samhexum Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 A typo on Cartier's website that incorrectly priced a pair of gold-and-diamond earrings ended up being a costly mistake for the luxury jewelry retailer. A consumer in Mexico said in a post on social media platform X that he was idly browsing Instagram when he came across the shockingly low-priced pair of earrings. Typically 237,000 pesos, or more than $13,000, the jewelry was listed for sale for 237 pesos, or about $13, the New York Times reported. It appears Cartier omitted three zeros, sheerly by mistake. When Rogelio Villarreal, a Mexican doctor, saw the low price, he broke out in a cold sweat, he said in the post. Upon clicking to purchase the earrings, Villarreal unwittingly kicked off a monthslong dispute with the luxury retailer that even drew interest from public figures. Initially, Cartier tried to cancel the order altogether and compensate Villarreal with a bottle of champagne and leather accessory to apologize for the inconvenience it had caused, according to reporting from Agence France Presse. But Villarreal deemed the offer unsatisfactory, and instead raised the case with Mexico's federal consumer protection agency. Villareal told the New York Times that Cartier had informed him it had fulfilled his order. "War is over. Cartier is complying," he said in an April 22 post. pubic_assistance and liubit 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+ sync Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 I wonder whose ass at Cartier's went into the wringer for that one. samhexum and pubic_assistance 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samhexum Posted April 30 Author Share Posted April 30 8 minutes ago, sync said: I wonder whose ass at Cartier's went into the wringer for that one. But wouldn't you have ordered 20 pairs... you know, as stocking stuffers? He's a doctor; he can afford $260. And he'd be the #1 secret santa in the world! + sync, BSR, liubit and 1 other 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex93108 Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 (edited) 1 hour ago, samhexum said: A typo on Cartier's website that incorrectly priced a pair of gold-and-diamond earrings ended up being a costly mistake for the luxury jewelry retailer. A consumer in Mexico said in a post on social media platform X that he was idly browsing Instagram when he came across the shockingly low-priced pair of earrings. Typically 237,000 pesos, or more than $13,000, the jewelry was listed for sale for 237 pesos, or about $13, the New York Times reported. It appears Cartier omitted three zeros, sheerly by mistake. When Rogelio Villarreal, a Mexican doctor, saw the low price, he broke out in a cold sweat, he said in the post. Upon clicking to purchase the earrings, Villarreal unwittingly kicked off a monthslong dispute with the luxury retailer that even drew interest from public figures. Initially, Cartier tried to cancel the order altogether and compensate Villarreal with a bottle of champagne and leather accessory to apologize for the inconvenience it had caused, according to reporting from Agence France Presse. But Villarreal deemed the offer unsatisfactory, and instead raised the case with Mexico's federal consumer protection agency. Villareal told the New York Times that Cartier had informed him it had fulfilled his order. "War is over. Cartier is complying," he said in an April 22 post. If there are lawyers on this forum, this is an open and shut case of a simple contract executed. The fault lies with Cartier for offering it for such a low price I do respect and admire Cartier for honoring the purchase Edited April 30 by Alex93108 samhexum, liubit and pubic_assistance 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+ nycman Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 1 hour ago, Alex93108 said: If there are lawyers on this forum, this is an open and shut case of a simple contract executed. The fault lies with Cartier for offering it for such a low price I do respect and admire Cartier for honoring the purchase I’m not a lawyer. I think the principle is that the purchaser knew (or should have known) that the offer was a typo / mistake, thus the "contract" isn’t enforceable. I believe Cartier would have gotten away (under US law, no clue about Mexico), with not fulfilling the order and simply refunding the $13. The PR aspect is another matter, and Cartier was smart to just write off the fuck up. Had he ordered 20 pair, I have no doubt Cartier would have fought harder (and had an even stronger case that the purchaser was attempting to exploit a clerical error). wsc and pubic_assistance 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samhexum Posted April 30 Author Share Posted April 30 18 minutes ago, nycman said: I’m not a lawyer. But you play one on TV, right? 21 minutes ago, nycman said: Had he ordered 20 pair, I have no doubt Cartier would have fought harder (and had an even stronger case that the purchaser was attempting to exploit a clerical error). CARPE DIEM! pubic_assistance 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex93108 Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 27 minutes ago, nycman said: I think the principle is that the purchaser knew (or should have known) that the offer was a typo / mistake, thus the "contract" isn’t enforceable. This is immaterial in much of the world which uses English / British common law, the US included. liubit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wsc Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 19 hours ago, nycman said: I’m not a lawyer. I think the principle is that the purchaser knew (or should have known) that the offer was a typo / mistake, thus the "contract" isn’t enforceable. I believe Cartier would have gotten away (under US law, no clue about Mexico), with not fulfilling the order and simply refunding the $13. The PR aspect is another matter, and Cartier was smart to just write off the fuck up. Had he ordered 20 pair, I have no doubt Cartier would have fought harder (and had an even stronger case that the purchaser was attempting to exploit a clerical error). I'm not so sure. If I pay the clerk with a ten-dollar bill but the clerk gives me change for a twenty, am I obligated (other than to not be an ass) to point out the mistake, or am I free to enjoy the small windfall? pubic_assistance 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloKyle Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) 3 hours ago, wsc said: If I pay the clerk with a ten-dollar bill but the clerk gives me change for a twenty, am I obligated (other than to not be an ass) to point out the mistake, or am I free to enjoy the small windfall? No you're not obligated. Human error is a fact of life for a business. One time recently my total seemed lower than I calculated in my head when I went grocery shopping. When I got home I saw on my receipt they never scanned the most expensive thing I was planning on buying. As far as the original post subject the doctor got lucky he seemed to eventually get the item from Cartier. A business is not required to sell an item for a price that is mistakenly posted. This article mentions online shopping is a little murky because a customer's credit card can get charged which many people seem to believe is the sealing of the deal. But online sites it says usually will have in the fine print that they can cancel an order if a pricing error is made. I would say unless the item is shipped out to you then the deal is not complete. Because for instance if they oversold an item and didn't have it anymore you'd be out of luck as well. As long as the money is promptly refunded in any cancellation situation they are off the hook. If a Company Is Advertising a Price Wrong, Are They Responsible for the Mistake? | Small Business - Chron.com SMALLBUSINESS.CHRON.COM A pricing error in an advertisement can be a nightmare for a small business. Pricing mistakes are never fun, but, unfortunately, they happen. The store isn't legally... Edited May 1 by BuffaloKyle wsc and samhexum 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+ nycman Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 6 hours ago, wsc said: I'm not so sure. If I pay the clerk with a ten-dollar bill but the clerk gives me change for a twenty, am I obligated (other than to not be an ass) to point out the mistake, or am I free to enjoy the small windfall? If the clerk figures it out, and can prove it while you are in the store, then yes I think you are obligated to return the money. Mistakes are not lottery tickets. Obviously, if they can’t prove it or if they never figure it out, well then it’s just your conscience we’re dealing with, not the law. But back to the original case: As @BuffaloKyle pointed out, a "contract" between the buyer and seller doesn’t exist until the goods are paid for. Most intelligent companies have a "terms of use" section on their online website that states a contract doesn’t exist until the goods are paid for and delivered. They also have a statement explicitly stating that they don’t have to honor any clerical mistakes. That doesn’t mean local jurisdictions (include Mexico), won’t have laws that say goods must be sold at their advertised price, even if it’s a mistake. And anyone who works in the international market knows laws and judges will favor the local party. Period. Also, if a company is routinely making "clerical errors", and pattern can be identified, there’s little doubt the judge will charge the seller with false advertising and rule in the purchasers favor. In the end, right or wrong, Cartier was smart to settle and lick their wounds. liubit and pubic_assistance 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloKyle Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 3 hours ago, nycman said: If the clerk figures it out, and can prove it while you are in the store, then yes I think you are obligated to return the money. In that case yes of course! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeezifonly Posted May 2 Share Posted May 2 The manufacture of the items probably doesn’t exceed $16.50 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samhexum Posted May 2 Author Share Posted May 2 1 hour ago, jeezifonly said: The manufacture of the items probably doesn’t exceed $16.50 yeah, but have you seen their gift boxes? liubit, jeezifonly, + sync and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CuriousByNature Posted May 3 Share Posted May 3 (edited) On 5/1/2024 at 4:06 PM, BuffaloKyle said: In that case yes of course! Last week I missed paying for a head of garlic in my grocery cart as I went through the check out. I didn't realize it until I saw it in the cart as I was loading the bags in the car. But yes, I went back in, stood in line again, and paid the 94 cents. The clerk was surprised, but you can't put a price on a clear conscience Edited May 3 by CuriousByNature BSR and + azdr0710 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now