Nobody stole from them. If you go to a B&M store with a DVD that has a shelf tag of $15.00 and when the clerk rings it up the total comes to $1.50. Yuo hand him your CC and he runs it through for $1.50 and then gives you a receipt. Thats the end of the transaction. They can't go back and charge your card days later for the other $13.50.

What you have is the offer: DVD for $15.00. You accept offer of $15.00. You go up to the clerk who then makes a counter offer: DVD for $1.50. You accept counter offer and transfer both assets and complete the transaction.
Just because Amazon made a bad counteroffer that causes them to lose money does not constitute the other person is stealing.

Why is this simple truth so damn difficult for some people to understand?

Here's my draft email (not sent yet):

"I do not consent to any additional charges on these orders. I agreed to the prices that were shown multiple times during the checkout process, and in various emails/printed invoices.
According to your stated policy, "If an item's correct price is higher than our stated price, we will, at our discretion, either contact you for instructions before shipping or cancel your order and notify you of such cancellation."
That did not happen, the items were shipped, signaling your agreement to the transaction and I was charged the quoted prices.
Any additional charges on any completed transactions will be disputed with my credit card company.

Thank you for your attention."[/QUOTE]




That sounds polite and yet to the point, mind if I borrow a version to use for myself?

Here is the email response I got from Amazon:

And then it goes on to just copy and paste the email that they sent to all of us.

In their response back it does give the option to say yes or no, if this helped you any. What about hell no, lol

Reading a lot of these threads is really entertaining! I applaud Amazon for trying to recoup their losses. It should have been caught sooner, and the items never shipped, but if I had taken part of this, I would know that they were not giving away dvd sets for little to no cost. I'd just return them. People have come up with all sorts of scenarios to justify taking advantage of Amazon, most are pretty weak, but the bottom line is that Amazon will probably not be able to force you to return the DVD's.

I only placed one order, for Seasons 3 and 4 of Seinfeld. I opted for 2-day shipping, so I paid $7.47 shipping. I object to any attempts to force payment or the return because--as it's been said many times before--they should have cancelled the order prior to shipping. Plus, of course, I object to their shitty email after I received the items.

I also object to losing $7.47 in shipping if I choose to return the items unopened. The only way I will return is if they credit my account the initial shipping charge. The only way I will pay is if they subtract the shipping charge from the normal cost of the two sets ($35.49 - $7.47).

Will I continue to shop at Amazon? Yep, but only because I get Amazon and Border giftcards from Discover and other avenues. (In fact, I placed an order yesterday before receiving their email.) If not for the giftcards, I'd simply shop at DeepDiscount.

So what are they saying about the Region 99 listing? When I saw the linked "deal" last weekend they were all listed as such.

I'm sure none of you received discs with Region 99, did you?

Here's another reply from Amazon I just received...

They admit it's illegal and state they have not charged the extra amount.
What I don't understand is why they want my Credit Card info and contact information for the issuing bank.
I don't think they really know what they're dong...

Like I said, I wouldn't send anything back for at least two weeks or so. Let things sort out for a week or two, then go from there.

In this example... maybe because it causes a conflict with the moral values they know they're expected to have and would expect of others?

Just a guess.

Right now I don't plan on doing anything. I'm gonna wait and see how it plays out. But if they charge my credit card without my permission, I'll dispute the charge and file a complaint at the Better Business Bureau.

Since you choose to engage in a blatant and unwarranted personal attack, let me respond that I have been a trial lawyer for over twenty years, I have been lead counsel on well over 50 trials, I regularly serve as a judge pro tempore and I have taught contracts at a local university off and on over the years. Oh, and I went to a pretty swell local law school .

Given the nature of this forum, I chose to present my views in as simple a manner as possible. I can imagine that as a very recent law school graduate, it must be hard for you to not look with some disdain upon such a basic concept as unilateral mistake but I assure you that the concept continues to live and I have dealt with it in several, "real life" cases over the years.

Is it your position that the concept of "mistake of fact" has no bearing on this discussion? And if that is your position, how do the other legal concepts you rattled off (without explanation, interestingly) bear upon what we are discussing? Or is it easier to just take potshots at others without having to support your own viewpoint?

I offhandedly raised the issue of theft for illustrative purposes only, to point out that in certain places these actions could actually amount to theft, in an attempt to underline the moral component that I feel is at stake. I never said that anyone here was a criminal or had behaved in a criminal manner. I did not name any specific jurisdictions, U.S. or otherwise, because I could not recall any specific jurisdictions at the time and because naming a specific jurisdiction was irrelevant to the point I was trying to make (i.e. that other people could consider this conduct to be criminal). I was challenged to specify a jurisdiction and I named two rather large jurisdictions. I can also tell you that apparently California is not such a jurisdiction. I can't be bothered to research the remaining 49 states, unless perhaps you want to compensate me for my time?

By the way, one thing I DID take the trouble to research was your background and allow me to be one of the first to congratulate you on your admittance to the bar in 2006 . Now you can go out and rack up all that "real life" experience you seem to crave so much .

I readily concede the point that everyone, including myself, who took advantage of this pricing glitch is guilty of a certain degree of unethical behavior...but what Amazon is proposing as a solution to their own ineptitude is not only unethical, but by their own admission, illegal.

Gee, there's that unilateral mistake theory again. I seem to recall that someone on here mentioned something like that a few dozen messages up

I think this is the most reasonable approach to take, unless your conscience dictates otherwise. Because Amazon goofed, they have allowed the leverage to fall to the consumer because, after all, the consumer has the product. Amazon now has the burden of collecting their money or goods and if they went after anyone, it would be those who purchased many, many sets. They almost certainly cannot re-charge your credit card unless you specifically authorize it. Doesn't mean they can't try other methods, if they so desire.

Bottom line: I entered into a legally binding contract with Amazon.com. I've lived up to my end of the agreement 100%. It is Amazon who is in violation of their own standards and practices, thus breaching our contract...which is illegal.

Reading all these threads... I hope Amazon figures out a way to charge the correct price for their items based on the deal. Can't wait to see the guys who placed 200+ orders get DONGED.

It would be easier to read if people who did not place orders would quit posting useless comments that have to be sorted through by those of us who have a financial interest in the situation.

And quit posting that fucking smilie of that bastard eating popcorn.

Rather than clutter with another post, I'll respond to the person below me by simply stating the obvious: Thanks for being an ass. I appreciate it.

lolololol would you like some "butter" on that?

Got your DVDs for nuthin and now you want the advice for free?

Since I did place an order, I'll keep posting useless comments, thank you.

Out of curiosity, what are Amazon's legitimate options? I'm assuming collection agencies and small claims court (or regular court)?

So, I got my response from CS, and instead of taking back the $36.49 credit they gave me, they tossed another $10 on top of it for my troubles, which leads me to believe that they might be intending to charge me and hope that I don't mind since I'm getting store credit for the same amount. This is a rock and a hard place -- I would have preferred them taking the credit back. I still won't authorize the charge (only because it's a precedent I don't want amazon to be setting on my account), but I'll feel like kind of a heel accepting the price glitch AND an extra $45...

I'm just gonna hold off and let amazon play the next card. I want to see if they do in fact try to charge me without receiving my approval.

-Toilet Dcuk

The range of the CSR responses we're getting is pretty remarkable. My exchange: