Chang et al. v. First Colonial Savings Bank

In November 1985, Chia and Shin Chang (plaintiffs) saw a newspaper advertisement that had been placed by First Colonial Savings Bank (the bank) (defendant). The advertisement pertained to the purchase of savings certificates from the bank and accompanying receipt of “Great Gifts.” Under the heading “Plan B: 3 1/2 Year Investment,” the advertisement stated that a depositor could “[d]eposit $14,000 and receive two gifts: a Remington Shotgun and GE CB Radio, OR an RCA 20 [inch] Color-Trac TV, and $20,136.12 upon maturity in 3 1/2 years.” The advertisement provided additional details regarding the gifts and terms of deposit, including an interest rate of 8.75 percent. In reliance on the advertisement, the Changs deposited $14,000 with the bank in January 1986, received the promised television on the same day, and expected to receive $20,136.12 in three and one-half years’ time. The bank also gave the Changs a certificate of deposit. Years later, when the certificate of deposit matured, the bank informed the Changs that the advertisement had contained a typographical error and that a depositor actually would have had to deposit $15,000 to obtain $20,136.12. The bank paid the Changs $18,823.93 instead of the advertised amount. The Changs sued the bank to recover the difference of $1,312.19. The trial court found in favor of the Changs, but the intermediate appellate court reversed based on its conclusion that the advertisement was not an offer but an invitation to bargain or negotiate. The Virginia Supreme Court agreed to review the case.