Supermarket responds after Reddit user’s warning about self-checkout overcharge — ‘Was annoyed that the total amount due on my supermarket purchase did not equate to the individual items I purchased.’::‘Was annoyed that the amount due on my Woolies purchase did not equate to the individual items I purchased.’

  • Schmidtster@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    116
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    11 months ago

    So it was resolved instore to their even better benefit, AND the person still went and posted a false story to shame and blame them?

    People are fucking weird.

    • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      79
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Even if it was a one-time glitch that was resolved in-store, it implies that the prices shown on-screen aren’t necessarily the same prices used internally to compute the total.

      That could merit a heads-up post for people to double-check their totals, though not the suggestion of anything more nefarious.

      • Schmidtster@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Things misscan all the time, they are using a hot topic to make an agenda.

        They could have spun it as a good story with the ending they got, but they choose to focus on a technical glitch that occurs with human cashiers as well.

        • Pheonixdown@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          27
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Nah, this wasn’t an issue with the scanner, it’s an issue with the core design of the software. For whatever reason, it uses different value fields when determining the price to display for an item and the price used in the total, that means this problem can occur for any number of items and the only way to detect it is to manually total the receipt. It’s a fundamental problem with the software and their pricing change control process and a good PSA, the negative headline draws better attention than the positive, which is that anyone could be charged incorrectly. That the store was able to fix it is also good to include, but it is an expected responsibility of the store to do so, not some positive spin.

        • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          How is this an mis-scan? Everything was scanned into the system, all recognized, all properly entered. The problem came with the display of that information. There was nothing wrong with the scan.

      • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Not major if it only impacts the price shown on the itemized price screen of clearance mangos in one store and the total price charged is correct.

  • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    “We’ve looked into this transaction and can confirm that the total of $17.90 was correct, however the mango price of 80 cents each that appeared on the screen was incorrect due to a technical error — they were on clearance for $1.90 each,” the Woolworths spokesperson told 7NEWS.com.au.

    “We understand why this customer was concerned and we apologise for the confusion caused. Our team resolved this with the customer in-store, providing the mangoes free of charge.

    Seems pretty straightforward and had a good resolution.

    • Corgana@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Seems pretty straightforward and had a good resolution.

      Well, except for when the Redditor went home and spread lies technically factual statements presented in a misleading manner and omitting key details with the apparent goal of damaging the reputation of the store despite being treated with kindness and fairness by the manager.

      • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Lies? What lies? They went home and said “I found this situation annoying.” How is that a lie?…

  • otp@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is just how it works in the US and Canada, though.

    $1.50 scanned.

    Your total is $1.65.

    Would you like to make a donation to a children’s charity?

    • $1
    • $2
    • $5
    • (other)

    Please select a tip percentage:

    • 18%
    • 20%
    • 25%
    • 100%
    • (other)
  • Oaksey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    The last 4 scanned items listed on screen but “5” items scanned. I’d dare say the fifth items that isn’t shown on screen accounts for the difference?

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      11 months ago

      According to the article the mangos were on sale for a higher price than what showed up on the screen, it totaled them correct but there was a mistake with it saying .80 cents per mango. They gave them the mangos for free apparently and apologized. Same thing would have happened whether or not it was a self checkout or a person, the item was entered incorrectly into the system.

      Always verify what you are buying.

  • DingoBilly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    What a garbage article. I assume this is a bit reporting, otherwise please don’t post crap like this from bad news sources.

  • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Tempest in a teapot.

    Did they call someone over when they saw the discrepancy? Because, you know, mistakes happen.

    I frequently have something not scan, or not come up right. There’s a button for help, there’s always someone right there anyway, hell, had a clerk walk up and help when he noticed I hit the wrong button. They pay attention.

    “I was annoyed”… That a system misreported something? If I was annoyed every time that happened I’d never not be annoyed.

    What’s with this sudden “self checkout rage bait” this week? Who’s pushing what agenda?

  • ZMonster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Got to give it to the Somali Pirates… That’s some next level marketing:

    “This appears to be an isolated incident at our MacArthur Metro store, involving the clearance price of a batch of our Calypso Mangoes.”