of (and presumably won't be getting more of in the foreseeable future). If they don't have an item, they can't ship you that item.That said, it sounds like you've run into a smaller operation without much customer service at all, and you may well have to fight to get your money back. If that happens, contact whatever agencies are available to you, such as the BBB, the local (to the business) Chamber of Commerce, your credit card company, etc. and make their lives hell until they refund.
posted by neewom at 1:53 PM on September 29, 2009
I don't think it's possible to legally require a business to furnish an item that they have run out of (and presumably won't be getting more of in the foreseeable future). If they don't have an item, they can't ship you that item.That said, it sounds like you've run into a smaller operation without much customer service at all, and you may well have to fight to get your money back. If that happens, contact whatever agencies are available to you, such as the BBB, the local (to the business) Chamber of Commerce, your credit card company, etc. and make their lives hell until they refund.
posted by neewom at 1:53 PM on September 29, 2009
the deal-a-day sites generally have less robust customer service because you're getting a piece of a bulk sale for 60% below retail. these sites have a limited number of whatever product they've put up that day (hence why it's deal-a-day instead of a 'pick what you want, whenever you want'). due to the nature of how they acquire their products, sometimes items are damaged. that's just part of the whole deal. if you want awesome customer service and products guaranteed in stock, then you should go to business that offer that, and a 60% markup.
if you're talking about hte site i think you are, they admit their customer service isn't the best and they say straight out that if they can't replace an item your money will be refunded. if you don't like the ToS, shop somewhere else.
posted by nadawi at 1:55 PM on September 29, 2009
if you're talking about hte site i think you are, they admit their customer service isn't the best and they say straight out that if they can't replace an item your money will be refunded. if you don't like the ToS, shop somewhere else.
posted by nadawi at 1:55 PM on September 29, 2009
I don't believe that they are legally obligated to give you the item, only to refund your money. If you were that miffed, you could try and take them to small claims court or something, and sue for a refund + damages. It would take you doing at least that to get anything out of the deal.
That said, while you have lost one month of interest on less than $100, the company has lost shipping charges, presumably both ways. They have a lot more skin in the game than you. Yes, they should have immediately refunded the money and they screwed up in that regard, but I would suggest that you just cut them a break on this one. It isn't like they are holding your money ransom or anything...
posted by suburbanrobot at 1:56 PM on September 29, 2009
That said, while you have lost one month of interest on less than $100, the company has lost shipping charges, presumably both ways. They have a lot more skin in the game than you. Yes, they should have immediately refunded the money and they screwed up in that regard, but I would suggest that you just cut them a break on this one. It isn't like they are holding your money ransom or anything...
posted by suburbanrobot at 1:56 PM on September 29, 2009
Best answer: Here's a pretty good way of explaining the contract theory, at least... assuming they have no terms of service that allow them to refund when the product is not available, and general contract principles apply, there are two ways to think of contract damages here. First is expectation damages. That is, they have to meet your expectations by providing you with the product itself. So, if it was a $60 item on their site, but the only way to get it now is to spend $85 somewhere else, and they've taken then refunded your $60, they would owe you $25. This would meet your expectation when you made the deal, as it would put you in a position that you would have been in if they didn't breach.
If it was found that there were no contract to begin with (perhaps because there wasn't a valid contract because of some kind of uncertainty, because you weren't legally obligated to enter into a contract because you were a minor, if there was a mistake of fact, etc.), then you would get restitutionary damages/recession. Those damages bring you back to the situation had you never met. There, the damages would be $0 (since they'd have refunded you the $60 already, and you're in the same position you were in before).
Chances are, though, their terms of service or policies allow them to refund when a product is not available. And the hassle it would take for you to recover even if they didn't would be way more than the difference you'd be entitled.
posted by JakeWalker at 2:18 PM on September 29, 2009
If it was found that there were no contract to begin with (perhaps because there wasn't a valid contract because of some kind of uncertainty, because you weren't legally obligated to enter into a contract because you were a minor, if there was a mistake of fact, etc.), then you would get restitutionary damages/recession. Those damages bring you back to the situation had you never met. There, the damages would be $0 (since they'd have refunded you the $60 already, and you're in the same position you were in before).
Chances are, though, their terms of service or policies allow them to refund when a product is not available. And the hassle it would take for you to recover even if they didn't would be way more than the difference you'd be entitled.
posted by JakeWalker at 2:18 PM on September 29, 2009
(Oh, also ... IANAL, that wasn't legal advice, etc.)
posted by JakeWalker at 2:19 PM on September 29, 2009
posted by JakeWalker at 2:19 PM on September 29, 2009
Also ... There are at least some situations where they have fulfilled their obligations on shipment and the loss of damage would lie with you. I don't remember the exact UCC provisions if no shipping term is provided, but there are definitely commercial cases where the person ordering and receiving the goods is on the hook if the goods are damaged in transit and not insured.
posted by JakeWalker at 2:21 PM on September 29, 2009
posted by JakeWalker at 2:21 PM on September 29, 2009
Best answer: These types of online stores usually set down the rules somewhere on their website. By making a purchase, you are agreeing to the rules (I believe). For example, one popular site offers a FAQ about this, in which they indicate the steps you should take if something is broken, and that they will almost always only be able to return your money.
That is probably backed up in their Terms of Use, although you have to be fluent in legalese to figure it out. What you can determine from the Terms of Use is that they had a lawyer figure out all the possible problems in their business venture, who gave them specific directions about what they can and cannot do (including your issue).
From a practical standpoint, these stores usually sell overstock. They can't send to you something they don't have. Sure, they could purchase it from somewhere else (at a loss to them) and then mail that to you, but I'm sure their lawyer thought of that one.
posted by Houstonian at 2:35 PM on September 29, 2009
That is probably backed up in their Terms of Use, although you have to be fluent in legalese to figure it out. What you can determine from the Terms of Use is that they had a lawyer figure out all the possible problems in their business venture, who gave them specific directions about what they can and cannot do (including your issue).
From a practical standpoint, these stores usually sell overstock. They can't send to you something they don't have. Sure, they could purchase it from somewhere else (at a loss to them) and then mail that to you, but I'm sure their lawyer thought of that one.
posted by Houstonian at 2:35 PM on September 29, 2009
Response by poster: JakeWalker: Ah, that's just the kind of explanation I was looking for to help me understand the issues involved. Thank you!
Houstonian: Your links provide the answer: In their Terms of Service section 17, it says "in no event will the aggregate liability ... exceed, in total, the amounts paid by you to us." So it seems that's where they explicitly cap their liability at just a refund.
So, thanks for the perspective, everyone. Time to move on :).
posted by kprincehouse at 4:06 PM on September 29, 2009
Houstonian: Your links provide the answer: In their Terms of Service section 17, it says "in no event will the aggregate liability ... exceed, in total, the amounts paid by you to us." So it seems that's where they explicitly cap their liability at just a refund.
So, thanks for the perspective, everyone. Time to move on :).
posted by kprincehouse at 4:06 PM on September 29, 2009
This depends entirely on your jurisdiction and on the TOS of the site you used. How much the TOS can override local law depends on what those laws say about the matter. In New Zealand for example your rights under the Consumer Guarantees act after recieving seriously faulty goods would be:
posted by shelleycat at 5:35 PM on September 29, 2009
If the problem is a serious one (the goods are unsafe, substantially do not meet acceptable quality, fitness for particular purpose, description or sample), you can choose to:You're trying for the second one but that only works if such goods are reasonably available (which it sounds like they aren't). But this means squat if you're located somewhere else and you haven't given us that information.
return (reject) the goods and get your money back, or
return the goods for a replacement of similar value and type (if the goods are reasonably available as part of the supplier's stock ), or
keep the goods and have the price reduced to make up for its drop in value.
posted by shelleycat at 5:35 PM on September 29, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Geckwoistmeinauto at 1:42 PM on September 29, 2009