bad information meant missing concert

barsbybird

I recently went to a concert in London with 4 friends. A few days before, the ticket agency sent me an email saying the times of the gig had changed and the first band would be on at 7pm...and main act shortly after. Because of the change, we all decided to get the train to London instead of driving. When we turned up to the gig, we were told the main act wouldn't be on til half 11 - the last train for kent leaves london at midnight...we had a 20 min tube ride so missed the main act.

I complained to Seetickets who say they got their info from the promoters so are not responsible.

I disagree and want to take it further....any advice on who to complain to and who regulates ticket agencies?

Outpost

Well to be fair to the agency you bought the tickets off they were merely passing on the message they'd been given by the people actually running the concert. If they were given the information that the act you were going to see was on at a certain time then surely they passed on that information in good faith and I fail to see what more they could have done.

I can certainly see why this is annoying but hard to see how the ticket agency is at fault in my opinion.

Those unpredictable musicians eh?

pinkshoes

I disagree with Outpost.

If you have in writing that the first band would be at 7pm, and the main band "shortly afterwards", then I think it's right to complain, as 4.5 hours is not "shortly afterwards".

Your contract is with seetickets, so if they supplied this information, then they should take some responsibility. It's then up to them to pursue it with the venue.

dmg24

pinkshoes wrote: »

I disagree with Outpost.

If you have in writing that the first band would be at 7pm, and the main band "shortly afterwards", then I think it's right to complain, as 4.5 hours is not "shortly afterwards".

Your contract is with seetickets, so if they supplied this information, then they should take some responsibility. It's then up to them to pursue it with the venue.

See Tickets provided the tickets to the OP, and gave him the correct start time. They did not state what time the concert would finish. The OP could have asked for more specific information, but they did not. I fail to see grounds for complaint.

pinkshoes

dmg24 wrote: »

See Tickets provided the tickets to the OP, and gave him the correct start time. They did not state what time the concert would finish. The OP could have asked for more specific information, but they did not. I fail to see grounds for complaint.

So you would agree that "shortly" in terms of a concert would equate to 4.5 hours?

As a concert generally finishes around midnight, then it's very unusual to have a band start their set so late.

I've been to loads of concerts/gigs, and the latest a main act has ever been on stage was about 10.30pm, which was stated on the tickets.

Helix

The See Tickets terms and conditions also state:

Please note, however, it is the customer's responsibility to check whether the event is going ahead at the scheduled date, time and venue, and See cannot guarantee that they will inform the customer of any changes to the event date, time or venue.

dmg24

pinkshoes wrote: »

So you would agree that "shortly" in terms of a concert would equate to 4.5 hours?

As a concert generally finishes around midnight, then it's very unusual to have a band start their set so late.

I've been to loads of concerts/gigs, and the latest a main act has ever been on stage was about 10.30pm, which was stated on the tickets.

It is irrelevant - See Tickets are a ticket seller, they do not decide or make warranty as to what time the main act will be on or when the concert will finish. In the same respect, your own experience is not relevant. If the OP needed to know what time the main act was on or when the concert finished, they should have checked with the venue.

See Tickets have a contract to provide the buyer with a ticket, which will detail the start time of the event. As the start time changed, See Tickets notified the buyer to enable them to be there on time. At no point did that say that the concert would be over by a certain time. Hence, they have fulfilled their contractual obligations.

Hintza

pinkshoes wrote: »

So you would agree that "shortly" in terms of a concert would equate to 4.5 hours?

You need to go to South Africa and work around "now", "just now" and "now now" so on that basis "shortly" could mean the next day!

duchy

Perhaps if the concert was in Cape Town you might have a point-but it was in London-not the colonies It's all to do with context-if you tell your boss you will be back from lunch "shortly" and roll up 4.5 hours later would you expect that to be acceptable or to be given your P45 ?

See tickets DO have liability because they gave out the info-the T&Cs say "check" the OP did check. If See deem their sources to be unreliable then they should have told the OP to check with the venue direct. They chose to give out information which also gives them liability no matter what their T&C's say -Quite honestly a main act coming on stage at midnight is a little ridiculous as most people in London use public transport so such exceptional circumstances would qualify for a special mention unless the venue typically starts so late. (Obviously we don't know which venue it was)