Jane Norman: won't let me use my gift voucher without paying the same amount on top.

antrobus

arenaman wrote: »

This would not amount to Theft if a person had an honest belief that they were legally right regardless of whether they actually were or not (say by leaving the voucher and walking out with the equivalent of the goods).

If they knew they were legally wrong even though morally they objected this would amount to Theft.

In reality there's very little chance something like this would get to court.

The 'honest belief' defence has already been tried and tested in court. See R v Ghosh (1982). It didn't work. So I wouldn't be inclined to try it myself.

look4abargain

Well we got a cheque from the administrators, for 85p!

paddyrg

look4abargain wrote: »

Well we got a cheque from the administrators, for 85p!

Ouch! Thanks for letting us know :-)

Using it as 50% payment doesn't seem nearly so harsh by comparison!

RosiPossum

I was under the impression that shops could refuse sale to anyone? The price on the tag is the offer, then the person takes the item to the till and the store says 'I accept your offer of £x for yz' and the contract is made?

I'm not really up to speed on this stuff, but the information in the 'do shops have to sell at the advertised price' seems to suggest that.
So it sounds, legally, as though OP is taking items to the till and offering the tag price, and they say they will sell for the tag price in cash, but refuse payment in vouchers. They can refuse cheques, so I guess it's just another form of payment.

That being said, I'd be so mad if I was told what OP has been told. The fact the company is in administration explains the rules, but doesn't change OP feeling aggrieved.

I feel for you OP! It's no fun to be in this kind of situation.

RosiPossum

adouglasmhor wrote: »

I did not steal as the company had already received payment to the value of the goods I took and I informed them i was doing it and how I could be contacted so I suggest you stop making unfounded allegations based on your personal interpretation of the law. When a court of law decides to prove I stole or a similar case is prosecuted then you can make that comment, until then I suggest you haud yer' wheesht.

You're being a wee bit of a hypocrite here. Your interpretation of the law is contrary to a lot of people's in this thread. The law doesn't back you up in removing items from a shop after leaving a voucher you have been told will not be accepted.
As it happens, I agree that the shop has already received payment and should honour it. The moral law and legal law are different, which is unfortunate in this case.

wealdroam

RosiPossum wrote: »

You're being a wee bit of a hypocrite here.
<snip>

Did you notice that Adouglasmhor, made that post over two years ago?

look4abargain

paddyrg wrote: »

Ouch! Thanks for letting us know :-)

Using it as 50% payment doesn't seem nearly so harsh by comparison!

Well there wasn't anything my partner wanted at the time and it seemed silly to spend £30 on something she didn't want just to get another £30 worth of stuff she also didn't want.

Anyway the whole family is banned now from using gift vouchers and any that are won or bought by those that didn't know are used up immediately, never letting this happen again.

RosiPossum

wealdroam wrote: »

Did you notice that Adouglasmhor, made that post over two years ago?

Nope! *hides self*