Current Conditions
Online Poll
Who will win the B-C-S National Championship?

Florida
Oklahoma


Stay Up to Date with WJHG.com














Saks Fifth Avenue Sues Customer Over Mis-Priced Jewelry Sale Save Email Print
Posted: 9:12 AM Nov 21, 2008
Last Updated: 9:12 AM Nov 21, 2008
Email Address: news@wjhg.com

A | A | A

Saks Fifth Avenue is suing a customer, over thousands of dollars worth of mis-priced jewelry.

Emily Pickering is being sued by the retail store after two clerks sold her diamond earrings and a diamond broach as a set for $28,000.

Turns out, the earrings and the broach weren't a set -- and should have been sold for $76,000.

The store's General Manager called Pickering, told her of the mistake, and asked her to either return the jewelry or pay up at a discounted price.

Court documents show Pickering refused.

Now Saks is suing her for the price of the broach and its lawyers' fees.

More Stories
Sansom Case Goes To Grand Jury

Bay County Death Row Inmate For 19 Years, Makes Another Appeal

Milton Historic District Fire

Some Panhandle Farmers Are Trying to Revive Satsuma Orange Industry

Laramore Charges Dropped

Local Bank Robber Is Former S.W. Georgia Mayor

New Revenue Sources

Carlie Brucia Murderer at Supreme Court

Post Your Comments
First Name:
Location:
Enter Comments: characters left
Email (optional):
Email will not be displayed on site. For station contact purpose only.
Read Comments
Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
Posted by: Jessica Location: PA on Dec 8, 2008 at 07:41 PM
Saks has no case here. I think in Business Law, this is called a solitcitation of offer. Price was put on the table as an offer, customer agrees to it, Saks accepts. Done deal. End of story.

Posted by: Miggity on Nov 24, 2008 at 01:47 PM
I think Saks should just have to eat their mistake. But, I remember learning in Business Law, something about the buyer would knowingly have to know it was the wrong price. If the buyer purchased the goods in good faith, or something, then they were not at fault. I'm not a lawyer and I don't remember the details. I think the buyer will win. I'd love to hear how this plays out though.

Posted by: Jessi Location: Youngstown on Nov 22, 2008 at 06:47 AM
The same thing happened to me with an item from a local store. The employee brought the wrong item out to my car. I questioned him about it and he told me it was right. The store manager called me 9 hours later saying they would press theft charges on me! I went back to the store the next day and the police were called. I was told that I had to pay the money so i asked to return the item. I was told that I could not return it because it hadbeen used already. I had to pay an additional $120.00 to keep from this store from trying to press charges. They didn't even offer me a discount. I don't shop there anymore.

Posted by: tom Location: panama city, fl on Nov 22, 2008 at 04:08 AM
this brings to mind two old sayings; "finders,keepers,losers,weepers" and "possession is 9/10ths of the law". emily "found" a bargain and she definitely has possession of that bargain. if she were to re-sale them, to a trusted friend or family member, for even one dollar, she would no longer be in possession of them and saks would be up that proverbial creek. take your lumps, saks!!!

Posted by: Mike Location: Michigan on Nov 21, 2008 at 07:08 PM
Saks better watch it. Maybe Emily can sue them! Wouldn't that be an ironic twist. They have no case. None! Customer was quoted a price and agreed to it - retailer accepted customer's money. End of story. No where for this to go.

Posted by: Sharon Location: Lynn Haven on Nov 21, 2008 at 03:12 PM
Wow. I would think that the clerk would be fired or somehow forced to make up the difference. I can't believe they're going to sue the customer. I can't wait to see what happens, either!

Posted by: Lyle Location: Chipley, FL on Nov 21, 2008 at 11:28 AM
It is not her fault. She paid what the clerk said she owed.

Posted by: Suzy Location: Michigan on Nov 21, 2008 at 11:01 AM
Um, do they really even have a case here? Can't wait to see how this unfolds.

Be a Citizen Journalist