Does anyone know where I stand?

That's not quite the same analogy John. For a start you're talking about a vast difference in price, but most importantly Oggy queried the price for that item at the time of sale.

For your analogy to work, the retailer would be handing the Leica over, the customer would be saying "are you sure, your website says this is ten times as much as you've just charged me", and the retailer would say "Yes, I'm sure, yours for £400."

In that situation I would be much more inclined to think "more fool them". With only £130 in it, I'm afraid I don't sympathise with the retailer to a huge extent.

Dan

I'm only asking the question, not making a judgement...

Here's a new question - does it matter if it's £130 or £13,000?

And another - what if "the retailer" was in fact the New Assistant who got a bit muddled?

Discuss....

Then presumably they'd be the New Assistant at a different shop by the weekend

The buyer enters a contract of sale at the time of purchase with the supplier, never mind what the price of the goods are. As long as both parties agree the price at this time of sale and no fraudulent intent was made by either party, then the sale stands. Not withstanding faulty goods etc, which is a seperate issue. Not so sure with regards to descrition of receipt however, they could give you the run around there.
I would keep the goods and not pay anymore and make a claim from Pentax for the cash back, after all its not Pentax loss, they would have had to cough up any way.

The fact Oggy questions the price at the time of purchase should have made any potential "New assistant" seek advice. It is still the error of the shop.

If the price at the time of purchase was not questioned, with Oggy believing the price to be different, then its a different story.

I can see John's point but still think the shop has to stand the loss, what if Oggy had not wanted to pay any more than he did? regardless of the error Oggy is still entitled to a reciept that states what he bought for the price he paid.

Consider this:
Oggy does nothing and the camera fails in six months time, he returns it to the shop as per his consumer rights and they send it off for repair, when it comes back they have replaced it with a K200D Oggy hasn't got a leg to stand on cos' his reciept says thats what he bought!

Thanks for all the replies people

The main problem is that I cannot register the camera for what it is. There is the secondary point that the box and it's barcode do not reflect the camera I have.

Had they acted on my first attempt (or probably even my second attempt) to rectify the situation, I would probably have tried to come to a reasonable accomodation with them, But my feeling now is that I will give them the whole show back and go elsewhere.

There's a lot of talk about rights but there's hopefully more to a relationship between seller and buyer than whatever the consumer (and seller) rights are. It's a two way relationship.

Anyway, just out of interest I've pulled out a clause from a Conditions of Sale from a supplier catalogue and it says something like this: "Goods remain the property of the seller until paid for in full" so the actual legal situation could be anybody's guess.

If we have a lawyer in the house, perhaps they could clarify the situation?

Doesn't mean squat. Who's to say I looked at the catalogue before I ordered. Unless I am made to sign an agreement stating that I agree to the above then It's worthless.

Oggy, are you saying that you got a K20 in a K200 box?

No Gartmore - I got a K20 with 18-55 in a K20 + 16-45 box therefore the barcode will not be valid.

One question on the box barcodes - do you have to peel off the sticky label, or should there be a push-out rectangular panel in the box with it on?

They all strangely have the sticky label I think. I just cut out the whole barcodes from the boxes & sent those in.

Cheers RR

There is another analogy. One which many shops have signed at the checkout. "Please check your change / receipt before leaving the store as mistakes cannot be rectified later."

This is usually so a customer can't say they've been given change from, say £10 but they handed over £20.
But, to my mind it is the same here. The shop made the mistake, entered into a contract, even though you pointed the error out. They must bear responsibility.
Had you'd gone back a week or so later and said you'd been given the wrong change would you have got your money back...I think not.

I think my comment is made in the spirit of building a proper relationship with a dealer you trust. We all get on well with Chris at SRS, so would we help him out if he made a huge error in our favour?

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I'd like to think we'd be straight with him and that the trust built up worked both ways.