Posted by Bazyle on 22/09/2021 13:15:44:
I think Trading Standards require the marked price to be honoured even if wrong …
Not my understanding at all, though lots of people believe it. For a contract to be binding there has to be an 'offer' and an 'acceptance' by both purchaser and seller. How would you feel about a legal obligation to honour offer prices if your house was accidentally advertised with a zero missing off the end?
When a customer offers to pay at the till, the store has no obligation to accept. Stores can and do turn away customers away who appear to be underage, drunk, mentally ill, or are not legally entitled to buy the item.
To avoid being accused of conning customers, many UK stores do honour mistaken asking prices. It's voluntary though – they don't want to upset customers! In Old Mart's case I'm sure BrianG is right: it's illegal in the UK to sell alcohol for less than the duty + VAT price.
Mistakes can cause tricky problems. On a Contract Law course years ago we were told about this example. A Scrap Dealer bought a large number of wooden Stirling submachine gun boxes at a Government Surplus auction. At his warehouse he discovered about 20% of the boxes contained brand-new submachine guns. These he offered to sell back to the government at market rate. Ended up in court. The scrappy's position was he'd bought the boxes legally at an auction, the contract was fulfilled, and he was therefore entitled to sell whatever the boxes contained. The Army said the scrappy couldn't own or sell sub-machine guns because he wasn't a licensed Arms Dealer: therefore he should give them back before they threw the book at him. Scrappy pointed out it was illegal for the government to sell the guns to him in the first place. A right mess! Unfortunately I was sent home due to illness and never found out how it ended, but due to a mistake both parties had broken the law expensively.
Ought to explain for the benefit of US friends that possession of just one automatic weapon in the UK is a serious matter. British subjects have no constitutional right to bear arms which makes it much harder for our nutters to organise mass-shootings. And taking a hard line on the private ownership of firearms hasn't undermined democracy.
Dave