If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Global News (Canada))   Woman finds price error on Home Depot website, proceeds to buy 22 cases of flooring at $2.97 each instead of $65 at local store and orders 50 more. Extra order gets cancelled, woman goes to media and biatches, gets her way   (globalnews.ca) divider line 214
    More: Asinine, Home Depot, Calgary, Global News  
•       •       •

10217 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Oct 2013 at 6:04 AM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



214 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-04 11:02:55 PM
The customer is always right. Even when she's not.
 
2013-10-04 11:11:05 PM
There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.  She likely knew it was a mistake, but Home Depot made the mistake of advertising it for that price.  I can see a gray area when it came to ordering the extra boxes, but the paid up front and they accepted the transaction, at that point they should have been obligated to complete it.

Putting more accountability on businesses in these matters would encourage them to proof-read their ads more thoroughly before publishing them.
 
2013-10-04 11:17:35 PM
What a greedy, selfish, morally bankrupt coont.   I hope she gets termites in her vagina.
 
2013-10-05 12:00:49 AM

TuteTibiImperes: There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.


Meh, sometimes it's not their fault, human error, advertiser errors.  If it was a bait and switch that sleazy places do on a regular basis, I might agree.

/hope you never make mistakes.....
 
2013-10-05 12:05:17 AM

TuteTibiImperes: There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.  She likely knew it was a mistake, but Home Depot made the mistake of advertising it for that price.  I can see a gray area when it came to ordering the extra boxes, but the paid up front and they accepted the transaction, at that point they should have been obligated to complete it.

Putting more accountability on businesses in these matters would encourage them to proof-read their ads more thoroughly before publishing them.


That's cute, but not how the law works.

You should go hang out on Consumerist. They seem more like your kind of people.
 
2013-10-05 12:05:26 AM
Dunno about Canada, but in the US she was entitled to the things they all agreed to.

Home Depot could have claimed the ad was faulty and denied her the purchase in the first place, but once they took her money in exchange for the specified quantity of product, they've committed to a contract at that price and the Uniform Commercial Code kicks in.
 
2013-10-05 12:12:03 AM

2xhelix: What a greedy, selfish, morally bankrupt coont.   I hope she gets termites in her vagina.


What a poorly trained, horribly supervised staff with no checks and balances. What an awful way to run a business.
 
2013-10-05 12:15:08 AM
Doesn't anyone proofreed ads anymore before they go too print?
 
2013-10-05 12:23:41 AM
 
2013-10-05 12:24:01 AM

basemetal: TuteTibiImperes: There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.

Meh, sometimes it's not their fault, human error, advertiser errors.  If it was a bait and switch that sleazy places do on a regular basis, I might agree.

/hope you never make mistakes.....


That's true, but the upright thing to do is to own up to the mistake and honor the ad.  I will say that there's a difference in how I view situations like this when it comes to major corporations and small mom & pops.  If it were a small independent business and a mistake like that could seriously put them in jeopardy, the lady would have been a dick to take advantage.  On the other hand, when it's a major corporation where the error won't even make a dent in their daily profits, and they already abuse their size to take advantage of people on a regular basis, she should take them for everything she can get.
 
2013-10-05 12:25:18 AM

TuteTibiImperes: basemetal: TuteTibiImperes: There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.

Meh, sometimes it's not their fault, human error, advertiser errors.  If it was a bait and switch that sleazy places do on a regular basis, I might agree.

/hope you never make mistakes.....

That's true, but the upright thing to do is to own up to the mistake and honor the ad.  I will say that there's a difference in how I view situations like this when it comes to major corporations and small mom & pops.  If it were a small independent business and a mistake like that could seriously put them in jeopardy, the lady would have been a dick to take advantage.  On the other hand, when it's a major corporation where the error won't even make a dent in their daily profits, and they already abuse their size to take advantage of people on a regular basis, she should take them for everything she can get.


Why does the size of the business affect a moral decision?
 
2013-10-05 12:31:27 AM

basemetal: TuteTibiImperes: basemetal: TuteTibiImperes: There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.

Meh, sometimes it's not their fault, human error, advertiser errors.  If it was a bait and switch that sleazy places do on a regular basis, I might agree.

/hope you never make mistakes.....

That's true, but the upright thing to do is to own up to the mistake and honor the ad.  I will say that there's a difference in how I view situations like this when it comes to major corporations and small mom & pops.  If it were a small independent business and a mistake like that could seriously put them in jeopardy, the lady would have been a dick to take advantage.  On the other hand, when it's a major corporation where the error won't even make a dent in their daily profits, and they already abuse their size to take advantage of people on a regular basis, she should take them for everything she can get.

Why does the size of the business affect a moral decision?


It's not a moral decision.  They advertised the product for that price.  She didn't alter the ad or try to purchase it for any price other than the one they offered it for.

That doesn't mean that you can't still have compassion for a small business with limited resources who shouldn't face undue hardship over a mistake.
 
2013-10-05 12:34:54 AM
Evelyn, is that you?

/you whoring bnitch
 
2013-10-05 12:35:34 AM
Home Depot: "Hey, the website if fine, it's working lets lay off most of the IT dept"
Home Depot: "Hey, we don't need proof readers, it's fine it's working, lets lay off most of the editors and fact checkers on our website".
Home Depot: "Ahhh...doooh!"
 
2013-10-05 12:42:57 AM

basemetal: Why does the size of the business affect a moral decision?


The laws (in the US, anyway) are the way they are because immoral people used to commit to contracts at one price, then hold the goods hostage when the buyer needed them; or they'd say the goods would be arriving at a given time, wait till the last second when you couldn't buy them from someone else while maintaining your schedule, and jack up the price after you'd already agreed to or paid a lower price. Or they'd say their salesman wasn't really authorized (although they were) to give you a certain deal, and jack up the price.

That's why the UCC (the sales laws in all 50 states) say that when you agree to a contract, you have a civil/legal obligation to fulfill that contract's terms, and as a company, when you give a person authority to make a sale for your company, the company is liable for that person's actions in making a contract on behalf of the company.

Things like this got hashed out in case law because usually, the immoral person was the seller.

Large retailers know the UCC, and most of them have procedures, training, and processes in place that document the training and authority of their sales associates, management, etc. In this case, HD should have trained its salesmen to know the value of the goods, and to question the accuracy of the flyer with management before committing to the deal.

The reason Home Depot would give her these things is because they knew they'd likely lose in court if she sued, and end up spending more money on attorney fees than the cost of the goods.
 
2013-10-05 12:48:32 AM

Lenny_da_Hog: The reason Home Depot would give her these things is because they knew they'd likely lose in court if she sued, and end up spending more money on attorney fees than the cost of the goods.


The only way they could win if it was print media...and they could say it was a 'typo' from the publisher and the publisher should have caught it.

Owning and publishing your own web site removes that 'out' for them.
 
2013-10-05 01:16:33 AM

TuteTibiImperes: There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.  She likely knew it was a mistake, but Home Depot made the mistake of advertising it for that price.  I can see a gray area when it came to ordering the extra boxes, but the paid up front and they accepted the transaction, at that point they should have been obligated to complete it.

Putting more accountability on businesses in these matters would encourage them to proof-read their ads more thoroughly before publishing them.


Umm...why? Think of it on the flip side? Let's say you come to me and buy a hammer for 10 bucks. But when you pay me you accidentally give me a $100 bill. Do I get to keep it the moment it hits my hand? I mean, that's the price you agreed to pay me!
 
2013-10-05 01:18:10 AM

optikeye: Lenny_da_Hog: The reason Home Depot would give her these things is because they knew they'd likely lose in court if she sued, and end up spending more money on attorney fees than the cost of the goods.

The only way they could win if it was print media...and they could say it was a 'typo' from the publisher and the publisher should have caught it.

Owning and publishing your own web site removes that 'out' for them.


She wouldn't have to claim false advertisement. It's the fact that she personally went to the store, met with a salesperson, made an agreement (verbal and written, likely, as she probably left with a receipt that had a promised shipping date) and paid money for goods. There's no question that a contract was committed.

In the US, she'd be suing for breach of contract, not false advertising. You can claim a typo or other error in your advertising (whether or not it's your own media) as a way to avoid committing to a contract in the first place -- HD could have just said, "That's an obvious error, and we can't provide those goods at that price, sorry for the inconvenience" -- but once you've committed to providing X-quantity of Y-goods for $Z, there's no turning back. You're then obligated.
 
2013-10-05 01:19:46 AM
The Eh-ristocrats
 
2013-10-05 01:20:11 AM

DamnYankees: TuteTibiImperes: There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.  She likely knew it was a mistake, but Home Depot made the mistake of advertising it for that price.  I can see a gray area when it came to ordering the extra boxes, but the paid up front and they accepted the transaction, at that point they should have been obligated to complete it.

Putting more accountability on businesses in these matters would encourage them to proof-read their ads more thoroughly before publishing them.

Umm...why? Think of it on the flip side? Let's say you come to me and buy a hammer for 10 bucks. But when you pay me you accidentally give me a $100 bill. Do I get to keep it the moment it hits my hand? I mean, that's the price you agreed to pay me!


Not at all the same situation.  I see a hammer for $10, I hand you $100, I still only agreed to pay $10, and you're responsible for giving me $90 back.  On the same token, if I hand you $20 for a $10 hammer and you hand me $100 back, it's my responsibility to let you know you gave me incorrect change.  Minor human errors making change isn't the same as advertising or listing a product at a certain price and then trying to change that after someone attempts to buy the product at that price.
 
2013-10-05 01:24:43 AM

TuteTibiImperes: Not at all the same situation.  I see a hammer for $10, I hand you $100, I still only agreed to pay $10, and you're responsible for giving me $90 back.  On the same token, if I hand you $20 for a $10 hammer and you hand me $100 back, it's my responsibility to let you know you gave me incorrect change.  Minor human errors making change isn't the same as advertising or listing a product at a certain price and then trying to change that after someone attempts to buy the product at that price.


What's the difference? By your own example, the key issue is not what price was paid or listed, but what price was intended to be paid or listed. The issue, contractually, is whether there was a meeting of the minds. The question that needs to be asked is whether or not each party intended to participate in the transaction as it took place, and just looking at the price on the website doesn't tell you that.

What this comes down to is WHY the number on the website was wrong. Did the person at home depot who put the price online accidentally put in a typo? Or did they put that price in thinking that was the actual price, and just getting it wrong? If its the former, the transaction should be void. If the latter, then I agree the transaction should go through.

All I'm saying is that we need more info to know whether or not HD should be legally obligation to honor this price. It's not enough to simply say "hey, that's what it said, so its a deal".
 
2013-10-05 01:39:29 AM

TuteTibiImperes: Minor human errors making change isn't the same as advertising or listing a product at a certain price and then trying to change that after someone attempts to buy the product at that price.


But listing the wrong price in error doesn't commit you to selling that price. True typos, without the intent to deceive, are not considered false advertising. False advertising involves willful deceit. There's no way HD (in the US) would have been guilty of false advertisement in this case -- it's very easy for them to show how the quantity error arose, and all they'd have to do is put signs up saying "Our flyer from this date has an incorrect price for this brand of flooring -- the quantity should have been per square foot, not per package," just to show they weren't actively trying to deceive anyone or bait/switch.

You'll see signs like that on retailer's shelves (especially grocery stores, who do a lot of mail/newspaper advertising) all the time.

HD in this case made the mistake of committing to a sale at that advertised price *before* realizing it was in error. If they'd realized it was an error beforehand and said, "Sorry, *this* is the real price, we screwed up, and we're not going to sell it to you," they would have been within their rights to refuse the sale in the first place.
 
2013-10-05 01:42:47 AM

Sid_6.7: TuteTibiImperes: There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.  She likely knew it was a mistake, but Home Depot made the mistake of advertising it for that price.  I can see a gray area when it came to ordering the extra boxes, but the paid up front and they accepted the transaction, at that point they should have been obligated to complete it.

Putting more accountability on businesses in these matters would encourage them to proof-read their ads more thoroughly before publishing them.

That's cute, but not how the law works.

You should go hang out on Consumerist. They seem more like your kind of people.


Then he would before Home Depot canceling the order.
 
2013-10-05 01:47:51 AM
one of my best Black Friday deals was courtesy of Home Depot

it was November 2010 and I was at the Home Depot website, just looking around, and I came across an unbelievable price for a Werner 22 ft. Aluminum Telescoping Multi-position Ladder


a248.e.akamai.net


I had been keeping an eye on the price, waiting for it to drop. At the time, it was going for $249. I had seen it previously as low as $199, but finances were tight and I couldn't justify even $200 for a ladder, much less $250.

on Black Friday, they had it listed online for $99. $99. store pick-up only.

I printed that right out and went to the nearest store, they were swarmed with Black Friday shoppers buying stocking stuffers and hand tools.

On the shelf, the item was listed as being on sale for $199. there were none left on the floor, but I saw 3 up above.

I talked to a sales associate in millwork (they handled the ladders), showed him the freshly printed web-price, his eyes popped and he said, "no way! that's gotta be a mistake?" he went to the website at his desk and pulled it up, and it showed $99.

he called a manager and explained it to him. they were incredibly busy and he said that it would take some time to block off the aisle, get the ladder down, and then figure out what to do with the price.

I told him that I'd be willing to come back later in the night to pick it up at a less crowded time if they would just write it up for me right then and there at $99.

the store manager came over, saw the computer screen, made a phone-call out of earshot, came back and reluctantly sold it to me for $99 on a hand-written invoice to indicate the reason for the incredibly low price.

I asked what were the chances of me being able to purchase all 3 for 99 each, he said no way. that was the end of that conversation. I didn't push it, I was satisfied.

I was completely content with getting one $250 ladder for $99.

I wasn't greedy, I didn't contact the Consumerist, I didn't call a lawyer.

somebody, somewhere, entered in a wrong price at their website. I was respectful and polite and fully understood the absurdity of the price.

that ladder is one of the best things that I've ever purchased, if I paid 4-500 for it, it would've paid for itself within the first year of using it for what it's allowed me to be able to do.
 
2013-10-05 01:51:01 AM

DamnYankees: What this comes down to is WHY the number on the website was wrong. Did the person at home depot who put the price online accidentally put in a typo? Or did they put that price in thinking that was the actual price, and just getting it wrong? If its the former, the transaction should be void. If the latter, then I agree the transaction should go through.


Per TFA, the error came in the quantity designation. Each package has several square feet. The price was supposed to be $2.97 per square foot, but was marked per package instead. It was a simple error.

But all of that becomes moot when they actually commit to the sale. Once HD's designated representative says, "We'll provide this for that price," and the buyer agrees (and it doesn't help HDs case that she paid the agreed price up-front), that's the contract, regardless of how that price came about. HD is then responsible for fulfilling that contract under the agreed terms.

What HD should have done is to train its sales associates to recognize obvious errors like this and bring them to management's attention for authorization before committing to a sale.
 
2013-10-05 01:59:53 AM

DamnYankees: TuteTibiImperes: Not at all the same situation.  I see a hammer for $10, I hand you $100, I still only agreed to pay $10, and you're responsible for giving me $90 back.  On the same token, if I hand you $20 for a $10 hammer and you hand me $100 back, it's my responsibility to let you know you gave me incorrect change.  Minor human errors making change isn't the same as advertising or listing a product at a certain price and then trying to change that after someone attempts to buy the product at that price.

What's the difference? By your own example, the key issue is not what price was paid or listed, but what price was intended to be paid or listed. The issue, contractually, is whether there was a meeting of the minds. The question that needs to be asked is whether or not each party intended to participate in the transaction as it took place, and just looking at the price on the website doesn't tell you that.

What this comes down to is WHY the number on the website was wrong. Did the person at home depot who put the price online accidentally put in a typo? Or did they put that price in thinking that was the actual price, and just getting it wrong? If its the former, the transaction should be void. If the latter, then I agree the transaction should go through.

All I'm saying is that we need more info to know whether or not HD should be legally obligation to honor this price. It's not enough to simply say "hey, that's what it said, so its a deal".


There's a big difference, and in my example there was no incorrectly listed price.  If the price is advertised or marked on the shelf (and the product in the position matches the description/SKU/UPC on the tag) at a certain amount, the store should be obligated to offer the product for that amount.

When a clerk/cashier rings up a price that doesn't match what the item is advertised/listed for, or makes incorrect change, that's the error of a single person, and should be simply corrected so that the correct price is charged and/or the correct change given.  When a company advertises, publishes, or lists an incorrect price on the shelf, that's an error at the company level, and the company should make it right by honoring that price.

I'm not going to make a big deal about Amy the cashier making a mistake, but I fully expect Home Depot the company to honor whatever price they offer a product for in writing.
 
2013-10-05 02:00:58 AM

calbert: one of my best Black Friday deals was courtesy of Home Depot

it was November 2010 and I was at the Home Depot website, just looking around, and I came across an unbelievable price for a Werner 22 ft. Aluminum Telescoping Multi-position Ladder


[a248.e.akamai.net image 801x1000]


I had been keeping an eye on the price, waiting for it to drop. At the time, it was going for $249. I had seen it previously as low as $199, but finances were tight and I couldn't justify even $200 for a ladder, much less $250.

on Black Friday, they had it listed online for $99. $99. store pick-up only.

I printed that right out and went to the nearest store, they were swarmed with Black Friday shoppers buying stocking stuffers and hand tools.

On the shelf, the item was listed as being on sale for $199. there were none left on the floor, but I saw 3 up above.

I talked to a sales associate in millwork (they handled the ladders), showed him the freshly printed web-price, his eyes popped and he said, "no way! that's gotta be a mistake?" he went to the website at his desk and pulled it up, and it showed $99.

he called a manager and explained it to him. they were incredibly busy and he said that it would take some time to block off the aisle, get the ladder down, and then figure out what to do with the price.

I told him that I'd be willing to come back later in the night to pick it up at a less crowded time if they would just write it up for me right then and there at $99.

the store manager came over, saw the computer screen, made a phone-call out of earshot, came back and reluctantly sold it to me for $99 on a hand-written invoice to indicate the reason for the incredibly low price.

I asked what were the chances of me being able to purchase all 3 for 99 each, he said no way. that was the end of that conversation. I didn't push it, I was satisfied.

I was completely content with getting one $250 ladder for $99.

I wasn't greedy, I didn't contact the Consumerist, I didn't call a lawyer ...



Be careful on that thing. Remember, Walter White died next to his precious.
 
2013-10-05 02:05:21 AM

Lenny_da_Hog: TuteTibiImperes: Minor human errors making change isn't the same as advertising or listing a product at a certain price and then trying to change that after someone attempts to buy the product at that price.

But listing the wrong price in error doesn't commit you to selling that price. True typos, without the intent to deceive, are not considered false advertising. False advertising involves willful deceit. There's no way HD (in the US) would have been guilty of false advertisement in this case -- it's very easy for them to show how the quantity error arose, and all they'd have to do is put signs up saying "Our flyer from this date has an incorrect price for this brand of flooring -- the quantity should have been per square foot, not per package," just to show they weren't actively trying to deceive anyone or bait/switch.

You'll see signs like that on retailer's shelves (especially grocery stores, who do a lot of mail/newspaper advertising) all the time.


Sure, and I agree with that.  If they notice the error and place appropriate signs up, no harm no foul.  If, however, they list that product on their website at a price, I click on the 'purchase' button, enter my credit card information, and complete the transaction, I'm going to be vocally pissed off if the product isn't delivered to me at the price I agreed to pay.  Similarly, if I go to the store, with flyer in hand showing the advertised price, and there isn't any sign notifying me that the price is incorrect, and I take it to the check out counter to purchase it, I will fully expect to pay the advertised price, and the company should be obligated to sell the product at that price.  If they then choose to put up a sign at the front door and in front of the products incorrectly priced that mentions the advertised price is an error and will not be honored, fine, all subsequent purchases should not have to be honored at that price. If that means the guy in front of me gets it for the lower advertised price but the signs go up before I get there, well, that's on me, I was too slow, they did what they had to do.
 
2013-10-05 02:57:03 AM
I did a room in Pergo because of a Home Depot deal like that. Well it wasn't that great of a deal, but still probably 1/6th what it should have cost.


What a lame-ass topic for the internet to be outraged about. At the point where Home Depot can't afford to eat a loss like that they'll realize they can afford to better train and pay their employees.
 
2013-10-05 03:04:24 AM
ever since being a salesperson at Fry's i've noticed that advertising pricing mistakes always show a lower price than what the item is selling for. you never see a $150 monitor accidentally advertised for $200, but it's not that unusual for it to be 'accidentally' advertised for $100. yay for people who hold stores accountable for this kind of thing.
 
2013-10-05 05:17:56 AM

TuteTibiImperes: DamnYankees: TuteTibiImperes: Not at all the same situation.  I see a hammer for $10, I hand you $100, I still only agreed to pay $10, and you're responsible for giving me $90 back.  On the same token, if I hand you $20 for a $10 hammer and you hand me $100 back, it's my responsibility to let you know you gave me incorrect change.  Minor human errors making change isn't the same as advertising or listing a product at a certain price and then trying to change that after someone attempts to buy the product at that price.

What's the difference? By your own example, the key issue is not what price was paid or listed, but what price was intended to be paid or listed. The issue, contractually, is whether there was a meeting of the minds. The question that needs to be asked is whether or not each party intended to participate in the transaction as it took place, and just looking at the price on the website doesn't tell you that.

What this comes down to is WHY the number on the website was wrong. Did the person at home depot who put the price online accidentally put in a typo? Or did they put that price in thinking that was the actual price, and just getting it wrong? If its the former, the transaction should be void. If the latter, then I agree the transaction should go through.

All I'm saying is that we need more info to know whether or not HD should be legally obligation to honor this price. It's not enough to simply say "hey, that's what it said, so its a deal".

There's a big difference, and in my example there was no incorrectly listed price.  If the price is advertised or marked on the shelf (and the product in the position matches the description/SKU/UPC on the tag) at a certain amount, the store should be obligated to offer the product for that amount.

When a clerk/cashier rings up a price that doesn't match what the item is advertised/listed for, or makes incorrect change, that's the error of a single person, and should be simply corrected so that the correct price is charged and/or the correct change given.  When a company advertises, publishes, or lists an incorrect price on the shelf, that's an error at the company level, and the company should make it right by honoring that price.

I'm not going to make a big deal about Amy the cashier making a mistake, but I fully expect Home Depot the company to honor whatever price they offer a product for in writing.




California Business and Professions Code 12024.2 (d)


Irregardless of a typo or any kind of published error on a website or printed media (or in store error), the business is still responsible for honoring that price to the consumer or face sanctions from the local weights and measures department or consumer affairs law enforcement agency.

Granted that is for California, but all US States have similar business and professions laws recommended by the National Conference on Weights & Measures that come straight from NIST.

Also granted the scenario from TFA is out of Canada, so all that shiat doesn't matter anyway, but in this case, in California, I'd be going to all 26 stores in my jurisdiction, buy it from each store, get overcharged, drop a notice of violation on each store, send it on up to the DA, and let them do the rest.

Why no, I've never had a problem like this with this business before...
 
2013-10-05 06:08:27 AM

TuteTibiImperes: There should absolutely be a law that businesses have to honor whatever price they advertise for a product or list it for on their website.  She likely knew it was a mistake, but Home Depot made the mistake of advertising it for that price.  I can see a gray area when it came to ordering the extra boxes, but the paid up front and they accepted the transaction, at that point they should have been obligated to complete it.

Putting more accountability on businesses in these matters would encourage them to proof-read their ads more thoroughly before publishing them.


There pretty much is; isn't that practically the first case in the Contracts casebook about Offer/Acceptance/Consideration?
 
2013-10-05 06:16:41 AM
Around the World in Grapie Days.
 
2013-10-05 06:21:18 AM

optikeye: Home Depot: "Hey, the website if fine, it's working lets lay off most of the IT dept"
Home Depot: "Hey, we don't need proof readers, it's fine it's working, lets lay off most of the editors and fact checkers on our website".
Home Depot: "Ahhh...doooh!"


Having worked for them as a contractor years ago, working on the customer self-checkout machines.  Yep.
They reap what they sow.
 
2013-10-05 06:24:13 AM
Give this coont the price that was advertised, then refuse to accept her business in the future. Done. Also pass her along to other businesses so they know what a whiny twat they're dealing with.
 
2013-10-05 06:24:21 AM
You know you'd do the same if you found a really "too good to be true" deal.
 
2013-10-05 06:26:44 AM
I got a free DVD movie one time from Best buy because the shelf said "FREE" - not free with purchase of (anything else) - just "FREE"

I got a receipt for it and everything.
 
2013-10-05 06:27:22 AM
The only coont I could sniff in this situation is home depot.
 
2013-10-05 06:29:06 AM
Good lord some of the people here feel entitled. "They made a mistake, I get to win!" Okay, let's do another situation. An ATM is accidentally stocked with $50 instead of $20 bills. You find this out, and immediately withdraw your entire savings, doubling your money since you got a $50 for every $20. According to some of these folks, "That's not stealing, because they made a mistake!"

Well then, let's go the other way. You're leaving a tip on a $20 restaurant bill, so you write down $2.50. Uh oh, you forgot the decimal place and put down $250. Oh well, you owe the restaurant a $250 tip because of YOUR mistake. Intentions be damned, you signed your name on the check muah hah hah!

shiatbags.
 
2013-10-05 06:32:40 AM

Securitywyrm: Good lord some of the people here feel entitled. "They made a mistake, I get to win!" Okay, let's do another situation. An ATM is accidentally stocked with $50 instead of $20 bills. You find this out, and immediately withdraw your entire savings, doubling your money since you got a $50 for every $20. According to some of these folks, "That's not stealing, because they made a mistake!"

Well then, let's go the other way. You're leaving a tip on a $20 restaurant bill, so you write down $2.50. Uh oh, you forgot the decimal place and put down $250. Oh well, you owe the restaurant a $250 tip because of YOUR mistake. Intentions be damned, you signed your name on the check muah hah hah!

shiatbags.


You're surprised? Half the population is subsidized by the other half. It's just how things go these days. Be a proud patriot, feel guilty for having a good job, and do your duty. Or something.
 
2013-10-05 06:34:21 AM
I'm guessing the initial purchase was her approximate SF and then she couldn't resist buying another 50 cases because it was so cheap.
Fifty cases of plastic wood is a lot of plastic wood, I'm guessing she'll be using it in her bathrooms*, stairs, as wall covering, siding, she will build a few chimneys out of it, will bedazzle her SUV with it, will start wearing it as a plastic wood suit, and still have a load left over to throw at the moon.
Either that or dump it on Craigslist for $40 a pop.
Plastic wood makes people do crazy things, people think it's some kind of magic 'classy' thing that turns their collapsing four year old stick house into the damn Biltmore.
All it does is show up every inconsistency in the earth's gravitational ellipse and throws you on your ass if you scurry across it with a glass of milk in your socks**.

*Bathrooms should not have wooden floor covering, plastic or otherwise. That goes for kitchens too. If you have a 'wood' floor in either of those 'wet' rooms then you deserve to drink eagle piss imo.
**Not a glass of milk inside your socks, feet in socks, glass of milk in hand, the whole lot ass over tit when the floor buckaroos you.
 
2013-10-05 06:34:48 AM
There is legal and there is ethical.    We would like them to be the same.   But they are not.   If she knew that the price was wrong, if she had any ethics at all, she would have pointed it out and moved on.   I guess legally, Home Depot had the obligation to let her get away with her lack of ethics.
 
2013-10-05 06:38:18 AM
Had a bit of a struggle with a somewhat situation last weekend.  I usually checkout the electronics section of my local Meijer because they often have really great deals on clearance items.  This summer, I ended up buying 4 Ballistic iPhone 5 cases, usually $60 each, for $7.95 each.  Last weekend, they had a Zagg InvisibleShield for iPhone 5 on clearance marked down from $20 to $4.95.  Not as drastic but still a great deal.  It had the orange clearance sticker and everything on it, but when I scanned it in up front, it rang up for $20.  The guy there gave me a nasty look and then spent 10 minutes on the phone trying to figure out if he's supposed to give me the price on it.  I think he was honestly waiting for me to get impatient and finally say, "never mind, I have to go."  Eventually he got the okay from the right person, and changed the price for me.

/CSB
//Don't get to do it often
 
GBB
2013-10-05 06:39:53 AM

Securitywyrm: Good lord some of the people here feel entitled. "They made a mistake, I get to win!" Okay, let's do another situation. An ATM is accidentally stocked with $50 instead of $20 bills. You find this out, and immediately withdraw your entire savings, doubling your money since you got a $50 for every $20. According to some of these folks, "That's not stealing, because they made a mistake!"

Well then, let's go the other way. You're leaving a tip on a $20 restaurant bill, so you write down $2.50. Uh oh, you forgot the decimal place and put down $250. Oh well, you owe the restaurant a $250 tip because of YOUR mistake. Intentions be damned, you signed your name on the check muah hah hah!

shiatbags.


Apples to manhole covers comparison.
1) You do not buy money at an ATM.  You can read more about how banks handle ATM errors in that packet of crap you threw out when you opened your account or on your bank's website.  And yes, it applies to ATMs that your bank does not maintain.
2) There is a little double-check feature on restaurant receipts.  It's called "math".  The total is the total.  If you somehow added $250 to the bill and wrote $260 down as the total, then yes, it's a $250 tip on a $10 bill.  If you wrote down $250 as the tip and came up to a $12.50 total, then no, it's not a $250 tip.
 
2013-10-05 06:41:07 AM
FTA : They said, 'no sorry, it was an associate error, we can't let you have it, we'll give you a free case if you buy the other 52 cases at 65 dollars a case,'" Laird explains. "I'm like, 'yeah, but I have a receipt. You guys actually put it through the system.'"

I hate this woman.
 
2013-10-05 06:46:59 AM

calbert: one of my best Black Friday deals was courtesy of Home Depot

it was November 2010 and I was at the Home Depot website, just looking around, and I came across an unbelievable price for a Werner 22 ft. Aluminum Telescoping Multi-position Ladder


[a248.e.akamai.net image 801x1000]


I had been keeping an eye on the price, waiting for it to drop. At the time, it was going for $249. I had seen it previously as low as $199, but finances were tight and I couldn't justify even $200 for a ladder, much less $250.

on Black Friday, they had it listed online for $99. $99. store pick-up only.

I printed that right out and went to the nearest store, they were swarmed with Black Friday shoppers buying stocking stuffers and hand tools.

On the shelf, the item was listed as being on sale for $199. there were none left on the floor, but I saw 3 up above.

I talked to a sales associate in millwork (they handled the ladders), showed him the freshly printed web-price, his eyes popped and he said, "no way! that's gotta be a mistake?" he went to the website at his desk and pulled it up, and it showed $99.

he called a manager and explained it to him. they were incredibly busy and he said that it would take some time to block off the aisle, get the ladder down, and then figure out what to do with the price.

I told him that I'd be willing to come back later in the night to pick it up at a less crowded time if they would just write it up for me right then and there at $99.

the store manager came over, saw the computer screen, made a phone-call out of earshot, came back and reluctantly sold it to me for $99 on a hand-written invoice to indicate the reason for the incredibly low price.

I asked what were the chances of me being able to purchase all 3 for 99 each, he said no way. that was the end of that conversation. I didn't push it, I was satisfied.

I was completely content with getting one $250 ladder for $99.

I wasn't greedy, I didn't contact the Consumerist, I didn't call a lawyer ...


Great story, even greater bargain!

/I paid $210 for mine
//best ladder I ever owned
 
2013-10-05 06:47:16 AM

shanrick: Doesn't anyone proofreed ads anymore before they go too print?


No, they do not. Same goes for direct mailers. Or magnetic signs for cars. "now offering delivery"got a few eyerolls from me at my boss from me. He is Indian, and has been on the country for 30 years now , but he trusts idiots and vendors to proofread. Thankfully, he has me listed as an admin to our soon to be launched website , so I can do damage control. Sadly, that will cut down on my facebook game time, but... cie la vie
 
2013-10-05 06:47:32 AM
This woman is a biatch plain and simple. You already got a GREAT deal at $2.97. This is already a thousand off your project - I usually get luck to save nickle and dime on stuff and I practically LIVE in home depot. I own rental property, I dream of these deals to get cabinets and flooring for cheap, however I usually get lucky to find a case of damaged hardwood every now and then for $20 a box down from $40-50. Occasionally I will find someone who had carpet cut up and didn't like it, and I get some commercial grade for $40-$100 where it should be $150-275.

This biatch is no different then when a bank accidently puts an extra zero to your deposit making you a millionaire, except some idiots are willing to spend the money because they feel they "are entitled". She's lucky Home Depot even honored the first few boxes, take your gain and walk.
 
2013-10-05 06:50:23 AM
I found a Toshiba Libretto at $149.99 online once upon a time. Clearly it was a database error, someone was off by a decimal place. I placed the order on a Saturday afternoon, crossed my fingers, and by lunch on Monday my account didn't even exist on that website. I can only guess I was one of many who caught this, since I wound up there via Nextag or whatever did that function in 2006.

I kept the print out for a while. I counted it as my version of a "fish that got away" story.
 
2013-10-05 06:50:42 AM
The stores are very quick to to correct a wrong price when something scans higher than it should and will find you and return your money, right? RIGHT?
Just like banks. "Oh, we overdrew your account in error? Fark you, pay us!" "Oh, we over credited your account in error? Fark you, pay us!"

/it's only an wrong when it benefits the customer
 
Displayed 50 of 214 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report