We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Potential debt collection? Please help!
Comments
-
I think you're arguing over extremely irrelevant points. If the voucher actually did state "voucher must be presented at the time you arrive at the premises and before your eye test" (which it doesn't), then all the retailer could actually do would be to refuse the free eye test. But what they have actually done is to try impose terms that don't exist by insisting on a minimum purchase amount and they can't do that. They haven't refused the free eye test, but they've told her she must spend at least £69. Not allowed.0
-
Hermione_Granger wrote: »That's how I would also interpret it.
If Specsavers gave me an appointment card, it would state "Time of test" or "time of appointment" and it would then show a time.
The voucher stated "Present voucher at time of test" so I see nothing wrong in them requiring that the voucher be given to them at the time the test was due to start.
The offer voucher should not be open to interpretation, it should be unabiguous and clear, and this is not. All they needed to do was put the minimum frame spend on the voucher.0 -
I think you're arguing over extremely irrelevant points.
Not irrelevant in the slightest.
All I was doing is responding directly to a point that you brought up.
If you didn't want people to respond, why bring it up?
Do you only now feel it is irrelevant because what I posted in reply to your comment of
means that as a specific time was mentioned then what you posted earlier must be wrong?Unless a specific time of when the person arrives on the premises is specified, then it's irrelevant what it means to each person0 -
I think you're arguing over extremely irrelevant points. If the voucher actually did state "voucher must be presented at the time you arrive at the premises and before your eye test" (which it doesn't), then all the retailer could actually do would be to refuse the free eye test. But what they have actually done is to try impose terms that don't exist by insisting on a minimum purchase amount and they can't do that.
Are you saying the 'terms don't exist' because they're not printed on the voucher even though they are in the voucher T&C's? (taking pinkshoes' word for that as I've not checked that out)0 -
The terms DO exist. They are quite clear*.I think you're arguing over extremely irrelevant points. If the voucher actually did state "voucher must be presented at the time you arrive at the premises and before your eye test" (which it doesn't), then all the retailer could actually do would be to refuse the free eye test. But what they have actually done is to try impose terms that don't exist by insisting on a minimum purchase amount and they can't do that. They haven't refused the free eye test, but they've told her she must spend at least £69. Not allowed.
*ETA I have assumed that OP's voucher is the same as the one which she linked to and which has terms as below:
"Valid for one test on or before the date shown. Present voucher at time of test. Cannot be exchanged for cash, used with other vouchers or eye-health clinic appointments or redeemed by customers already entitled to a free NHS-funded eye test. One per person, at Specsavers stores listed below."0 -
Hermione_Granger wrote: »Not irrelevant in the slightest.
All I was doing is responding directly to a point that you brought up.
If you didn't want people to respond, why bring it up?
Do you only now feel it is irrelevant because what I posted in reply to your comment of
means that as a specific time was mentioned then what you posted earlier must be wrong?
Who said I don't want people to respond? You're arguing over an interpretation and it's irrelevant. I stand by what I've said. "Present at time of test" is not a stipulation that it must be presented immediately upon arrival prior to the test or at any other time, other than when the user goes to have the test.0 -
Are you saying the 'terms don't exist' because they're not printed on the voucher even though they are in the voucher T&C's? (taking pinkshoes' word for that as I've not checked that out)
They're not in the voucher ts and cs - I've checked it out and it's not anywhere on the website and OP said nothing in store said so either.0 -
Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »The terms DO exist. They are quite clear*.
*ETA I have assumed that OP's voucher is the same as the one which has terms as below:
"Valid for one test on or before the date shown. Present voucher at time of test. Cannot be exchanged for cash, used with other vouchers or eye-health clinic appointments or redeemed by customers already entitled to a free NHS-funded eye test. One per person, at Specsavers stores listed below."
Right, no mention of a minimum spend or any specified time the voucher must be presented. As I stated, even if there WAS a specific time (before test, during test, after test, prior to purchase etc) they could only refuse the free eye test, they cannot impose terms that DON'T EXIST.0 -
-
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards