Does Section 75 cover season ticket purchases

eddddy

Manxman_in_exile said:

I'm not sure I understand?  If the T&Cs say you are entitled to your money back then that's what they say - fine.  If the club goes bust as a result(which is what I think the OP is worried about) he can still definitely make a s75 claim if neccessary because the club is bust.

But in the example you gave (which, for the sake of argument let's say, is an unfair term and unenforcable) the OP will still have a s75 claim if the club goes bust irrespective of what the T&Cs say.

No - that's incorrect.

The club going bust does not automatically mean you have a valid s75 claim.

The club breaching the contract means you have a valid s75 claim.

But often, when a business goes bust, it results in them breaching contracts.,

.....Manxman_in_exile said:

I don't see how the OP would not have a claim if the club are in breach of contract because they've been expelled, never mind what the T&Cs say. 

You're fundamentally misunderstanding what a contract is.

In simple terms, the T&Cs are the contract.

So again in simple terms, the phrase "the club breaches the contract" means the same as "the club not doing what it says in the T&Cs"

So, if you prefer, you could say "You have a valid s75 claim if the club doesn't do what it says in the T&Cs"

Manxman_in_exile

Perhaps we are talking at cross purposes but I'm not suggesting that the OP has a valid s75 claim in the event that the club simply goes bust.  What I'm saying is that if the OP has a valid claim against the club, but the club goes bust, then they will have a s75 claim too.  I'm sorry if I didn't spell it out, but I thought it didn't need saying that there couldn't be a s75 claim unless there was some breach of contract by the club in the first place.

I'm probably being thick, but I'd be grateful if you could clarify your original point [see edit below] about an exclusion clause again?  "In simple terms, the T&Cs are the contract."  Agreed.  Now I'm making an assumption here, but I presume the overall effect of the T&Cs will be something like that in exchange for a sum of money from the OP the club will provide a seat at their home ground for the OP to spectate at certain football matches in certain competitions during the following season.  If the club is unable to participate in those competitions and matches and is unable to provide the agreed spectator experience to the OP because they have been expelled from the football league, that would seem to me to go to the heart of the contract and be a clear breach, notwithstanding that one of their T&Cs may attempt to restrict, limit or deny any liability on their part in such circumstances - which is what I understand you to be suggesting(?).  Surely a T&C can't exclude liability for a total breach of a contract even if both parties appear to have agreed to it (or rather that one party has very reluctantly had it imposed on them and they have in no real sense agreed to it)?

I'm not understanding whether you are saying that if the season ticket T&Cs contain such an exclusion as you suggest, then the club will not be in breach if they are expelled and play no football next season, and therefore there will be no s75 claim, or whether you are agreeing that the purported exclusion would be an unfair term and unenforcable, and therefore the club would be in breach and a s75 claim would be possible.

I think the OP simply wants to know whether if they pay for a season ticket by their credit card, and the club is expelled and so can't play next season, and goes bust, would they have a valid s75 claim against the card provider for a refund on the season ticket?  It seems to me that the club would obviously(?) be in breach in those circumstances, and a s75 claim could be made irrespective of any purported "exclusion" clauses in the T&Cs.

Maybe I had too late a night last night, but you obviously think I'm wrong?

[EDIT:  Just to clarify, this is what you posted that I'm querying:

Going back to the question about section 75... you need to read the season ticket terms and conditions - i.e. the contract - to see what happens about your season ticket, if the club gets expelled.

Section 75 makes the credit card company jointly liable for breach of contract (or misrepresentation). So if the club breaches the contract, you should be able to claim damages from the credit card company.

So for example, if the season ticket contract / t&cs says something like "If the club is expelled, you will not get any refund on your season ticket" - then section 75 can't help you."

It just seems to me that that last bit is going to mislead the OP if you are saying they can't make a s75 claim.

DoaM

The club are a service provider ... the ST holder is the person to whom the services are provided. If the service provider is no longer able to provide said services then they are in breach of contract. The T&Cs of the service can have a term to limit the liability insofar as the services cannot be provided ... in this specific case such a term is likely to to be judged an Unfair term - this doesn't void the contract but it is struck out from the contract and the remaining T&Cs still apply.

tl;dr ... if the club go bust then a Section 75 claim will be valid.

Manxman_in_exile

Well I'm glad you agree.  I simply don't understand why eddddy thinks an unfair term is irrelevant and says "...then s.75 can't help you."

(I was beginning to think my marbles had gone.  I did Law of Credit and Security in my LLM and that was 40  years ago, but I didn't think the law had changed that much).

eddddy

Manxman_in_exile said:

Perhaps we are talking at cross purposes but I'm not suggesting that the OP has a valid s75 claim in the event that the club simply goes bust.  What I'm saying is that if the OP has a valid claim against the club, but the club goes bust, then they will have a s75 claim too.  I'm sorry if I didn't spell it out, but I thought it didn't need saying that there couldn't be a s75 claim unless there was some breach of contract by the club in the first place.

Good - I'm glad we agree.

• Section 75 makes the credit card issuer jointly liable for breach of contract (and misrepresentation)
• The T&Cs are essentially the contract
• So the OP needs to read the T&Cs to see if they might have a valid s75 claim in certain circumstances
• The OP can challenge any unfair contract terms (but that is different legislation, not directly related to section 75)

I think that summarises everything I've posted.

If you want to read the legislation, it's here: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/75

born_again

eddddy said:

Going back to the question about section 75... you need to read the season ticket terms and conditions - i.e. the contract - to see what happens about your season ticket, if the club gets expelled.

Section 75 makes the credit card company jointly liable for breach of contract (or misrepresentation). So if the club breaches the contract, you should be able to claim damages from the credit card company.

So for example, if the season ticket contract / t&cs says something like "If the club is expelled, you will not get any refund on your season ticket" - then section 75 can't help you.

1st point would be the club. 
Chargeback next & S75 as last resort.

Manxman_in_exile

I'm glad we agree too, I thought I couldn't be explaining myself properly.  It might be worthwhile updating your earlier post so that nobody inadvertantly goes away with the wrong impression:  "So for example, if the season ticket contract / t&cs says something like "If the club is expelled, you will not get any refund on your season ticket" - then section 75 can't help you."  (I think your comprehensive summary missed that bit out.)

RobM99

As a slight digression, I can see many clubs (and other businesses) closing for good. For lower leagues clubs, gate receipts are the main source of income (no Sky TV revenue). Southend, Oxford, Macclesfield, for examples.

Manxman_in_exile

RobM99 said:

As a slight digression, I can see many clubs (and other businesses) closing for good. For lower leagues clubs, gate receipts are the main source of income (no Sky TV revenue). Southend, Oxford, Macclesfield, for examples.

I've no doubt that's true.  It's not just professional sports clubs either.  It's one of the reasons why my wife and I decided not to argue about trying to get (partial) refunds on golf club and rowing club memberships.  Yeah, they haven't provided the service/facilities to us, but they're still dependent on that income and I'd rather continue to pay them now rather than find they no longer exist post-Covid.

I started a thread about this at the start of lockdown because I was concerned about the potential effects on the economy and firms going out of business.  It's all very well having a consumer right to a refund but it's in no-one's long term interests if businesses go bust and reduce competition.  Most people disagreed:  https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6120017/what-is-the-position-regarding-contracts-cancelled-owing-to-corona-virus/p1