Was I sold the correct printer?

I bought a Canon Pixma MP280 printer for £60 from PC World’s online store. It was advertised as having Bluetooth, Wifi, a card reader and an 8.8cm colour display.

When the printer arrived it had none of these. I complained to PC World and was offered a refund. I don’t feel that is correct. We ordered an item with all the points listed and the item received is nothing like the one advertised.
Gerry Billinghurst

We asked Mr Billinghurst to send us a copy of the advert because we couldn’t find any that showed the printer had these features. He replied saying the ad on the PC World site had been changed and now reflected the correct features.

But he also sent us what he said was the advert he responded to. This showed that the printer came with these features and appears to be a clear breach of the Sale of Goods Act.

But although Mr Billinghurst had been offered a full refund he was not happy with this. As far as he was concerned PC World had breached the contract and he wants a printer with the advanced feature.

We contacted Canon and it told us the printer that had those features was the MG8150, which costs £329. This is a massive price difference. But legally we wondered what his chances were of forcing PC World to provide him with this far more expensive printer.

We contacted Ralli Solicitors LLP for advice. Solicitor, Michael Forrester told us that revoking the contract under laws such as the Sale of Goods Act was by far the strongest claim Mr Billinghurst had.

“Basically, the position adopted by the company is technically correct in law,” he told us.

He said there was nothing to stop Mr Billinghurst asking PC World to provide the printer with the features specified as it is in breach of this part of the contract. But he said if PC World refused, a court may not rule against that decision because the retailer had offered a full refund.

He also said there was nothing to stop Mr Billinghurst going out and buying a printer with the specification originally contracted for, or as close as possible, at “a reasonable price”.

Mr Billinghurst could then make a claim for the difference in price. But Mr Forrester warned if PC World refused, and Mr Billinghurst took the case to the small claims court he may not win.

He should consider the implications if he lost the case. Legal costs after any hearing, which would be capped at £80 for cases involving amounts less than £5,000, would have to be paid by the losing party to the winner,” warned Mr Forrester.

We have informed PC World. In our view, the full refund is a reasonable way to conclude this dispute.

When goods don’t fit the bill
Wherever goods are bought they must ‘conform to contract’. Part of this means the goods must be ‘as described’. In this case the contract was breached because the printer clearly did not have the features advertised and described.

Usually the remedy is to revoke the contract and get a full refund. But as you can see above there may be other solutions, including a goodwill gesture from a retailer. But if considering legal action it is always best to get legal advice.

Case update
Mr Billinghurst contacted us and said PC World had now agreed to exchange the printer for an HP model. "This hasn't got the full spec as was originally advertised on the Canon.

But it's close," he told us. Mr Billinghurst also said that it would appear the SoG "isn't a lot of good" and that companies can "advertise whatever they like and accuracy is not important".

While the laws are by no means perfect, we disagree with this view. However, readers need to be more proactive about making complaints to the right authorities. We cannot file complaints with Trading Standards on their behalf. We can only advise you and attempt to resolve disputes with retailers and manufacturers.

But if you have a problem, make a point of contacting your local Trading Standards office so that at least it can be brought to their attention. It may not always help but it's a start.