M&S honour mispriced Panasonic TV

Marks & Spencer

Our Len wrote about firms not honouring misprices earlier this week, but alas, a pricing blunder by Marks & Spencer is now being honoured after an online petition forced a few hands.

Basically, M&S were incorrectly selling a Panasonic 50 inch 3D plasma television for just £199.

The petition, called 'Marks & Spencer supply our tv's that we paid for' was set up by customers after M&S cancelled their orders saying the price was an error.

Of course, M&S tried to sneak out of it by refunding customers and throwing in an extra £25 as a goodwill gesture. Sadly, people wanted posh televisions and not a £25 voucher.

'We can confirm that there was a pricing error on the TV and after reviewing our position, we decided to honour original orders at the incorrect price. We have contacted all customers involved,' said a spokesperson for M&S.

And what a bargain some people have got! The TV had originally been priced at £1,099 and M&S had already discounted it to £699. It was due to offer a further £100 off as a special 'Offer of the day' promotion on 8th January. Alas, the retailer reduced the price to £199 instead of £599.

Now, the company have removed the Panasonic TV product page from its website altogether, replacing it with a 404 error page.


  • Nick
    ...and folk are still bitching about it. Not content with the TV for £200, they want moral victories aswell. Let it go for christ sake and watch some 3d porn or something
  • Kevin
    But then you have the people that took the £25 and ran, are they going to get the chance to get the tv anyway? Or is it going to be the people that moaned the loudest? I wonder if this leaves future misprices open to having to be fulfilled? Or indeed used as a case by someone who wanted to change the law.
  • Tom
    Stupid M&S left them self open for having to deliver future mis-prised products. I would have just said STFU to everyone.
  • Jazz
    Fair play to M&S. They weren't obliged to do it. A lot of companies wouldn't have even offered the £25 voucher.
  • The B.
    Right Len, what about this then: http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/nokia-800-lumia-sim-free-119-99-stock-was-449-99-argos-1123901 If they've taken the money then does it constitute contract? T&C's: http://www.argos.co.uk/static/StaticDisplay/includeName/TermsAndConditions.htm 2.2 The 'confirmation' stage sets out the final details of your order. Following this, we will send to you an order acknowledgement email detailing the products you have ordered. Please note that this email is not an order confirmation or order acceptance from Argos. 2.3 Acceptance of your order and the completion of the contract between you and us will take place on despatch to you of the products ordered unless we have notified you that we do not accept your order or you have cancelled it (please refer to Returns and refunds). Surely, if they've taken the money then the contract is formed?
  • A T.
    @ Kevin The law is clear. It was an 'invitation to treat' [offers] only. They did not have to do anything. It is about good customer service that they did this. But you are right, I see it all the time, it is often those that complain the loudest that get results (which is why I try not to reward those that complain the loudest with a result).
  • The m.
    I would not buy a TV on line for a quid. Since they would pass my details to Tv licensing and I would be robbed for the rest of my life!
  • The B.
    Is the site on the fritz again? My post from yesterday morning's gone walkies. I was asking about the Argos Nokia thing on HUKD.
  • Boris
    @The Real Bob It's on the fritz. I've had at least five posts go missing that were so funny and/or interesting that they would make you leak fluids from all of your bodily orifices. Honest.
  • kv
    "Of course, M&S tried to sneak out of it by refunding customers and throwing in an extra £25 as a goodwill gesture" firstly they didnt have to refund anything because they didnt take payment. secondly they werent "sneaking out" of anything, no contract had been formed, and the £25 was going above and beyond their legal obligations.
  • Very c.
    Well, M&S have gone back on their word and are now offering us an INFERIOR model (UT30). Yes, M&S are stating that Panasonic claim this is an equivalent model. THIS IS NOT TRUE as I (and others) have contacted Panasonic and they have confirmed that the UT30 is inferior to the ST30. I have been promised by M&S that I would receive the ST30. Later it changed to 'an equivalant model' as the ST30 was out of stock. I stated I would not accept an inferior model, not even a slightly inferior one. M&S' respons? No, we wouldn't do that, it will be of equal specification. You are now bullying us into accepting this inferior model, we need to decide by 5th of Feb! I haven't even been officially told any of this, my order is still showing as ST30, so if I didn't read HUK forums I'd still be expecting a ST30 even now. They've had my money for weeks now, but won't deliver my telly - despite all the promises. They were loving all the good press they got from this, now they have turned from HERO to ZERO in my opinion. SHAME ON YOU M&S! Anyone who feels similarly hacked off, please sign this petition: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/shame_on_marks_and_spencer/
  • kyserbill
    Shame on m&s not honouring their email they have yet again messed up what was a media win. Now the will have to own up to be liars.

What do you think?

Your comment