WA Legal for Perth Racing to Round Off Prices?

Australia's #1 for Law
Join 150,000 Australians every month. Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!
FREE - Join Now

Coinausjohn

Member
2 April 2017
1
0
1
Perth Racing marks their Vegetarian Rolls at $8.55 but rounds this on their Register to $8.60 as they claim they do not supply Five Cent pieces. Is this continual practice legal under Australian Consumer Law?

How can I claim my numerous losses of Five Cents from Perth Racing?
 

Lance

Well-Known Member
31 October 2015
852
123
2,394
Hi,

This is misleading advertising under Australian consumer law. I mean seriously if they don't carry five cent pieces don't advertise in five cent increments, its just misleading. The Department of Commerce actually deal with this a lot. The following link will tell you who to contact. Rounding
 

Emge0708

Active Member
4 April 2017
9
1
34
Arguably the price of $8.55 would be considered an invitation to treat. When you go to the register, and it comes up at $8.60, it is then offer and acceptance takes place. But on the other hand, if they do it regularly it might be misleading. Price is extortionate either way.
 

Rob Legat - SBPL

Lawyer
LawConnect (LawTap) Verified
16 February 2017
2,452
514
2,894
Gold Coast, Queensland
lawtap.com
Emge0708: Not quite. Looking at it in pure contractual terms (without Lance's valid point, for example) the advertising of the price at $8.55 is an invitation to treat. However, asking to buy one without any other communication of price can be deemed an offer to purchase at $8.55. The seller then saying, "that will be $8.60" is actually a counter-offer. Acceptance only occurs if the buyer accepts that new price.
 

Emge0708

Active Member
4 April 2017
9
1
34
Hmm, my understanding is different, I thought the $8.60 would be a mere supply of information, the lowest price which the vendor would be willing to enter into a contract, and the buyer nearly always makes an offer in the retail sense. Similar to Harvey v Facey. Tomato Tomato really I think
 

Rob Legat - SBPL

Lawyer
LawConnect (LawTap) Verified
16 February 2017
2,452
514
2,894
Gold Coast, Queensland
lawtap.com
It is much of a muchness. I haven't studied contract law in about 20 years, so I'm going off my memory of the Carbolic Smoke Ball and Boots Cash Chemist-type reasoning.

In practical terms, the offer has to be put forward by someone. The buyer is unlikely to be offering to buy it 'at any price', notably because they're under the likely impression that it's on sale for $8.55 and because people realistically don't seek to buy something 'no matter what the price is' as a general rule (even though that price may feel like it).

The $8.60 is unknown to the buyer until it's communicated by the seller. In their mind, they think they're buying it for $8.55. By basic principles, it becomes a counter-offer.