Bike shop price increase after paying deposit

oknepop

Put a deposit on a bike a few months back for delivery in early 2022, to secure the model and size I wanted. Bike was 1650 euro. Have a price docket recording the price of the bike and deposit paid.

A while back before Xmas the shop called me to say that the bike is now 1899 as the manufacturer put prices up for 2022 deliveries.

Checked with the manufacturer, and the RRP has only gone up to 1700.

While I'm conscious that shops can charge whatever they want, other shops are listing this model for 1700.

I still want the bike, but not at almost 2 grand. Is there any solution to this?

At the end of the day, I assume the shop can refund me the deposit and tell me to jog on, and I can take my business elsewhere - disadvantage for me being that I'd have to wait a few months again for the bike I want to be delivered.

However I would've thought the purpose of a deposit is to secure goods for delivery at a certain time and at an agreed price?

TCPIP

You have a valid contract as denoted by the agreement made and provision of the deposit (consideration) so you can enforce that. The shop can either sell at the original price or try and return the deposit, in which case you can sue for specific performance of the contract. Most likely they'd try return it, you can then ask a solicitor to send a letter indicating your willingness to sue for this, they'll probably balk at the idea of having that happen and just sell the bike for the agreed price and whatever your solicitor charged.

Assuming the docket you have doesn't have any kind of qualifiers as to changes in MRSPs you should be good to peddle on.

Seth Brundle

Just checking, are there any extras with the bike shop price e.g. clip-in pedals (which normally wouldn't come as standard)?

Does the price docket mention that the final price might change?

standardg60

Yep as above if your docket says price, deposit paid and balance remaining they haven't a pedal to stand on, even more so if it says deposit is non-refundable.

If their supplier has reneged on a contract to supply the bike to them at a particular cost that is their problem and nothing to do with you.

oknepop

Thanks for the input. There are no extras with the bike at the 1650 quoted price (not even regular pedals mind you), and I got the quote off them for submission to my employer's cycle to work scheme admin. Nothing on the docket to say the price might change. Docket notes 1600 remaining balance. While it says nothing about the deposit being non refundable, their website does.

Good to know that the deposit and quote imply a contract, however I suppose the hard part would be enforcing it. While it sounds like I have a leg to stand on from a legal perspective, in practical terms I just want the bike when it's delivered to them and don't want the headache of having to use a solicitor, and I imagine the shop could drag this out too, even if they were to supply at the agreed price, or just say they can't get the bike in!

I'll talk to them first and see what they say, but it sounds like I can insist they deliver in line with the quote.

silver2020

Highly unlikely that the manufacturer changed prices for items already ordered, so shop likely to be trying it on.

Edit, should say "highly unlikely"

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Wow this is shady. Tbh if a shop tried this with me I'd be just insisting on my money back and order the bike straight from the manufacturer.

oknepop

To be honest I have no issue paying an extra 50 quid if the shop is being charged that extra increase in RRP by the manufacturer - I'm all for supporting local business and I've bought from this shop before, but I'm not sure where the extra 200 quid over the 1700 RRP is coming from, so I'm a bit put off and surprised by that. I know demand for bikes is high and there are lots of backlogs, but still.

Unfortunately I can't order from the manufacturer as they don't do direct to consumer, and I have to use the cycle to work scheme 3rd party admin's approved list of retailers to avail of the scheme in my job.

Seth Brundle

Just after re-reading your posts in the cycling forum on this - have you asked the bike shop why they are charging you €200 over the RRP and, if so, what did they say?

ED E

While I'm conscious that shops can charge whatever they want, other shops are listing this model for 1700.

Dont trust this. When the other shops last had stock will not indicate prices for bikes that may not land until June/July.

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118445751#Comment_118445751

I would be curious if they know the OP is buying on the BTW scheme so may not have as much freedom as a cash buyer to change where they get it.

oknepop

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118445841#Comment_118445841

Fair point, though the 1700 on other sites is the new RRP, which implies that they updated the prices recently.

Yeah the shop does know I'm going through cycle to work.

I haven't spoken to them since the call, but will investigate further. Worst case, I stick with the bike I have which is only 5 years old and wait till next year to get something newer from another shop. Would be a shame if it fell through however.

Strumms

You agreed a price with the shop, the retailer.

whatever goes on between the retailer and the manufacturer isn’t your problem…

id request my money back.

standardg60

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118446134#Comment_118446134

Why? That's exactly what the retailer would be happy to do.

Stick to your guns OP, if any retailer had the audacity to contact me unilaterally changing a legal contract i'd be going out of my way to have their guts for garters. Threaten them with legal action and they'll soon back down, they will have have enough eejits willing to pay the extra to cover their costs to rule you out.

The fact you're on the BTW scheme is the precise reason why they are extravagating the extra cost, if people think they're getting a good deal to begin with they are less likely to question an increase

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118446343#Comment_118446343

Do deposits have a legal standing? I have read on boards that the contract is not formed until the goods are dispatched/picked up by the buyer.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118447965#Comment_118447965

I would imagine the contract is formed. A deposit from a customer and a written record of deposit paid and balance to be paid, sounds like a contract to me

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118447965#Comment_118447965

"When you pay a deposit, you are entering into a contract with the trader. The contract can be made verbally or in writing. As parties to the contract, both you and the seller have certain legal rights and obligations. The terms of the contract are a matter between you and the trader."

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/consumer/shopping/deposits.html

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118448135#Comment_118448135

I did read that and see now that the contract is formed with the payment of a deposit, but both CA and CCPC sites seem to indicate that the most the op can expect is the return of the deposit if the shop are unable to fulfil their part of the contract.

Personally I would just get my money back and take my business elsewhere. Why would you tie yourself up for months trying to force the shop through the courts to fulfil the order, only potentially to be told that the return of deposit is all you are entitled to?

magicbastarder

it doesn't sound like they're not able to fulfil their side of the contract - it's that they're unwilling to fulfil it at the agreed price. IANAL, so i don't know how significant the difference is. they've explicitly made clear to the OP that they are able to get the bike, from what i've read.

but yeah, i'd be torn between wanting to go after the shop for sharp practice vs. having bought a bike there and having a sour relationship with them after, in case of after sales issues.

Seth Brundle

Before any legal discussion, I think the OP should first talk to the shop about the large difference in price between the current MRRP and what the shop are planning on charging the OP.

It may be the case that the person in the shop misread the rrp or similar. They may also back down on it when challenged.

I really don’t see what RRP has to do with anything. The shop is in no way bound by what the manufacturer recommends the item is sold for.

The solution to this would appear to be pretty simple, if the op knows it can be bought cheaper at another shop, get the deposit back and go buy the bike there.

This happens with cars all the time, it's a suck it up thing.

C3PO

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118449052#Comment_118449052

Yep - regular discussions in Motors about prices going up after deposit being paid. And this is with big main dealers so there must be a clause in the contract that allows for increased prices?

In USA car sales I've seen it called "throwing someone a low ball"

Good price to make people commit then "a problem, it was priced wrong"

Once committed people often pay. They have accepted it as now part of their lives

If i were op i would walk never support them again. Legally i would imagine it's a contract

I was in an electrical shop where a lady had bought x on the promise they would get her y. They were saying supplier can't get it not our fault.

Pretty mean and probably illegal

.

HerrKapitan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118451109#Comment_118451109

It is happening with new build houses also. Any increases of materials during the construction period will be added on at the end.

These days, you are agreeing to buy something you don't know the exact price of.

Tech_Head

I’d avoid the legal route, especially when you’ll most likely want to stick with them for a while for warranty issues and potentially servicing.

I’d walk if they are trying to get you to pay more than agreed and charging over and above the actual price increase.

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118453630#Comment_118453630

i suspect contracts for new house building have those clauses built in, the bike shop would appear not to have made the OP aware, or allowed for it in the paperwork, that the bike price could increase.

manonboard

OP. You are correct and they are screwing you over. You have a contract. The amount is not worth pursuing legally

From what i see the best course of action is:

1st, you fight your corner with the shop and tell them you are not ok with the price increase, that you have a contract and money has been exchanged. You expect them to fulfil their end of the agreement. The same as you cannot alter your money to be less than agreed contract. If they refuse, send them a letter yourself with the details, make the complaint in writing and threaten legal action within 7 days if they do not respond.

If they give in, you win, if they don't, get your deposit back and write them a nasty review detailing their bad practices. Give them 2 stars and make your review reasonable but highly unhappy with the bad tactics used.

Bad reviews hurt their business and they dont deserve customers with that tactic. Customers deserve to be treated fairly.

The Phantom Jipper

The juice obviously isn't worth the squeeze getting actual solicitors involved but could the threat and eventual use if necessary of the Small Claims Court be an option (€25 fee)? Might be a little petty but they're being fairly petty themselves trying to gouge an extra few hundred quid out of you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118455993#Comment_118455993

If they return the deposit, the op is not at a loss.

silver2020

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118453630#Comment_118453630

Only if it is written into the contract. Rare for houses, but normal for commercial buildings.

Normal for most things to have a condition about taxes changing.

The Phantom Jipper

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118456252#Comment_118456252

It was meant more as another card the OP could use, but would the Small Claims Court not be in a position to compel the seller to fulfill the terms before it got to returning the deposit?

In any event, the OP would be at a loss if they bought at the new price, or got the refund and had to pay another seller at a higher price simply because the original seller reneged on their agreement.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118456311#Comment_118456311

But the op hasn’t yet bought at a loss, and as far as I am aware, the SCC does not award redress above what the consumer has spent.

In reality, the shop will say they are unable to fulfil the contract due delays/unavailability/Covid/Brexit/ blah blah blah.

It is entirely possible that other shops are selling existing stock whereas the op’s shop is buying to order and costs of delivery are more expensive, particularly if it is coming from the UK. It’s not nice to find the cost is higher, and the shop should suck it up, but they may be struggling and not willing to provide it at the agreed price.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118456252#Comment_118456252

Yes, he is. The loss is the difference between (a) €1,650, the price for this bike under the contract he has with this bike shop, and (b) whatever he has to pay to buy the same bike from another shop. He will only avoid a loss if he can buy the bike elsewhere for €1,650 or less.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118459112#Comment_118459112

Of course you have more knowledge of this, but doesn’t the SCC limit awards to what the claimant is directly out of pocket rather than what they could be if they bought the item elsewhere for a higher price? If the deposit is returned, what is the op directly out of pocket?

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118459187#Comment_118459187

I'm not aware of that but, as I have no direct experience of the small claims procedure, this doesn't mean that it isn't the case. I'm approaching this on the basis that:

• the general principle in breach of contract cases is that the plaintiff should be put in the position he would have been in, had the contract been performed in accordance with its terms; and
• in this case, that means he should get the bike for an expenditure of €1,650; and
• that means that, if he has to buy the bike elsewhere for more than €1,650, the measure of damages is the difference between what he paid and €1,650; and
• I don't see anything in the District Court Rules or elsewhere to say that, under the small claims procedure, the usual rules for measuring damages don't apply.

But, as I say, I have no direct experience. There may be something in the Rules that I haven't spotted, or there may be some practice or practice direction that says that registrar's won't measure damages on that basis and, if you want that, you have to go to a court hearing.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118459239#Comment_118459239

I’m afraid I relied on this site, (last paragraph) and what has been posted in the CI forum by claimants who have experienced the SCC.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/courts_system/small_claims_court.html

GM228

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118459239#Comment_118459239

"that means that, if he has to buy the bike elsewhere for more than €1,650, the measure of damages is the difference between what he paid and €1,650"

You can only make a SCP claim against the vendor of any goods purchased, if the deposit is returned and items are bought elsewhere then there is no SCP claim against the original shop because there is no purchase of goods from them.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118459362#Comment_118459362

So if you have a consumer contract for the sale of goods, but the vendor breaches the contract by refusing to supply the goods for the contract price, you can't pursue damages using the small claims procedure?

Looks like a lacuna in the scheme, no?

GM228

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118459671#Comment_118459671

But by accepting the deposit back and going elsewhere is a clear indication both parties have accepted rescission.

Remember also that whilst breach of contract can and more often than not does play a part in SCP claims that breach of contract it is not a valid claim for the purposes of the SCP simpliciter, the cavaet for a SCP claim in relation to goods is that the claim relates to goods actually purchased from the vendor, not goods that you intend to purchase, there may have been an intention to purchase and a contractually agreed price as well as a good intention deposit paid at first, however in the scenario where you describe that the deposit is returned and the item bought elsewhere then no item has been purchased from the original vendor.

Now if you refuse to take back the deposit and intend to enforce the contract at the agreed price it may be a different matter, but, until final payment is actually made is the item considered actually purchased for the purposes of the SCP?

Peregrinus

I accept what you're saying. What I'm wondering is whether there is any way that you could position yourself so that you could proceed using the SCP.

If you accept the return of the deposit then, yes, the contract is rescinded. What if you decline the return of the deposit and instead tender the balance of the purchase price (which the vendor will, naturally, refuse). Whether or not you use the SCP, you can't go to the District Court to get an order compelling the vendor to complete the contract, so instead you sue him for damages for breach of contract, the damages being the difference between the contract price and what you actually had to pay to get the bike.

You can certainly sue him in the District Court; the only question is whether you can use the Small Claims Procedure, and this will be decided in the first instance by the Registrar, I imagine without hearing the defendant. You would seek to persaude the registrar that, when Ord. 53A talks about "any goods or services purchased" in the context of a claim in relation to a consumer contract, that actually means any goods or services to be purchased under the contract. But I wouldn't give much odds for your chances of success, particularly if the narrower interpretation, that it only refers to goods or services that have actually been purchased, is already the established practice.

So, yeah, I think you're right; I doubt that the SCP can be used here. But that's why I say there's a lacuna in the scheme; it seems to me that if you have a consumer contract for the sale of goods or services, and you have part-performance in the form of payment of some of the purchase price, and the vendor refuses to deliver the goods or services he has contracted to supply, that's the kind of thing the consumer ought to be able to pursue through a small claims procedure.

Does the fact that the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act allows for the vendor to repair, replace or REFUND in cases where there is a dispute with the consumer, have a bearing in this? By returning the deposit the shop is satisfying a redress option in full.

Seth Brundle

What if you decline the return of the deposit and instead tender the balance of the purchase price (which the vendor will, naturally, refuse).

I know that here you are discussing the SCP but in this particular thread the OP is using the BTW scheme so technically is the employer the customer, not the OP (although the employer paying the deposit muddies the water somewhat)?

Revenue seem to think it is the employer who then uses the bike as part of the employees payment: https://www.revenue.ie/en/jobs-and-pensions/taxation-of-employer-benefits/cycle-to-work-scheme.aspx

oknepop

As a brief update, I spoke with the shop and it turns out they ordered the wrong bike for me (priced at 1900).

The bike I wanted is still up 50 quid vs the original price docket price, and I suppose the main point of this thread was about price changes after a deposit had been paid. That being said, the bike I want, because it wasn't ordered, wont be available till next year so it could be argued that there's some resultant loss to me there. Anyway, I've more important things to worry about in life than being out 50 quid, so I've gone through another shop that can get the bike for me much sooner.

Original shop is returning my deposit.