Expired gift voucher - any chance of an extension?

HillStreetBlues

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

user1977 said:

HillStreetBlues said:

user1977 said:

Okell said:

user1977 said:

Okell said:

motorman99 said:

But registrars aren’t judges, and often see things differently…..

(I do wonder if gift vouchers etc that have an expiry date might be "unfair" under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  I'd be interested what argument sellers would put forward to show the term was fair)

They've got to expire at some point anyway under the normal laws of prescription for debts (5 or 6 years depending on the jurisdiction) - which is actually what some retailers explicitly do e.g. Tesco's gift cards expire 5 years after their last use.

They don't "have to expire" at all.  

I had some WH Smith vouchers that had no expiry date and were well over 6 years old*.

I redeemed them instore and even checked before doing so that they were still valid.  The shop assistant said that so long as they had no expiry date then they should be accepted and they were.

I think I've done the same with Boots vouchers too.

Yes, I'm not arguing that retailers are prohibited by anybody else from honouring old vouchers if they choose to do so, but they don't have a legal obligation to honour them until Doomsday.

It's the law of contract, it doesn't simply end because you want it too.

And the law of prescription applies to contracts...

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5

Yes it does but you're misunderstanding it.

Time limit for actions founded on simple contract.

An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued. 

If you have a gift voucher (that you bought) that has no expiry date and the retailer reject it, then you have 6 years from that date as that is when the cause of action accrued (the date of rejection).
It's not the start of the contract.

I was under the impression that indefinite contracts (with no exit clauses by the parties) are generally disfavoured by courts? It would be rather ridiculous to have a Harris’s voucher from 1850 and expect it to be still be valid, never mind that our currency has changed since then! 

Disfavoured doesn't mean disallowed.
If you feel something from 1850 would be ridiculous, how about transferable token from 1766, that must be mindblowing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-67194169

The Bristol Old Vic added: "If it is indeed authentic, we will honour our policy and provide free tickets to the owner."

Paid £50 and got a token, the gift card of it's day.

RefluentBeans said:

 

In any sense - most modern vouchers have an expiry date. People should really use them by that point, or ask for an extension before it expires. 

Better still get someone what they want, an gift card is normally a cop out.

Cloth_of_Gold

I shan't be taking them to court because it's just not worth the risk, or the time, for a £50 gift card. I might send them an email asking them to extend as I think 13 months, especially as it was issued during the pandemic, is pretty poor. Ultimately though, I haven't got a lot of spare time so don't want to put too much effort into it, especially as even if they agree I will almost certainly give the card to someone else to use. It's more the principle than anything else but sometimes you just have to let things go. 

unforeseen

In December 2021 someone bought us a £50 gift voucher as a Christmas present; it's for a well-known chain of brasseries. At that time covid was in full swing 

But Covid wasn't in 'full swing' in 2022. Things were quickly getting back to normal

user1977

HillStreetBlues said:

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

user1977 said:

HillStreetBlues said:

user1977 said:

Okell said:

user1977 said:

Okell said:

motorman99 said:

But registrars aren’t judges, and often see things differently…..

(I do wonder if gift vouchers etc that have an expiry date might be "unfair" under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  I'd be interested what argument sellers would put forward to show the term was fair)

They've got to expire at some point anyway under the normal laws of prescription for debts (5 or 6 years depending on the jurisdiction) - which is actually what some retailers explicitly do e.g. Tesco's gift cards expire 5 years after their last use.

They don't "have to expire" at all.  

I had some WH Smith vouchers that had no expiry date and were well over 6 years old*.

I redeemed them instore and even checked before doing so that they were still valid.  The shop assistant said that so long as they had no expiry date then they should be accepted and they were.

I think I've done the same with Boots vouchers too.

Yes, I'm not arguing that retailers are prohibited by anybody else from honouring old vouchers if they choose to do so, but they don't have a legal obligation to honour them until Doomsday.

It's the law of contract, it doesn't simply end because you want it too.

And the law of prescription applies to contracts...

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5

Yes it does but you're misunderstanding it.

Time limit for actions founded on simple contract.

An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued. 

If you have a gift voucher (that you bought) that has no expiry date and the retailer reject it, then you have 6 years from that date as that is when the cause of action accrued (the date of rejection).
It's not the start of the contract.

I was under the impression that indefinite contracts (with no exit clauses by the parties) are generally disfavoured by courts? It would be rather ridiculous to have a Harris’s voucher from 1850 and expect it to be still be valid, never mind that our currency has changed since then! 

Disfavoured doesn't mean disallowed.
If you feel something from 1850 would be ridiculous, how about transferable token from 1766, that must be mindblowing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-67194169

The Bristol Old Vic added: "If it is indeed authentic, we will honour our policy and provide free tickets to the owner."

Paid £50 and got a token, the gift card of it's day.

Nothing in that story suggests it's legally enforceable though, just that the Old Vic are happy to honour it.

Cloth_of_Gold

unforeseen said:

In December 2021 someone bought us a £50 gift voucher as a Christmas present; it's for a well-known chain of brasseries. At that time covid was in full swing 

But Covid wasn't in 'full swing' in 2022. Things were quickly getting back to normal

Things weren't back to normal for everyone I can assure you. Anyway, if I can find the time I will ask them to extend it until, say, the end of Feb, and if they do all well and good but if not, I'll just forget about it.

HillStreetBlues

user1977 said:

HillStreetBlues said:

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

user1977 said:

HillStreetBlues said:

user1977 said:

Okell said:

user1977 said:

Okell said:

motorman99 said:

But registrars aren’t judges, and often see things differently…..

(I do wonder if gift vouchers etc that have an expiry date might be "unfair" under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  I'd be interested what argument sellers would put forward to show the term was fair)

They've got to expire at some point anyway under the normal laws of prescription for debts (5 or 6 years depending on the jurisdiction) - which is actually what some retailers explicitly do e.g. Tesco's gift cards expire 5 years after their last use.

They don't "have to expire" at all.  

I had some WH Smith vouchers that had no expiry date and were well over 6 years old*.

I redeemed them instore and even checked before doing so that they were still valid.  The shop assistant said that so long as they had no expiry date then they should be accepted and they were.

I think I've done the same with Boots vouchers too.

Yes, I'm not arguing that retailers are prohibited by anybody else from honouring old vouchers if they choose to do so, but they don't have a legal obligation to honour them until Doomsday.

It's the law of contract, it doesn't simply end because you want it too.

And the law of prescription applies to contracts...

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5

Yes it does but you're misunderstanding it.

Time limit for actions founded on simple contract.

An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued. 

If you have a gift voucher (that you bought) that has no expiry date and the retailer reject it, then you have 6 years from that date as that is when the cause of action accrued (the date of rejection).
It's not the start of the contract.

I was under the impression that indefinite contracts (with no exit clauses by the parties) are generally disfavoured by courts? It would be rather ridiculous to have a Harris’s voucher from 1850 and expect it to be still be valid, never mind that our currency has changed since then! 

Disfavoured doesn't mean disallowed.
If you feel something from 1850 would be ridiculous, how about transferable token from 1766, that must be mindblowing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-67194169

The Bristol Old Vic added: "If it is indeed authentic, we will honour our policy and provide free tickets to the owner."

Paid £50 and got a token, the gift card of it's day.

Nothing in that story suggests it's legally enforceable though, just that the Old Vic are happy to honour it.

That is true, no way of knowing either way.
As you replied to another post, rather than my comment to yours I'm guessing you accept that you were wrong about how the law of prescription applies to contracts works (sometimes you have to guess as some are scared to admit to making them).

Exodi

It is a sad day to see promotion of the use of frivolous claims; exploiting the fact that many retailers will settle small claims as the cost to defend would be higher.

MSE should be ethical. If this is not explicitly covered by MSE forum rules, it should be.

@motorman99 If your defence was genuinely as you say ("[I] Said it was unconscionable that they could take money in this way and as the customer I get nothing in return, simply wrong that they can take money in this way"), I'd expect you would have got short shrift for wasting everyone's time. You're fortunate that the retailer could not be bothered to defend themselves, but don't warp this win in your head into something it wasn't. You did not win on the merit of your defence.

Hoenir

Exodi said:

It is a sad day to see promotion of the use of frivolous claims; exploiting the fact that many retailers will settle small claims as the cost to defend would be higher.

Easy enough to defend small claims. Retailer will simply quote their contractual terms. Onus then remains on the claimant to decide whether it's worth pursuing. Throwing £35 down the drain to file a claim needs to be considered. 

user1977

HillStreetBlues said:

user1977 said:

HillStreetBlues said:

RefluentBeans said:

HillStreetBlues said:

user1977 said:

HillStreetBlues said:

user1977 said:

Okell said:

user1977 said:

Okell said:

motorman99 said:

But registrars aren’t judges, and often see things differently…..

(I do wonder if gift vouchers etc that have an expiry date might be "unfair" under the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  I'd be interested what argument sellers would put forward to show the term was fair)

They've got to expire at some point anyway under the normal laws of prescription for debts (5 or 6 years depending on the jurisdiction) - which is actually what some retailers explicitly do e.g. Tesco's gift cards expire 5 years after their last use.

They don't "have to expire" at all.  

I had some WH Smith vouchers that had no expiry date and were well over 6 years old*.

I redeemed them instore and even checked before doing so that they were still valid.  The shop assistant said that so long as they had no expiry date then they should be accepted and they were.

I think I've done the same with Boots vouchers too.

Yes, I'm not arguing that retailers are prohibited by anybody else from honouring old vouchers if they choose to do so, but they don't have a legal obligation to honour them until Doomsday.

It's the law of contract, it doesn't simply end because you want it too.

And the law of prescription applies to contracts...

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/section/5

Yes it does but you're misunderstanding it.

Time limit for actions founded on simple contract.

An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued. 

If you have a gift voucher (that you bought) that has no expiry date and the retailer reject it, then you have 6 years from that date as that is when the cause of action accrued (the date of rejection).
It's not the start of the contract.

I was under the impression that indefinite contracts (with no exit clauses by the parties) are generally disfavoured by courts? It would be rather ridiculous to have a Harris’s voucher from 1850 and expect it to be still be valid, never mind that our currency has changed since then! 

Disfavoured doesn't mean disallowed.
If you feel something from 1850 would be ridiculous, how about transferable token from 1766, that must be mindblowing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-67194169

The Bristol Old Vic added: "If it is indeed authentic, we will honour our policy and provide free tickets to the owner."

Paid £50 and got a token, the gift card of it's day.

Nothing in that story suggests it's legally enforceable though, just that the Old Vic are happy to honour it.

That is true, no way of knowing either way.
As you replied to another post, rather than my comment to yours I'm guessing you accept that you were wrong about how the law of prescription applies to contracts works (sometimes you have to guess as some are scared to admit to making them).

Ah, no, the relevant date is surely when it could first be redeemed i.e. the date of purchase normally - or the clock restarts whenever it is re-acknowledged (hence the Tesco policy of running from the last use). Your interpretation would suggest that any contractual obligation could lie in abeyance for decades and then suddenly be enforced.

motorman99

Exodi said:

It is a sad day to see promotion of the use of frivolous claims; exploiting the fact that many retailers will settle small claims as the cost to defend would be higher.

MSE should be ethical. If this is not explicitly covered by MSE forum rules, it should be.

@motorman99 If your defence was genuinely as you say ("[I] Said it was unconscionable that they could take money in this way and as the customer I get nothing in return, simply wrong that they can take money in this way"), I'd expect you would have got short shrift for wasting everyone's time. You're fortunate that the retailer could not be bothered to defend themselves, but don't warp this win in your head into something it wasn't. You did not win on the merit of your defence.

Well that’s hard luck on you then. The op asked what they could do and I gave them an example of what I did. 

My defence was also that the small print saying about the expiry was so small as to be impossible to read. 

I never claimed to have won on a point of law. I won because they offered to settle. It’s quite clear. 

You say MSE should be ethical…..and I agree….as long as the companies that dish out these gift vouchers are ethical too, and they are not.
I’ll bet that for every £1000 of gift vouchers they sell, not much more than £900 ever gets spent in the shop. The rest expire, get lost etc.
THATS UNETHICAL.
Not what I did 
your high horse is that way >>>>>>>>>>