[securingsincity]

Massachusetts has a quite prominent law against this.

"When buying groceries—food and non-alcoholic beverages, pet food or supplies, disposable paper or plastic products, soap, household cleaners, laundry products, or light bulbs—you must be charged the lowest displayed price, whether on the sticker, scanner, website, or app.

If the lowest price you saw for an item is $10 or less, and that lowest price is not what you were charged or not what appeared on the in-aisle price scanner, the first item should be FREE. If the lowest price you saw for an item is more than $10, and that lowest price is not what you were charged or not what appeared on the in-aisle price scanner, you should receive $10.00 off the first item."

https://www.mass.gov/info-details/consumer-pricing-accuracy-...

Not to say it's not happening in a Mass based Dollar Stores but you could be walking away with a lot of free stuff and it would be enough of a deterrent to stomp out the practice. I've had it happen at grocery stores usually at their suggesting.

[hippo22]

Unfortunately, this type of conflict can only be adjudicated by courts, which low-income people don't have the time and money for. You couldn't just walk out of the store with the items. You'd need to either:

1. Buy the items and sue.

2. Take the items without paying, likely get the police called on you, and defend yourself in criminal and civil court.

[jefftk]

3. Point at the sign, which is posted at every register, and ask for your discount. If they say no you ask for the manager. I've done this several times, and never had an issue (but sometimes it takes a little while).

[jkaplowitz]

Theoretically there is a third option, stay in the store near the cash register and call the police to come deal with it on the spot before the purchase. The problem is that they probably won't bother coming, and if they do, they won't come quickly enough to make it worth waiting for them given the amount of money at stake.

Edit: Yeah, I did say before the purchase, but I should have said after the purchase when they pay the legally correct price but the store accuses them of shoplifting and tries to detain them. And I know it's often infeasibly hard to pay the legally correct price from a logistical perspective without the cashier's cooperator, especially if you want to pay with a card. It is clearly possible to put at least the right amount of cash on the counter, ask for the change, and attempt to leave if they refuse, but that doesn't guarantee ever getting the change. Anyway, I did list this option as (purely) theoretical and not as actually practical.

[jimnotgym]

Just refuse the price and walk out, closing the checkout lane while they put everything back on the shelf. Announce loudly what you are doing. Take some friends to do it in other checkout lanes

[almostgotcaught]

this is a tort not a criminal act - cops wouldn't/couldn't do anything.

[jkaplowitz]

In a lot of places in the US, the lower of the shelf price and the scanner price is by law the most they can demand, at least for retail sales to consumers. Attempts to stop the customer from leaving after having paid the legally appropriate amount would be criminal acts by the store, no?

[dawnerd]

Have you seen the cops here though? Good luck trying to argue it when they’re loving you up for “shoplifting”. They’re going to side with the store.

[jkaplowitz]

I did call it a theoretical option and not a practical option. Although they might be a little more sympathetic to someone who is white, in a business suit, has a photo of the shelf price on their phone, can confirm that a surveillance camera captured them paying the shelf price, and is lucky enough to either get a cop who knows about the local price accuracy law or can point the cop to a visible posted sign about the law in the store.

[gruez]

Not to mention that cops only have powers to arrest/issue tickets, not to adjudicate disputes. This isn't Judge Dredd where cops can mete out judgements as they see fit. That's the whole reason why we have courts and judges.

[jkaplowitz]

It's not about adjudicating disputes in an arbitrary sense, it's about enforcing consumer protection laws about prices displayed and then charged at retail. Many places legislate that the lower of shelf or scanner price be the maximum price charged.

[gruez]

>It's not about adjudicating disputes in an arbitrary sense, it's about enforcing consumer protection laws about prices displayed and then charged at retail.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how the legal system works, at least for common law ones. When cops "enforce" the law, like arresting someone or towing a car, they're only allowed to do it because there's some immediate need. In the former case, it's because having a criminal roaming around the streets is a danger to society, and in the latter case because the car is blocking traffic and needs to be removed. In both cases you still need a judge to ruled that the person actually shoplifted or parked illegally. None of these factors apply in a dispute over pricing, and it's not the police's job to strongarm the shopkeeper to accept the lower-marked price. Indeed, in the two examples, there are often cases where no actions are taken at all, for instance issuing a summons instead of arresting someone, or issuing a ticket instead of towing a car.

[sejje]

Call the police to come deal with...mispriced items? That's not the job of police, sorry. Not in the US anyway.

[jkaplowitz]

Call the police to stop a store from criminally restraining the freedom of a customer to leave with their purchase after the customer pays the legally mandated maximum price which is often the lower of shelf and scanner price, yes. That's not going to be a high enforcement priority for the police, but it's absolutely a crime if the store does that.

[gruez]

>Call the police to stop a store from criminally restraining the freedom of a customer [...]

Realistically no store is going chase after the customer for that, but that doesn't mean the average shopper is going to risk arrest/banned (for what the store essentially sees as shoplifting) to send a $2 message over the price difference. And all of this assumes your novel legal theory is actually correct.

[jkaplowitz]

It's not a novel legal theory, But yeah, I did call it a theoretical option, not a practical one. I don't pretend that it's practical.

[LorenPechtel]

Call the cops to come deal with someone threatening to make a false police report about you.

[JumpCrisscross]

> this type of conflict can only be adjudicated by courts, which low-income people don't have the time and money for

Massachusetts has a strong consumer arm at its AGO [1] and consumer regulator [2].

The problem is less one of cost of litigation than education about available options. (And the time to pursue them.)

[1] https://www.mass.gov/how-to/file-a-consumer-complaint

[2] https://www.mass.gov/orgs/office-of-consumer-affairs-and-bus...

[michaelmrose]

If you walk out and it goes to court you will surely lose. You may have started with the right to get it for nothing but you cannot realize that right by force. Self-help is almost always illegal in any case of disagreement between parties.

[mynameismon]

Yeah, but someone living paycheck-to-paycheck and shopping at dollar stores is likely not someone who can afford filing a lawsuit.

[bombcar]

If it’s common enough it sounds like it could be some fun pastime for lawyers.

[mschuster91]

> Unfortunately, this type of conflict can only be adjudicated by courts, which low-income people don't have the time and money for.

Here in Europe, we have consumer protection agencies. Get wronged? Shoot them off an email and they'll take care of it. And overcharging at the cash register? That gets handled by the responsible authorities. Again, call them, tell them what happened and it can get real messy real fast.

[js2]

I was having trouble getting Verizon to unlock an iPhone that had been purchased (not financed) from Best Buy and that had been on Verizon's network for more than two years. Verizon support said only BB could unlock it[^1]. I thought that was poppycock. I filled out a form on the FCC's web site just before midnight. By 8 AM, the FCC had forwarded the complaint to Verizon. By 9 AM Verizon executive relations called me. 30 minutes later the phone was unlocked.

Which is all to say, for some things, the US also has consumer protection and it's great when it works.

[^1]: Apparently only Apple sells unlocked iPhones. iPhones purchased at other retailers carrier-lock themselves at activation. At least on Verizon they're supposed to automatically unlock after 60 days. When that doesn't happen, you get stuck in Verizon's mindless customer support swamp[^2,^3].

[^2]: https://old.reddit.com/r/Bestbuy/comments/17ae8l2/verizon_sa...

[^3]: https://old.reddit.com/r/Bestbuy/comments/1buemp5/why_is_it_...

[LorenPechtel]

Yeah, I've had a similar experience with a phone company trying to hold a number hostage. Yes, the bill was unpaid, but I was not the one liable. (My phone on a company account, the company was going under.) Letter to the regulators, very promptly fixed.

[raw_anon_1111]

I bet you didn’t try that this year when every single part of the federal government is actively trying to harm people.

[zdragnar]

We have such agencies over here as well. Most states have some sort of weights and measures agency that handles inaccurate price scanning complaints.

I can't say how effective they are at remediating small figure issues, but no company wants to hear from them regardless.

[venturecruelty]

We have those agencies as well. They've been steadily gutted since their inception, and the courts (well, the Court) don't care.

[zeroonetwothree]

You may be referring to the CFPB but states tend to have their own agencies that have nothing to do with SCOTUS or the federal government.

[venturecruelty]

And yet, here we are, with the terrible state of affairs for consumers.

[gnulinux]

You live in Massachusetts and speak from experience? Because this law seems to work quite well in MA as it's a particularly popular law.

[cormorant]

Not only that, but they post a sign about this at every register. (That must be required.) So you can point to the sign. I think a typical store manager would comply. Maybe I'm not cynical enough.

[phyzome]

Yup. My local Star Market was pretty bad about this, so I started paying close attention to prices on the shelf and at the register. Pretty soon I was taking home free items every shopping trip. (I also reported them to Inspectional Services when aisle scanners were broken or prices were particularly egregiously missing or wrong.)

Some of the cashiers had to have it explained to them with much pointing to the sign that hangs on every register; others knew the drill and called a manager over right away.

After about 6 months they started shaping up. Maybe the store manager got fed up, or maybe corporate stopped having them skimp on sticker hygiene.

From the article:

> In one court case in Ohio, Dollar General’s lawyers argued that “it is virtually impossible for a retailer to match shelf pricing and scanned pricing 100% of the time for all items. Perfection in this regard is neither plausible nor expected under the law.”

...but in my experience, they're perfectly capable of doing the right thing, given appropriate incentive and enforcement. In particular I noticed that this really varies from store to store, even in the same chain.

[cyberax]

> ...but in my experience, they're perfectly capable of doing the right thing

It's both true. Given that a typical store can have thousands of SKUs displayed, mistakes will _always_ happen once in a while. A forgotten price tag, an incorrect sale price, etc.

But at the same time, stores are more than capable of having a system to _fix_ these issues as soon as they are detected. It doesn't even take much, just a way for a cashier to flag an inconsistent price for someone at the back office.

[phyzome]

Exactly. A mistake here and there is fine. Dollar Store is clearly on another level.

[doctor_radium]

So this means I would get the app-only sale price, without using the app?

While doing some research into state retail pricing laws a few years ago, I discovered how tough Massachusetts is, being one of the last holdouts mandating ticketing on all items, and only relenting in exchange for price scanners every so many aisles. Living in Pennsylvania and annoyed by stores tying their best prices to their apps, I fancifully emailed Elizabeth Warren, asking if she'd prod a friend in state government to consider a legislative end run around apps. I had no idea such a law really existed. "First in the nation" I expect. Wonder how long it's been around?

[phil21]

Probably doesn’t apply for most app pricing, since those are typically advertised as “digital coupons” or the like in the fine print.

[kube-system]

I can’t help imagining that the likelihood of successfully arguing for a free product with a DG cashier is slim to none.

[veunes]

What's interesting is how uneven the landscape is across states