The company called me later that day and said it was a mistake. They offered to sell the lense at a very high price. Since the initial offer was $0.00 and the comfirmed price after entering in pay info still $0.00, are they liable to sell me the lense for $0.00. I have a receipt with a conformation number showing the details of the sale at $0.00.
Personal Injury Lawyer
Basic contract law would suggest that there was no consideration for the product. in other words, contracts very rarely exist for free goods since one party has not received anything in exchange. Without knowing exactly what happened it is difficult to say, but one could argue you would've been better off if the product was charged for a penny because you would be able to argue that both parties made an exchange (you=1 penny, camera company= the product).
This post is designed for general information only. The information presented should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.
Have you read every word of the website and terms and conditions of the sale? If not, you really don't need to go further until you do. Likely, that will address the issue. Otherwise, what are you going to do? It was a mistake on the website. Move on.
Personal Injury Lawyer
The UCC and local laws provide rules for contracts. There are several reasons why your claim would probably be denied: 1. Having paid nothing you have given no consideration , therefore the contract would fail. 2. Having asked nothing for the product, it could be viewed as a gift offer, which is generally unenforceable if the donor changes it's mind, unless you have tak steps after you received the offer in anticipation of receiving the gift, such as purchasing a new camera specifically for use with that lens. 3. The UCC defines and provides specific remedies for a unilateral mistake, such as the mistaken web offer. 4. Since you obviously knew the online price was a mistake, both the UCC and a court of equity will not permit you to benefit from your attempt to take advantage of the mistake by ordering/compelling the seller to specifically perform the purported contract and give you the lens. 5. Basic contract law requires a meeting of the minds, which was certainly not the case here since you thought one thing and the seller, albeit mistakenly, thought another thing. I could cite more reasons but I think you get the idea.
Disclaimer: This response is provided to you by attorney Robert G. Rothstein (404) 216-1422 for educational and informational purposes only.No attorney-client relationship has been created hereby. Other attorneys may have different opinions or responses. If you found this response helpful, please indicate Best Answer to Avvo. Thank you.
3 lawyers agree