UK man says he spent nearly £2,500 on a gaming PC for his girlfriend, and she ended their three-year relationship the next day

A man in the United Kingdom has shared on Reddit that he spent close to £2,500 on a gaming PC as a birthday gift for his girlfriend of three years, only for her to end the relationship the very next day. The post, shared on the subreddit r/LegalAdviceUK, quickly drew thousands of responses from users offering both legal analysis and personal opinions on the situation.

The original poster, who said he is 21 years old, wrote that the breakup came as a complete shock to him. He said he later received screenshots from two mutual acquaintances in which his ex-girlfriend, who is reportedly 29 years old, allegedly admitted that she had been planning to end the relationship for months but deliberately held off until after she received the gift.

“I wouldn’t have wanted it back if the relationship had ended naturally,” the poster wrote in a comment on the thread. “It’s just the premeditated plan to get this one final item off me, which she’d been begging for, that really annoys me.”

Reddit users and legal commenters said about whether the PC can be taken back

In his original post, the man asked whether the circumstances gave him any legal grounds to reclaim the computer. He acknowledged that under UK law, a gift generally belongs to the recipient once it has been given, but said he would never have spent that amount of money on her had she not been his girlfriend at the time. Relationship conflicts playing out publicly online have become increasingly common, as seen in cases where a girlfriend embarrasses her boyfriend during a date and the story ends up going viral.

Several commenters confirmed his understanding of the law. One user cited the legal principle from Pitt v Holt, a 2011 Court of Appeal ruling, which established that gifts can only be reclaimed in cases involving a mistake of sufficient gravity. The commenter quoted from the related case Oglivie v Littleboy, which states that “a donor can only obtain back property which he has given away by showing that he was under some mistake of so serious a character as to render it unjust on the part of the donee to retain the property given to him.”

One commenter raised the possibility of a fraud claim under Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006, suggesting the ex-girlfriend may have made a false representation, appearing to be committed to the relationship, in order to obtain the gift. However, other users pushed back on this, with another commenter saying that the situation involved a personal relationship rather than a contract, which would complicate any such legal argument.

Another user suggested a more practical route through the UK’s Money Claim Online service. They recommended that the man write to his ex-girlfriend formally, stating that the gift was given under the understanding of a continuing relationship, and include the screenshots as evidence. The commenter said they had personally used the service twice and won both times, adding that even if the claim fails, forcing her to respond to a court process may itself prompt her to return the item or settle.

However, another user argued that the man likely has no legal grounds to pursue the matter, and that even if he did, the cost of legal action would probably exceed the value of the PC itself. “She’s a scu–ag, but legally you have no grounds,” they wrote. The original poster replied, “Yup. That’s what I thought.” Sudden exits from relationships have stunned people online before, such as the case of a boyfriend who vanished after texting “bye forever” at the airport.

One commenter offered a different perspective on the financial loss, writing: “Consider it a cancellation fee for getting someone this awful out of your life.” Another user suggested that the most effective option available may not be a legal one at all, writing, “She’s entitled to keep it. You’re entitled to tell her friends and family what kind of person she is.”

Another point raised in the comments was that, under UK consumer rights law, any warranty or purchase protection on the PC would be tied to the buyer, meaning the ex-girlfriend would need to return to the original poster if she ever needed to make a claim on the guarantee. The original poster did not indicate in his post whether he plans to pursue any legal or other action. He described the experience as “an expensive lesson.”