Elite 11+ shopping and chat thread part 3

pippo

bubbs wrote: »

Yes def you have you "worn" the shoes in?dont want them hurting Monday:(

Well spotted Bubbs - Tweets, wear the shoes around the house for over the weekend 'cos with all else you need to feel comfortable.

pippo

davemorton wrote: »

Your latin isnt as bad as you think

D

Failed 'o'level latin!! We had a teacher, 'Horace' who wore a gown, and whenever he came into the classroom it was H stand in the corner, 'R' stand with your nose on the ???? board, Pippo stand on your chair.............. Think that's where my fear of heights came from:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

pippo

curl_girl wrote: »

I always end up at customer services after using ss tills as I must be the only customer who manages to over charge themselves.

I bought a bottle of jd on ss in a box for a gift, noticed at home that it's still security tagged, it didn't set any alarms off going out of the store though.
Thank goodness I've noticed before gifting.......
Another return to S....

I hate ss tills. :mad:

Whilst ss tills may serve our [STRIKE]porpoises[/STRIKE]purposes from time to time I believe we should use manned tills to prevent further job losses.

pippo

davemorton wrote: »

One for TM thanks to Hukd
Peaky Blinder Irish Whiskey, rum or gin, £15.95 + Free Delivery Non Prime with code ************ on Amazon.

Is that an OK Gin? I'm very new to the delights of gin, despite my age!

pippo

OOps, the wine tonight may have cause me to speak too much!

davemorton

pippo wrote: »

Is that an OK Gin? I'm very new to the delights of gin, despite my age!

Sorry, no idea, but its a good price even for a crap gin. More of a gimmick but still a good price.

curl_girl

pippo wrote: »

Is that an OK Gin? I'm very new to the delights of gin, despite my age!

I remember visiting my great grandma when I was about 5, I thought the glass on the table was water, I was thirsty so drank it all in one go!
It was vile at the time but much more pleasant now.
Night all.

Savvybuyer

TrulyMadly wrote: »

My take on it....for what it's worth:D

Have T&C's been broken? If not how can it be fraud?

Or are we talking about what someone thinks is morally correct and where you draw your line.

This is where I get confused.

Let's take the train tickets for example. Do you draw your line at one ticket or 100 tickets? It what point are you ripping the pants out of the promotion?

If it's ok to do one, then it's probably ok to do 2 or 3. What about 7 or 17? Or 70.
And who is the person who decides whether it's ok to do 10 as it's a nice round number but not to do 11? Who gives that person the right to say what level is acceptable for someone else?

Is fraud still fraud even if it's just a teeny tiny bit?

What about returning clothes on the double up? What if something genuinely doesn't fit......are we saying you shouldn't return it?

Minefield.....but .............

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone I say.

It's not about whether something is morally correct, or morally incorrect, in theory, as, if something is legally fraud, it is fraud. It's not about morally correct, it's an objective test, as all ways of committing fraud require dishonesty and therefore most probably the Barlow Clowes test applies, which first makes an assessment as to what someone (subjectively) knew or believed about the facts and then whether the conduct was dishonest or not is assessed by "...the (objective) standards of ordinary decent people".

It is for a jury to decide whether something is dishonest. However, that's the theory. In practice, it could be said it depends on what the members of the jury think is morally correct. However, as the members of the jury are drawn randomly from society, it might be expected that, overall, their standards would be what was generally thought to be morally correct.

On the second highlighting, the answer is yes. However, there may be public interest reasons, if an amount was particularly small, why a prosecution would not be brought. However, the offence would technically still be committed (if it was fraud in the first place).

It is not a matter for personal opinion. The law says what is or is not fraud.

Afaik, no-one has ever expressed stated precisely what they believe to be fraud and nothing has told me anywhere that people were thinking about these train tickets. However, it seems to me that booking a journey in return for loyalty points that are offered is a perfectly valid and lawful contract. There is no false representation. There is no failure to disclose information because I do not see any legal duty to disclose information (I do not give legal advice) - I can't see where there is any requirement by law to disclose that you are merely booking and not intending to print the ticket or to travel. Which specific part of statute or common law requires people to do this? I can't see there is - besides, you are paying to book. Finally, there is no abuse of position. It seems none of the three ways that fraud can be committed under the Fraud Act 2006 therefore apply.

The offers are of certain number of points in return for making a booking on the operator's train. It is a perfectly valid offer, which may be accepted. In other words, a legal contract if someone chooses to do so. There is no requirement to make the journey to qualify for the points.

It is perfectly legitimate and legal to "rip the pants out of" promotions. I do not see that there is any provision of law that makes doing this illegal. Therefore it is perfectly fine to do regardless of what other people's moral views irrelevantly are. There are restrictions in promotions themselves that say when you don't qualify for the points. For example, first booking only. If they have given no limit or time period, then there is none. You are required to pay each time to make a booking, in return for what they have offered. If you qualify you can therefore do it as many times as you like and entirely unlimited - and you have to pay for a booking each time so that is sufficient detriment to us for contractual purposes. Indeed, it would be silly to make a booking and then not use the ticket if you didn't qualify for the points. If you do qualify, then that seems to me to be fine. I am perfectly happy to accept offers and make payments as part of conditions of a contract where they are offering me back something worth more than my own lawful and clearly sufficient consideration within the meaning of contract law.

pacifica9

Also, with tickets - as with many other offers - clearly the companies have provided a limited number of tickets with bonus points. Do they really care if many were bought by many or many were bought by few?

mhoc

an update on the impossible Christmas list.
We have found a gold cutlery set from Clas Olsen which is a 6 person set which has been agreed upon so thats a trip up to Liverpool unless I can find a free delivery code.

Then I think Eldest child thought she would test just how how elastic the Christmas budget was and she sent me a picture of Le Cruset mugs - at £10.50 EACH :eek:
They are not going on the Christmas wish list

Its a month away yet and I am dreading what else she is going to ask for next