Technology changes real fast nowadays, with one direct impact being that whatever you buy will soon have an updated version available soon, and which will cause the version you have with you being no longer the hot new version available in the market. Invariably, soon after your purchase, you will find that what you purchased has been surpassed with more features, and the version you hold does not cost as much as you would have liked. One example of that was when I had gone for a 3 month visit to the US, and purchased a camera for around $560. By the time it was time for me to come back, that same camera was costing around $505, which was a big pain since I felt that I had lost something.
Stores can get affected, since the stock of devices that they hold would become cheaper when a new version would become available, and there would be pressure to clear the stock. However, for a customer, this does not matter, since he / she would want to pay the price as per the version that they are buying, and if the price of an older version is now cheaper, they should only have to pay the lower price.
So what happens when the store or some salesman inside the store tries to cheat a customer, by promising that the version sold to the customer is the latest version and charging the current price for that item, and then the customer finding out later that the product that they bought was not the latest version, but an older version ? The customer would feel cheated and would try and convince the store about what happened. Now if the store does not agree, then some customers walk away in disgust, while others exercise their right to file a consumer complaint and ensure that they are provided what they paid for (as should all of us, you should never shirk from exercising your rights). This is even more problematic since this was for a store selling an Apple product, an iPod (link to article):
The North District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum held that iWorld, a premium reseller of Apple products, “practiced deception” by selling Ankit Singhal, a medical student, a second generation iPod by “representing” it as third generation and directed it to refund the cost of the gadget.
“When the customer demanded third generation iPod, it was duty of the seller to sell only third-generation iPod. In the present case complainant (Ankit Singhal) was sold a second-generation iPod representing it to be a third-generation which is in the nature of deception practiced upon a customer just to sell inferior iPod.”
Ankit Singhal, a student of Maulana Azad Medical College, had alleged that he had asked for a third-generation iPod but the iWorld had sold him a second-generation product instead.
He had said the invoice given by the store showed the iPod as third-generation, but later when he had checked its details on the Apple website he found it to be second generation.
And the store even refused to attend the case, not sending somebody on its behalf to try and present its case.