Posted on 12/31/2012 6:58:08 AM PST by SmileRight
In a move that potentially may spark a class action lawsuit, Dick’s Sporting Goods is refusing to fill orders for guns that were paid for weeks ago.
Russell Kellner of Flower Mound, Texas said he and his wife bought three Troy Defense Carbine Semi-Automatic Rifles on Black Friday at a cost of $799 each, a $300 dollar discount.
“It was a heck of a deal,” said Kellner. They received two of them, but were then notified by Dick’s on Christmas Eve, that no more orders would be fulfilled...
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...
Cause you'll get sued for breach? And lose?
Best price I’ve found in the Tidewater area for new long guns. I don’t really see anything wrong with a corporation playing the pc game...it’s their business.
I think that is it’s business plan, preppy athletic place.
Actually, no. The value of the product skyrocketed between contract and completion. So even with the extra $100 (which is in the form of a gift card and therefore not transferable to be able to be spent at a merchant that fulfills their contracts) he wouldn't have enough to make him whole anyway.
The end result, is that he walked away with $100 more spending power than he went in with. You really can’t lose something that you never had, no matter how much you wanted it, or was promised.
Uh, no he didn't, assuming that what he wanted to purchase was still an AR. They inflated more than $100 between the time the store entered a CONTRACT and when they welched. So he HAS been damaged.
You really can’t lose something that you never had, no matter how much you wanted it, or was promised.
He "had it" in the legal sense, in the sense that he'd entered into a contract to purchase it. Are you saying if you negotiate a really good price on a car and you and the dealer sign a contract, it's kosher for the dealer to back out by refunding your money and giving you a Benjamin, just because he negotiated a deal that turned out to be bad for him? Obviously not. A deal's a deal.
Damaged, really? The only thing that happened was that he didn’t get a good deal on a purchase...that’s nothing more than arriving too late for a great black friday sale. Plus, he got a $100 gift certificate. How damaging is that?
You really don’t think the shooting in CT constitutes an extenuating circumstance for the management to make a decision like that over? It’s not like they just up and changed their mind over a whim.
He didn't "arrive late". The weren't out of stock. The store entered a contract, then welched. Beyond that, and what I've already said, I'm done explaining on this issue.
You really don’t think the shooting in CT constitutes an extenuating circumstance for the management to make a decision like that over? It’s not like they just up and changed their mind over a whim.No, I "really don't" think that's an extenuating circumstance. Not even 1% of one. The events in CT are irrelevant, once a contract has been inked. Changed their mind on a whim is exactly what they did. Good day.
The result is the same...he wanted/expected a good deal but didn’t get it. I can’t see how this is very damaging.
‘Beyond that, and what I’ve already said, I’m done explaining on this issue’ me too, bye and...keep thinking?
The result is the same...he wanted/expected a good deal but didn’t get it. I can’t see how this is very damaging.
‘Beyond that, and what I’ve already said, I’m done explaining on this issue’ me too, bye and...keep thinking?
You really don’t think the shooting in CT constitutes an extenuating circumstance for the management to make a decision like that over?
no way see force mejure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force_majeure
They announced a week before Christmas that they were suspending sales because of the shooting.
I believe a private company has every right to do what they did and what they think is proper, and if it goes to court, so be it. I’m sure they are prepared for this.
It’s called loss of the “benefit of the bargain.”
And any politically motivated action not based on the personal relationship that interferes with a contract entered into (an offer and an acceptance) is whimsical. It was not a good reason.
There was a bus accident in Oregon. It killed nine. Should all bus salesmen now revoke all of their contracts to sell buses like the one in the accident? What is the connection between the two?
What is the connection between sad events in any part of the world and the contract between a retailer and its customer?
There isn’t one.
Sue them for the loss of the benefit of the bargain, or preferably, for specific performance to compel the transfer of title as they agreed.
I went there for some workout clothes and one outfit would have cost me over $100- pants, tank and a jogbra. Went to TJMaxx, got almost 2 outfits by the same manufacturers for less than half.
Their name will forever be a verb, linked to what they did for honest Americans.
You are right - and wrong.
They completed the SALE of the weapons; they violated their duty to perform the CONTRACTED delivery of the purchase.
Not usually a supporter of lawsuits, but this one is righteous, and Dick's should be socked for full price plus fees plus treble damages. Make their liberal politics expensive!
I had an FFL in the mid-1990’s. I was told by an ATF agent during a “random” inspection that I could refuse to sell a firearm to anyone “for any reason or no reason.”
It’s called fraud,
You sell something, take someones money then reneg?
soooo much for dick’s sporting goods.
Haven’t been back in the Sports Authority since they pulled the same kind of crap.
Hell with em.
OK Dick, then give me my money back for the guns I paid you for and you now refuse to deliver. Better be quick, as Lawyers are lining up right now to handle my case against you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.