Petrol rip-off at Caltex Braddon

oh you are completely right caf, i was just commenting on an above comment regarding shelf price.

In the petrol situation, i would ask to speak with the manager etc, and just kick up a huff until the price was corrected – common sense prevails…i hope.

Jonathon Reynolds said :

Have you noticed the current trend to put two prices on products: an “after cash back” price and a “you pay” price…

Unfortunately it seems to be a common practice across virtually all retailers and surely this must verge on deceptive advertising? I know there is a common practice of adding footnotes to prices and descriptions… but its getting worse.

This system came from the US, where they call them “rebates”. Yanks love official-sounding terms for things. So you buy your item and then claim a “rebate” through various tortuous procedures, all aimed at limiting how many people actually claim (and get) a portion of the price back.

They’ve costed it all out, and essentially it’s a great way of advertising a sale price, and moving more stock because of it, but limiting how many “rebates” you have to honour.

Many people won’t bother. Others will stuff it up somehow, lose their docket or throw away the packaging and not cut out the label/barcode/secret password etc, or fail to claim in the allotted 2.5 days, or fail to fill out sufficient bits of paper, and so “fail to qualify” for the rebate.

I refuse to participate in these. If a shop’s offering them, I might enquire if I can buy the item for the sale price, and if not, I tell them why I’m not buying. It’s a bad road for us to go down, it’s a rort.

The “invitation to treat” thing (Davo111’s last paragraph) is fine in most instances, but in the case of buying petrol it’s hardly a simple matter to put it back and walk away if you don’t like the price at the counter.

If a shop puts the wrong price tag on something, it doesn’t matter – you get it for that price. Why should petrol be different?

You get it for the price written on the shelf.
However – If (just like this large sign) you have been attracted to the store due to a catalog/sign etc then i have to honor the price… unless i make “attempts” to remove the sign/make corrections of the catalog, and put up “corrected notices” at the front of my store.

At the end of the day, when a shop sells items, you are offering to buy the items, they can still refuse to sell you the item. this occurs when people try and “adjust” my signs from $30 to $10 and think i won’t notice etc etc.

shenanigans said :

If a shop puts the wrong price tag on something, it doesn’t matter – you get it for that price. Why should petrol be different?

I’d say it was an honest stuff up on someone’s part at the servo in question.

When I was pumping fuel to get me through CIT back in the early 90s, it was pretty widely known that, if dropping the price, you do it on the bowser first, and if raising the price, you do it on the signs first. Can’t remember the exact specifics, but there’s a law somewhere or other that states the sign cannot be marked at a higher price than what is displayed at the bowser.

@Vic Bitterman:
Scanning code of practice is here: http://www.ara.com.au/138.html

and the ACCC has the following to say about Consumer Rights for Pricing: http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/11746/fromItemId/3667

Which leads on to a related “pricing” issue which gets up my nose (however more a national issue rather than a local one)

Have you noticed the current trend to put two prices on products: an “after cash back” price and a “you pay” price. Typically it occurs with the IT and Electronics retailers. Some examples (and note that these links will expire when these online catalogues go out of date) :

Harvey Norman: http://www.harveynorman.com.au/catalogue/viewcatalogue.html?cat=105059

Officeworks: http://catalogues.cataloguecentral.com.au/cc.asp?xml=officeworks.xml&iid=7086&did=6686835&VendorId=38&hash=5974bf0450ec0ce6af07f8d97a0a016a379610fc&src=ext

Dick Smith: http://catalogues.cataloguecentral.com.au/cc.asp?xml=dicksmith.xml&iid=7268&did=6686890&VendorId=17&hash=ba5eac94b657f51c24fb0e02f1af10353480b012

Myer: https://www.myerone.com.au/export/sites/default/myerone/content/catalogue/midseason_2008/index.html

Unfortunately it seems to be a common practice across virtually all retailers and surely this must verge on deceptive advertising? I know there is a common practice of adding footnotes to prices and descriptions… but its getting worse.

I agree with Gungahlin Al, good on yer.

However, shenanigans, you are plain old wrong with your assumption re the price tag. There is a voluntary code of practice with some supermarkets in which your food item if mislabeled you will get it for free. This does not extend to non food items, and even getting them for free may well be a gesture of goodwill if nothing else. Note, this code of practice is voluntary too.

Go and Google ‘Invitation to treat’. That will give you the background on price labelling. In essence, doesn’t mean that a particular item with a price tag means you will get it for that price, assuming the retailer is making an honest mistake.

If a shop puts the wrong price tag on something, it doesn’t matter – you get it for that price. Why should petrol be different?

All I’m saying is I’m not that convinced that it was some conniving move to separate you from your cash through deception. I think it’s more likely that someone forgot to change the sign.

And that JD is called “marginal net worth”, which was part of the point of my article.
Getting sick of certain Canberra businesses loading up the margins, plus doing unscrupulous things like this place did, just because the town has a high average wage.

Cut him some slack M6? I did – I asked nicely first.