Dell Faces Quebec Class-Action Suit After Computer Price-Change

[Jason Dunn]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/TechNews/2003/05/08/82701-cp.html' target='_blank'>http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/TechNew...8/82701-cp.html</a><br /><br /></div>"Dell Canada may face a class-action lawsuit in Quebec for adding hundreds of dollars to the listed price of a hand-held unit on its web site. The consumers' group Union des consommateurs said Thursday it has asked a Superior Court judge for permission to sue the computer giant. The group is demanding Dell stick to the price of $89 to $118 listed last month for Axim X5 pocket PC models. Dell posted a correction on its web site on April 7, saying the actual retail price for the units was $379 for a basic model and $549 for a faster unit."<br /><br />Earth to Quebec consumers suing Dell: grow up. Online pricing mistakes happen all the time, and this one was so obvious I can't believe anyone thought it was legitimate. Dell made a nice gesture by offering $50 discount coupons to people that had ordered once at the incorrect price, so no matter what you're getting it cheaper than anyone else. It's not like Dell was doing a purposeful "bait and switch" where they advertised the price just to get the orders, then switched it afterwards. And we wonder why some US vendors don't come up to Canada. :roll:

[Ed Hansberry]

My thoughts exactly. most (all?) sites and paper ads say they are not responsible for errors and it is quite clear Dell doesn't engage in bait and switch tactics. :evil: Dell should suspend Axim sales in Quebec for one month as punishment to the goobers bringing this lawsuit.

[Pony99CA]

It's good to see that we in the U.S. don't have a corner on the frivolous lawsuit market. :devilboy:

Besides, what's $100 Canadian anyway? Like 25 U.S. cents? :rofl:

I do like Ed's idea, though. Isn't it bad enough that Dell probably has to support both French and English in Quebec?

Steve

[Ainvar]

Heh I hate those kind of people that think they are always owed something.
They were born so they are owed something.... blah blah blah.
Always trying to screw somebody over for something just cause you are too cheap or think you are owed something that you are not.
Grow up and look at how the world works and quit being dishonest, it will come back and bite you in the ass in the end (most of the times 3x3x3 times over).

[butch]

Hi!

Hey! Do you know that there is people in Quebec reading PocketPCThought??? The answer: YES! 8)
I'm one of those...
First, I'm not for those kind of lawsuit... It is only good for the lawers...
Second, here is Quebec the law says:
(1) where the price of the good rung in at the check-out is higher than the price advertised, the
lower price shall be honoured and :
(a) the merchant shall give the good to the consumer free of charge, if the accurate price of
the good is $10 or less ; or
(b) the merchant shall correct the price and grant the consumer a discount of $10 on the
corrected price, if the accurate price of the good is higher than $10 ;
(2) where the same error occurs in respect of identical goods during the same transaction, the
merchant shall correct each of the errors but compensate the consumer in accordance with
subparagraph a for only one of those goods ;
(3) the accurate pricing policy shall apply even if the error is noticed before the transaction is
completed, on the condition however that the consumer buys the good ;
(4) the accurate pricing policy shall not apply in respect of a specific good if its application
contravenes an act or regulation.

So, street stores have to pay for there mistake here... But, I have absolutly no ideas on-line stores are subject to this law. If they are, maybe this lawsuit won't be only good for the lawers... I still doubt that however...

[dshirley]

Ah, come on guys... A year ago, the US legal system punished all the major PC manufacturers to the tune of hundreds of millions of US dollars, for shipping floppy disk drives with a bug which would lose a couple of bytes of data every 512nd time you write to a floppy disk drive whilst decoding a heavy multimedia file... And you complain about a lawsuit which falls under the local laws which protect consumers from those sorts of suppliers which price products incorrectly just to get sales.

Sure, Dell certainly didn't do this on purpose, and this isn't really a legitimate use of the legal system, but don't bash a legal system which is different from the US one before you understand the environment!

DS

[Gremmie]

Remember, the initial admin who posted this story is from Canada.

[thenikjones]

Hi!

Hey! Do you know that there is people in Quebec reading PocketPCThought??? The answer: YES! 8)
I'm one of those...
First, I'm not for those kind of lawsuit... It is only good for the lawers...
Second, here is Quebec the law says:
(1) where the price of the good rung in at the check-out is higher than the price advertised, the
lower price shall be honoured and :
(a) the merchant shall give the good to the consumer free of charge, if the accurate price of
the good is $10 or less ; or
(b) the merchant shall correct the price and grant the consumer a discount of $10 on the
corrected price, if the accurate price of the good is higher than $10 ;
(2) where the same error occurs in respect of identical goods during the same transaction, the
merchant shall correct each of the errors but compensate the consumer in accordance with
subparagraph a for only one of those goods ;
(3) the accurate pricing policy shall apply even if the error is noticed before the transaction is
completed, on the condition however that the consumer buys the good ;
(4) the accurate pricing policy shall not apply in respect of a specific good if its application
contravenes an act or regulation.

So, street stores have to pay for there mistake here... But, I have absolutly no ideas on-line stores are subject to this law. If they are, maybe this lawsuit won't be only good for the lawers... I still doubt that however...

Well, (b) says they should get a $10 duscount, and Dell offered $50? What's the problem? Seems Dell are bending over backwards to compensate people.

[rudolph]

Well, (b) says they should get a $10 duscount, and Dell offered $50? What's the problem? Seems Dell are bending over backwards to compensate people.

Exactly... and they offered $150 off the X5 400mhz... quite generous if you ask me

[Ed Hansberry]

Ah, come on guys... A year ago, the US legal system punished all the major PC manufacturers to the tune of hundreds of millions of US dollars, for shipping floppy disk drives with a bug which would lose a couple of bytes of data every 512nd time you write to a floppy disk drive whilst decoding a heavy multimedia file... And you complain about a lawsuit which falls under the local laws which protect consumers from those sorts of suppliers which price products incorrectly just to get sales.
Those manufacturers knew about the bug and continued to ship the drives for years because they didn't want to pay to redesign the controllers.

[Pony99CA]

Second, here is Quebec the law says:
(1) where the price of the good rung in at the check-out is higher than the price advertised, the
lower price shall be honoured and :
(a) the merchant shall give the good to the consumer free of charge, if the accurate price of
the good is $10 or less ; or
(b) the merchant shall correct the price and grant the consumer a discount of $10 on the
corrected price, if the accurate price of the good is higher than $10 ;
[...]
(3) the accurate pricing policy shall apply even if the error is noticed before the transaction is
completed, on the condition however that the consumer buys the good ;


Thanks for posting that law. It sounds like it contradicts itself, though. Part (1) says the lower price will be honored, but part (b) says that the merchant can correct the price and give a $10 discount.

I'm guessing that part (1) applies to the consumer that the merchant notices the problem with, and part (b) applies to any other consumer that comes in with the ad later.

In the case of the Web, though, where lots of people can order the goods, are all of the transactions treated under part (1)? Given what part (3) says, it would seem like they would, because the transaction does not have to be completed (which seems to make void any "transaction is not completed until we bill you" clause).

Given that you could easily argue the price on the Web is an "advertised price", it does seem like Dell would have to honor those prices. Yikes!

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Sure, Dell certainly didn't do this on purpose, and this isn't really a legitimate use of the legal system, but don't bash a legal system which is different from the US one before you understand the environment!
We were not bashing the legal system; we were bashing the people filing that suit. I don't hold the U.S. legal system at fault for frivolous lawsuits filed here; I hold the plaintiffs and lawyers at fault.

That said, given my reading of the law in the previous post, they may actually have a case. :oops:

Steve

[Pony99CA]

Ah, come on guys... A year ago, the US legal system punished all the major PC manufacturers to the tune of hundreds of millions of US dollars, for shipping floppy disk drives with a bug which would lose a couple of bytes of data every 512nd time you write to a floppy disk drive whilst decoding a heavy multimedia file... And you complain about a lawsuit which falls under the local laws which protect consumers from those sorts of suppliers which price products incorrectly just to get sales.
Those manufacturers knew about the bug and continued to ship the drives for years because they didn't want to pay to redesign the controllers.
This is off-topic, but I never heard anything about this. Is this article (http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/7.88.html#subj5.1) talking about about the same thing?

Steve

[OzzyPPC]

I have to say that I'm not sure where you guys are comming from on this one...
So, small, vulnerable Dell is being bullied by the big bad consumers? Get real!
Dell (and all companies trading via the net) gain the massive advantage of not having to pay for floor space, retail insurance etc etc which brick and mortar traders have to pay. The trade off from this is that they have to watch what they are posting. If they are too lax to actually ensure that their prices are accurate, bad luck - this is the real world and its is crazy to say that companies like Dell can have it both ways - if you happen to get a faulty device its all 'that is just the reality of purchasing electronic equipment, how were we to know that you might get a dud, you can have it repaired/replaced but on our terms, in our time' but when the boot is on the other foot its all 'sorry, you must understand, it was obvious that wasn't the price'...
The only way to ensure companies watch what they post on their sites is to enforce the laws which apply to them. They wouldn't cut you any slack if they happened to send you something you didn't pay for - you would have letters of demand asking for it back as soon as they realised.
Get with the program

[khpchan]

Let me say that - I witness the whole sequence of the Dell Axim error (Canada).

Here's what I saw.

First, the pricing error is orginated from the forum in Redflagdeals.com. This site has a good reputation of good deals in Canada.

One day (or once upon a time), a person discovered there is a pricing error on the Dell Axims, and he posted the link with the wrong price. However, without that specific link, (let's say you enter Dell.ca and add your Axim to the cart in an ordinary way) , you won't be able to see the pricing error. Within 24 hours, this thread has gone through the roof with 50 or more pages. Some people are insane and make a purchase of 10 Dell Axims at a time and I believe he (or she) hopes to make a buck or two by selling these on Ebay, provided if Dell honours the lower price.

Of course, indeed, Dell DID not honour the lower price, and I believe they were right because I can't see the lower price unless I click on the specific link. But guess what? People ARE upset about that Dell did not honour the lower price, and maybe that's why they come up with this lawsuit.

Anyways, I purchased my Dell Axim with the regular price plus the mail-in rebate on the second day after Dell released the Axim. I mean, you are always looking to find a deal, especially if you are addicted or short on money. But people are really abusing it right now, and some 'furious' people even print out fake ads trying to PM with Staples Canada (because they have that 150% price guarantee.)

But the legal system in US is no better than the one in Canada. At least a smoker in California can suit some tobacco companies for billions or hundred millions of $. Even the worse is that the jury is on the side with the smoker. How about suing McDonalds for their 'too-hot' coffee? Some other are even insane to sue fast food restaurants for their obesity. They should have sued the furniture manufacturer (i.e. the sofa/couch) or the snack/chips company.

Just my 2 cents.

[Cypher]

[quote=butch]
Well, (b) says they should get a $10 discount, and Dell offered $50? What's the problem? Seems Dell are bending over backwards to compensate people.


If I were Dell, at this point I'd settle and "gift" all those people with $10 instead of the $50 they offered :)

[butch]

[Thanks for posting that law. It sounds like it contradicts itself, though. Part (1) says the lower price will be honored, but part (b) says that the merchant can correct the price and give a $10 discount.

I'm guessing that part (1) applies to the consumer that the merchant notices the problem with, and part (b) applies to any other consumer that comes in with the ad later.

In the case of the Web, though, where lots of people can order the goods, are all of the transactions treated under part (1)? Given what part (3) says, it would seem like they would, because the transaction does not have to be completed (which seems to make void any "transaction is not completed until we bill you" clause).

Given that you could easily argue the price on the Web is an "advertised price", it does seem like Dell would have to honor those prices. Yikes!

Steve

I just re-read it, in fact it means, that the store give you 10$ for ervery mistake, but not if the article cost less than 10$. If you buy a 5$ "thing" but the price is wrong you got it for free, if you buy a 100$ "thing" but the price on it is 75$, the store correct the price, but you get a 10$ rebate, so you pay 90$ for it. If you buy ten 100$ "thing" you get one for 90$ and the other for 100$.
As other said, Dell offered 50$ so the are in law I think.

[cyngon]

My reading of the law is that in this case (assuming for the sake of argument this law applies equally to brick and mortar and online shops) is that Dell would have to honor the lower (incorrect) price -and- a $10 discount on top of that.

-Bryan

[Pony99CA]

I just re-read it, in fact it means, that the store give you 10$ for ervery mistake, but not if the article cost less than 10$. As other said, Dell offered 50$ so the are in law I think.
Re-read it again. The law says that $10 discount is only after the price is corrected. People who ordered before Dell corrected the price may well be entitled to the lower price according to part (1) of the law, as part (1b) may not have applied.

Steve

[butch]

I just re-read it, in fact it means, that the store give you 10$ for ervery mistake, but not if the article cost less than 10$. As other said, Dell offered 50$ so the are in law I think.
Re-read it again. The law says that $10 discount is only after the price is corrected. People who ordered before Dell corrected the price may well be entitled to the lower price according to part (1) of the law, as part (1b) may not have applied.

Steve
No! I'm not so sure... You have to tell the store there error to let them correct it right? As soon Dell knew the error they corrected it...

Here the full paper on that law, for those who want to read it, look on page 10: http://www.opc.gouv.qc.ca/programmes/LettreAffPrice_marking.pdf

[Pony99CA]

No! I'm not so sure... You have to tell the store there error to let them correct it right?
Why? What law says that you have know the company's prices better than the company does? Even if you think the price is a mistake, are you legally (morally may be a different issue) obligated to let them know?

Steve

[Jason Dunn]

First, the pricing error is orginated from the forum in Redflagdeals.com. This site has a good reputation of good deals in Canada. One day (or once upon a time), a person discovered there is a pricing error on the Dell Axims...

Exactly! PRICING ERROR. No honest person could say they weren't trying to take advantage of Dell - they KNEW it was a pricing ERROR, not a "really great deal". Those people buying 10 and wanting to sell them on eBay? Greed. This is all about greed and people who are trying to abuse the system that's SUPPOSED to be set up to legimately protect them from real bait and switch tactics. When systems get abused, they're less likely to be there in the future when they're really needed.

[Steven Cedrone]

O.K.,

Time to step in here...

Please limit the discussion to the topic: The lawsuit...

Don't turn this into another HOF&S thread... :roll:

Steven Cedrone
Community Moderator

[Cypher]

Having read the pdf file given (thanks to the poster) and, if this is indeed the law that the "consumer group" is using to state their claim, I think it's a good example of how the law lags behind the technology.

The law and the Fair Pricing Policy are completely based on "brick-and-mortar" shops. The law states (among other things) that if you choose the general exemption to not individually lable each item with its price, you must use shelf lables with the price listed and you must adhere to the fair pricing policy. The fair pricing policy says that, in the event that an item rings up at a price higher than the lable on the shelf, the lower price will apply. What exactly does that have to do with an on-line shopping facility? Good question. Is the web page listing the equivalent of labeling each item or is it the equivalent of shelf pricing? Who really knows? Yet, whether or not they even have to adhere to the fair pricing policy hinges upon that distinction.

There's an article on another site titled "Technologically Dim Lawmakers." I think we have as much to fear from technologically dim judges and juries.

It's also a good example of how "consumer advocates" may not help the consumers in the long run. Sure, if the judge actually buys this claim, those who participated in the class action suit will get an Axim at under cost, but all those companies with web-based sales who are watching this lawsuit are very likely to eliminate sales to Candian customers out of fear of facing the same thing. The consumers might end up wishing they'd left well enough alone if they even realize what happened.

[OzzyPPC]

So, you think Dell sells Axims to Canadians (or anyone else) out of the goodness of their hearts?

No they don't: they sell products in a market because they think they can make a profit. Forcing them to honour the prices that they posted on their own site run by their own staff is only going to make them be more careful about what they post. It is nobody else's fault other than Dell's.

If a particular jurisdiction wants to enact laws which require companies to behave in a certain way I don't see how anyone can complain. If it is a purely Qubecian law no body has any right to say it's wrong. If you are a Qubecian and you think the law stinks write a letter to your political representative and vote out the party that says they wont change it.

DONT however pretend that Dell can or will 'punish' anyone for their own mistake. Their job is to make a profit for their shareholders, not dish out sanctions to consumers. If they start doing that kind of stuff they will go the way of the record companies and RIAA--> pretty darn unpopular and not too profitable.

[Steven Cedrone]

HOF&S posts moved and thread quietly unlocked...

Please keep the discussion on topic...

Steven Cedrone
Community Moderator