GHL On Sale - BRS

[JohnnyKnuckles]

So did anyone actually get confirmation that these were purchased successfully?

Randy and Ryan were driving around hand delivering them to people who ordered local today. Those guys are amazing. I’m putting statues of them next to the Virgin Mary in the garden.

 

[FishyFishFish]

Randy and Ryan were driving around hand delivering them to people who ordered local today. Those guys are amazing. I’m putting statues of them next to the Virgin Mary in the garden.

They were also giving out non-expiring $10 promo codes, without MAP restrictions, at the same time.

 

[JNalley]

 

[Acros]

So did anyone actually get confirmation that these were purchased successfully?

I got the confirmation email. Status - in picking

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

The disclaimer is there - they can cancel the sales!

Minnesota law that i pulled off Westlaw. I am not offering legal advice, just restating a couple court of appeals decisions talking about the law in this type of circumstance in general:

Generally, if goods are advertised for sale at a certain price, it is not an offer and no contract is formed; such an advertisement is merely an invitation to bargain rather than an offer. 1 Samuel Williston, A Treatise on the Law of Contracts § 4:7 (4th ed. 1990); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 26 (1981). The test of whether a binding obligation may originate in advertisements addressed to the general public is “whether the facts show that some performance was promised in positive terms in return for something requested.” Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc., 251 Minn. 188, 191, 86 N.W.2d 689, 691 (1957) (quoting 1 Samuel Williston, A Treatise on the Law of Contracts § 27) (3rd ed. 1957)).

Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Russell, 519 N.W.2d 460, 463 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994)

There are numerous authorities which hold that a particular advertisement in a newspaper or circular letter relating to a sale of articles may be construed by the court as constituting an offer, acceptance of which would complete a contract. J. E. Pinkham Lumber Co. v. C. W. Griffin & Co., 212 Ala. 341, 102 So. 689; Seymour v. Armstrong & Kassebaum, 62 Kan. 720, 64 P. 612; Payne v. Lautz Bros. & Co., City Ct., 166 N.Y.S. 844, affirmed, 168 N.Y.S. 369, affirmed, 185 App.Div. 904, 171 N.Y.S. 1094; Arnold v. Phillips, 1 Ohio Dec. Reprint 195, 3 West.Law J. 448; Oliver v. Henley, Tex.Civ.App., 21 S.W.2d 576; Annotation, 157 A.L.R. 744, 746.

The test of whether a binding obligation may originate in advertisements addressed to the general public is ‘whether the facts show that some performance was promised in positive terms in return for something requested.’ 1 Williston, Contracts (Rev. ed.) s 27.

The authorities above cited emphasize that, where the offer is clear, definite, and explicit, and leaves nothing open for negotiation, it constitutes an offer, acceptance of which will complete the contract. The most recent case on the subject Johnson v. Capital City Ford Co., La.App., 85 So.2d 75, in which the court pointed out that a newspaper advertisement relating to the purchase and sale of automobiles may constitute an offer, acceptance of which will consummate a contract and create an obligation in the offeror to perform according to the terms of the published offer.


Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc., 251 Minn. 188, 191–92, 86 N.W.2d 689, 691 (1957)

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

No apology needed, other vendors do sell it, but, they do not have the presence of BRS. I do wish @Premiumaq @premiumaquatics , and @SaltwaterAq would carry more though. I also wish that LFS's would carry GHL products. @Vinny@GHLUSA

Reefbum...

 

[MaddyP]

Minnesota law that i pulled off Westlaw. I am not offering legal advice, just restating a couple court of appeals decisions talking about the law in this type of circumstance in general:

Generally, if goods are advertised for sale at a certain price, it is not an offer and no contract is formed; such an advertisement is merely an invitation to bargain rather than an offer. 1 Samuel Williston, A Treatise on the Law of Contracts § 4:7 (4th ed. 1990); Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 26 (1981). The test of whether a binding obligation may originate in advertisements addressed to the general public is “whether the facts show that some performance was promised in positive terms in return for something requested.” Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc., 251 Minn. 188, 191, 86 N.W.2d 689, 691 (1957) (quoting 1 Samuel Williston, A Treatise on the Law of Contracts § 27) (3rd ed. 1957)).

Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Russell, 519 N.W.2d 460, 463 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994)

There are numerous authorities which hold that a particular advertisement in a newspaper or circular letter relating to a sale of articles may be construed by the court as constituting an offer, acceptance of which would complete a contract. J. E. Pinkham Lumber Co. v. C. W. Griffin & Co., 212 Ala. 341, 102 So. 689; Seymour v. Armstrong & Kassebaum, 62 Kan. 720, 64 P. 612; Payne v. Lautz Bros. & Co., City Ct., 166 N.Y.S. 844, affirmed, 168 N.Y.S. 369, affirmed, 185 App.Div. 904, 171 N.Y.S. 1094; Arnold v. Phillips, 1 Ohio Dec. Reprint 195, 3 West.Law J. 448; Oliver v. Henley, Tex.Civ.App., 21 S.W.2d 576; Annotation, 157 A.L.R. 744, 746.

The test of whether a binding obligation may originate in advertisements addressed to the general public is ‘whether the facts show that some performance was promised in positive terms in return for something requested.’ 1 Williston, Contracts (Rev. ed.) s 27.

The authorities above cited emphasize that, where the offer is clear, definite, and explicit, and leaves nothing open for negotiation, it constitutes an offer, acceptance of which will complete the contract. The most recent case on the subject Johnson v. Capital City Ford Co., La.App., 85 So.2d 75, in which the court pointed out that a newspaper advertisement relating to the purchase and sale of automobiles may constitute an offer, acceptance of which will consummate a contract and create an obligation in the offeror to perform according to the terms of the published offer.


Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc., 251 Minn. 188, 191–92, 86 N.W.2d 689, 691 (1957)

Would then a order confirmation or invoice constitute an agreement from BRS?

 

[JNalley]

Would then a order confirmation or invoice constitute an agreement from BRS?

I'm no lawyer, but what he's citing is mostly basic contract law (something you need to learn when becoming a Real Estate Agent).

In this instance, it sounds like according to Minnesota State Law:

The price advertised on the website was the contract offer
Completion of sale was the acceptance of the contract offer
This alone creates an obligation from BRS and binds the contract

Though, I could be misreading something.

Edit: The order confirmation/Invoice would be proof of the agreement

 

[spsick]

You guys are going off the deep end here.

It was a mistake with the website and I can’t see how anyone would be upset or expect them to do anything other than cancel the orders.

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

Would then a order confirmation or invoice constitute an agreement from BRS?

The best argument is if your credit card is charged, just shooting from the hip; once an offer is accepted with consideration, it's accepted, and becomes an enforceable contract. They took your money... Refunding the money would be a breach of the contract for failure to perform, technically.

The question (and note i am not taking the time to review the UCC or minnesota statutes, more caselaw etc.), may be if the language on the website created additional terms in the contract (which you arguable accepted as well when paying) that allows them to rescind or modify the contract to change the price or refund the money.

But, the more i think about, i doubt it. If BRS accepted your money--i am a lawyer and good one at that BUT THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE-- just me talking about a hypothetical situation, it seems to me if they accepted your money--they accepted your money. The time rescind the deal was before charging you...

That said, the law and internet issues like this lags and i have no reason to know any of this off hand. The UCC, a minnesota statute, or another case may address this issue more in depth.

 

[JNalley]

You guys are going off the deep end here.

It was a mistake with the website and I can’t see how anyone would be upset or expect them to do anything other than cancel the orders.

Oh, I wholly expect cancellation, I was just answering a question. It's definitely fun to speculate though.

Edit: On the off chance they don't cancel though, I'm going to be happy come Wednesday

 

[FishyFishFish]

You need to read the cases above before jumping to conclusions. I haven't read all of those cases but, of those that I have, none of them mentioned in the quote appear to relate to the price, but the terms of sale.

I still believe that there is absolutely no legal requirement that requires them to honor the price and they will just cancel the orders; this is pretty basic contract law IMO.

 

[ColoredRock]

Completion of sale

This whole thread is postulating and hyperbole.. anyone have money drawn from their account they used?

If you post a Frag for $20 when you meant to post it for $200 are you obligated at the $20 posted price. Ugh.

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

You guys are going off the deep end here.

It was a mistake with the website and I can’t see how anyone would be upset or expect them to do anything other than cancel the orders.

Regardless of the law, they may just cancel the orders and refund. That does not mean it's lawful... And most of you won't care.. For the amount at issue of a few GHL parts--a decent lawyer could get them to uphold the deal if the law is arguable here ( i don't know, i just quoted the first things that came up on a westlaw terms and connector search--and that is all good law according to westlaw) because them reaching out to a lawyer is expensive.

 

[JNalley]

This whole thread is postulating and hyperbole.. anyone have money drawn from their account they used?

If you post a Frag for $20 when you meant to post it for $200 are you obligated at the $20 posted price. Ugh.

yes, the money has been withdrawn from my account (as all things, it's sitting as a pending transaction and I no longer have access to that portion of my funds.

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

this is pretty basic contract law IMO.

Cite it.

 

[ColoredRock]

yes, the money has been withdrawn from my account (as all things, it's sitting as a pending transaction and I no longer have access to that portion of my funds.

good to know

 

[MaddyP]

yes, the money has been withdrawn from my account (as all things, it's sitting as a pending transaction and I no longer have access to that portion of my funds.

Same here.

 

[Coral Your World]

Regardless of the law, they may just cancel the orders and refund. That does not mean it's lawful... And most of you won't care.. For the amount at issue of a few GHL parts--a decent lawyer could get them to uphold the deal if the law is arguable here ( i don't know, i just quoted the first things that came up on a westlaw terms and connector search--and that is all good law according to westlaw) because them reaching out to a lawyer is expensive.

Don’t forget to bill your time for this case law research lol

 

[Mywifeisgunnakillme]

You need to read the cases above before jumping to conclusions. I haven't read all of those cases but, of those that I have, none of them mentioned in the quote appear to relate to the price, but the terms of sale.

the price is the most material term in this contract/sale.