Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Do you do it? Do you tell the person that gave them to you?


I've just had a lovely time in Bromley exchanging a whole lot of inappropriate (size/colour/wrong season/generally quite ugly) clothes that the kids grandparents gave us. Gift receipts were included, none of them would have been worn - most were quite summery styles that fitted the kids now but would have been too small next year, so no use at all. I got some lovely bits for each child instead which they will wear a lot, and only had to pay a few ??? over the value of my exchange.


My problem is that we are seeing their grandparents in half term, and I can guarantee I'll be asked whether they are wearing the clothes they gave us. Given I'm already far from being favourite daughter in law, do I politely say "yes, they're lovely, wear them all the time, but they're all in the wash", or admit I swapped the lot?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/26145-exchanging-unwanted-gifts/
Share on other sites

I'd go with 'they're in the wash' if you've swapped the lot, I reckon you can get away with admitting swapping one item 'I had to take it back as the hem unravelled, it didn't fit, etc' but I guess admitting you swapped everything is admitting you don't like their taste! It's a minefield with this stuff isn't it?!

Saying they're all in the wash might work once. However if you use that excuse time and again, then it just makes you look like you're not considerate enough to have their special clothes washed and presentable on the day. :(


If they took the time to choose clothes, I can understand why they'd like to see at least one original item on their grandkids.


Out of every 'batch' of gifts, always keep one original? Then make sure the kids are wearing it on the day! :)


Also, preempt inquiries with a direct approach. Have your kids make beautiful thank you cards, and place a little note in each saying 'Thank you for the lovely X, we've had to swap if for a Y which Toddler adores.' Or something to that end. Keep it short and sweet.


Don't offer a reason for the swap in your note. But if asked, I would be honest. Otherwise they'll never learn what it is that you want/need for the kids.


On the flip side, it was really thoughtful of them to include gift receipts. So they can't expect that everything would be a perfect fit. xx

I don't think it would be unreasonable to say that you exchanged them for more wintry styles. My inlaws are in Australia so I can get away with not dressing our daughter in the monstrosities they send over. Blue leather waistcoat for a newborn girl anyone?!


Unfortunately their taste isn't much better when it comes to buying for us. my BIL says that they have the knack of finding the worst item in the best shop! Same BIL on Christmas day had the guts to hand a present straight back to his father, saying that he'd never use it so he may as well give it to someone else. Not necessarily recommending that approach.

Blackpool great-nan [my nan-in-law], knew we were due a boy, but presented us with lemon yellow, baby blue and white knitwear from the days of yore. Blousey, ribbons, matching bonnets and pants...the works! We took pictures of our little man in them, emailed them and then bought her a Debbie Bliss pattern book and a load of nice wool as a thank you....because we know how dear wool is. No more dodgy knits.


The more pressing issue is that Blackpool has no baby shop. But it does have a good market and a lot of thrift shops. Some of the clothes we've had bought for us would have caught light from a match a mile away. Pure plastic. I haven't figured out what to do with these yet.

I feel a little sorry for your MIL, but reckon honesty is the best policy, or could just be the same next year, and the one after that!


A friend of mine has a truly hellish MIL who hand makes dresses for her granddaughter in OK styles but hideous, inappropriate fabrics, e.g. those neon acid smiley faces! This all started after my friend swapped some (pink, v v frilly) clothes. Extremely hard to challenge, although I couldn't remain quiet in my friend's shoes!

If they gave you the receipts, then, surely, it is fine to take the items back?

Some shops stock different things in different parts of London so it is entirely possible that the item you have now bought might not have been available to the kind giver. Maybe his/her taste will be totally reflected in what you have now bought, which would be a great result actually.

Echo Mrs Bigsy - first rule of unwanted clothes gifts, put on child and take photo for thank you card - job done.


If your relative or whoever has bought / made the item and genuinely thinks you will love it - don't say you've swapped it. They may try even harder next year and get it more wrong. Just be gracious and say it was lovely thank you very much and be glad your kids are young enough for you to get away with it. As they get older they actually love some of the hideous items that come their way and you as the parent have to grin and bear them wearing it - funny how many kids and grandparents tastes match up but not the parents.


Presents show that someone was thinking of you and we should enjoy that element rather than be cross the pressie is so wrong.


However, there are the gifts from those that do it out of begrudged duty or for some other 'odd' reason that have no thought behind them - do what you like with those.


Laugh and enjoy the dross, the kids soon grow up and it passes.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...