The consumer bought a graphics card, but it soon became clear that the entire device is no longer being manufactured. The online store tried to cancel the transaction, but the buyer took the case to the Consumer Disputes Board.
There have been problems with the availability of graphics cards. Adobe Stock / AOP
In the August decision of the Consumer Disputes Board, the electronics store Proshop A/S was instructed to pay the man 260 euros for the case where he had bought a graphics card that never arrived.
In January, the man had ordered an MSI GeForce RTX 3080 Gaming Trio graphics card for 829 euros. Proshop canceled the order agreement a few days later, justifying the cancellation with the fact that the production of the graphics card had been stopped.
The buyer demanded from Proshop an equivalent MSI GeForce RTX 3080 Gaming Z Trio graphics card of a new model, EUR 1349, at the original order price or a price difference of EUR 520. The seller did not agree to this, but demanded that the person pay a higher price if he wanted the video card.
“The new model cannot be compared to the old one”
In its response, Proshop says that it was forced to delete the buyer’s order after the production was finished. The seller pointed out that the new model is not comparable to the old one because their parts are different. According to the seller, the new graphics card is, for example, “much stronger and more durable, which extends the service life of the card”.
In its reasoning, the Consumer Disputes Board refers to the Trade Act. According to the board, based on the cancellation of a confirmed order, the buyer is entitled to cover purchase or compensation for the price difference between the ordered product and the current price at the time of cancellation.
The Consumer Disputes Board considers that the consumer may be entitled to compensation when the exact same product is not available, but the fair price of the product can be reliably estimated based on a product that is similar to the ordered product.
– The board considers it clear that the products have only some minor differences. The board considers that they correspond to each other sufficiently so that an estimate of the fair value of the ordered product can be made. The control product is somewhat more developed than the ordered product. Therefore, when evaluating the fair price of a similar product, it cannot be assumed that it is the same as the fair price of the reference product, but rather it is something less than that, the solution says.
The board estimates the fair value of the corresponding product at the time of dismantling to be 260 euros more than the product according to the contract, which is half the price difference between the ordered and the reference product. For this reason, the Board recommends Proshop to pay 260 euros to the person concerned.
The scourge of online shopping
The Finnish Competition and Consumer Agency (KKV) said in a recent announcement that it had observed a common phenomenon where sellers cancel order contracts on illegal grounds, for example due to running out of products or incorrect stock balance.
KKV said that the problem applies especially to electronic and home appliance online stores. Based on the inspection, it was noticed that many online stores have a wrong understanding of their right to cancel an order, and the terms of delivery do not fully comply with the Consumer Protection Act.
For the sake of clarification, it must be underlined that the announcement is not directly related to the previously presented case.
KKV examined the contract conditions regarding delivery of 14 Finnish online stores in the fall of 2021. The audit found that the majority of the checked online stores used an illegal contract condition, according to which the seller can cancel the order placed by the consumer, for example, in a situation where the goods are sold out or the stock balance is incorrect.
– The seller must ensure that if the product is out of stock, it is also not possible to buy it. The order placed is a contract that binds both parties and it is unreasonable for the consumer if he cannot rely on it, the consumer representative Katri Väänänen said in the announcement.
KKV emphasizes that the online store cannot withdraw from the contract with a unilateral notice of cancellation. The contractual condition with which the online store limits its obligation to remain in the contract is generally unreasonable.
– Our aim is that these nasty practices that have become entrenched in the online store will only be a momentary phenomenon and sellers will notice that following the rules is also profitable in terms of their own reputation and business, says Väänänen.