Taking Red Letter Days to court....

meer53

How many people, given this as a gift, would believe that it was open ended and never expired ? If the OP wants to take it to court then fine, it's beyond me why they want to do it though.

Azari

meer53 wrote: »

How many people, given this as a gift, would believe that it was open ended and never expired ?

LOL. "Never" is a long time.

I think it would be reasonable to expect such a voucher to last for a year.

Checking Boots and M&S vouchers, neither have any expiry date.

If the OP wants to take it to court then fine, it's beyond me why they want to do it though.

Probably because they want to get some money back.

That, together with the fact that the last time someone threatened to take them to court (according to the link posted earlier) they caved in, which would suggest that they are not nearly as sure of their ground as some of the people here.

Shashwoo

IMO this is just a case of, opps I've forgotten about this let me see if I can still claim on it.... oh dear seems I can't... Oh well lets take them to court because I forgot about a voucher that clearly had a expire date on it.

Just leave it and let the lesson be learned to check for expiry dates from now on.

You wouldn't find an old highstreet voucher with an expo date of 3 years ago and try to use it?

If you wish to take them to court good luck but in my eyes you will lose as the judge will side with them and class you as being unreasonable.

Not being awful here just giving my opinion.

pendulum

Without offering to top up any extra cost they have incurred I'd say you had no chance.
You've offered to compensate them for any losses they have incurred by you redeeming the voucher late... that makes it interesting!
Looking forward to the result. I'm 50/50 as it's up to a judge and could go either way.

magenta22

I have both purchased and received experience day vouchers - admittedly from a different company but they must all be roughly the same.

It's quite clear on the voucher when you have to book by and in the additional paperwork with it advises you to book well in advance and again how long your voucher is valid for. So to expect them to do it 11 months after the validation date - they are quite within their rights to say you have to purchase another one.

Fundamental_2

Mind if I interject/raise a question?

I find the issue of placing expiry dates on all vouchers disingenuous and can see no reason why an expiry date should be used at all.

Other than to benefit financially from lapsed/expired vouchers, would anyone care to offer a reason why companies use an expiry date?

Cheers

FDM

Azari

Fundamental wrote: »

Mind if I interject/raise a question?

I find the issue of placing expiry dates on all vouchers disingenuous and can see no reason why an expiry date should be used at all.

Other than to benefit financially from lapsed/expired vouchers, would anyone care to offer a reason why companies use an expiry date?

Cheers

FDM

Because they can.

pendulum

Fundamental wrote: »

I find the issue of placing expiry dates on all vouchers disingenuous and can see no reason why an expiry date should be used at all.

It is necessary to have expiry dates, as inflation and other factors mean a voucher is worth less as time goes on. A service or offer may also only be available for a limited time. I don't think expiry dates come under "Unfair Contract" terms - as they protect the seller and buyer as they not only impose a time limit on the buyer, they also give the buyer a timeframe in which they know they can redeem the voucher for its full value. In this case the time limit was 9 months, which is quite a fair and reasonable amount of time.

Is having an expiry date (of 9 months) an unfair contract term? Almost certainly not.

Is it unfair for the company to refuse the voucher holder's offer to compensate them for any extra costs they have incurred as a result of redeeming the voucher after the expiry date? That is the interesting bit IMO.

Fundamental_2

pendulum wrote: »

It is necessary to have expiry dates, as inflation and other factors mean a voucher is worth less as time goes on. A service or offer may also only be available for a limited time. I don't think expiry dates come under "Unfair Contract" terms - as they protect the seller and buyer as they not only impose a time limit on the buyer, they also give the buyer a timeframe in which they know they can redeem the voucher for its full value. In this case the time limit was 9 months, which is quite a fair and reasonable amount of time.

Is having an expiry date (of 9 months) an unfair contract term? Almost certainly not.

Is it unfair for the company to refuse the voucher holder's offer to compensate them for any extra costs they have incurred as a result of redeeming the voucher after the expiry date? That is the interesting bit IMO.

I am not sure I agree that it is 'necessary'. It may be 'beneficial' for the retailer in that inflation may eat into their profit margin; I am not sure what 'other factors' you refer to but we must also factor into the equation the huge amount of monies the retailer will have 'on deposit' in the form of unspent vouchers. These monies can be utilised/saved/invested which can also then produce further profit.

However, I can not see that the use of expiry dates is equally 'necessary' for, of confers any equal benefit on, the consumer.

It is this 'balancing' of rights and responsibilities that the judge will consider.

Cheers

FDM

Alpine_Star

trevorhackett wrote: »

The point from here (and this is where the court's judgement comes to play) is whether the RLD Ts & Cs coupled with their refusal to accept an additional payment to reflect any reasonable loss from late registration is fair.

This is where you're wrong.

Under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts regulations the court will only be concerned with the fairness of the terms within the contract and will not consider the fairness of any unilateral attempt by you to make a payment that falls outside of the terms of the contract.