London show cancelled 40 mins before start

jon81uk

Manxman_in_exile said:

Kinhh said:

...We were told to get there at 1:30. Email received at 1:48! ...

Where were you told to get to by 1:30?  London?  The theatre?  Settled in your seats?  And you were informed of cancellation at 1:48?

What do the T&Cs say about cancellation and giving notice of cancellation?

I'm pretty sure nobody else will agree with me but I don't see why all of you shouldn't be asking for both your travel costs and time off work!

It might be that their T&Cs are so watertight that they cover this situation, but I can't see that it's at all reasonable that they should tell you the show is cancelled with no prior notice after the time you have been told to arrive.  If their T&Cs do allow that I think I'd argue that they were blatantly unfair under Part 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (legislation.gov.uk).

I would suggest that it should be perfectly foreseeable to the venue that if they cancel at no notice then people travelling to see the show will have paid out on train tickets etc to get there, and that those are losses stemming directly from their breach of contract.  (Assuming that a cancellation with no warning whatsoever is a breach, and I don't see how it can't be... )

However, I'm sure nobody else will agree with me so I accept I'm probably wrong and the OP should just be satisfied with the ticket refunds...

Matinee showings start at 14.30 so they were told 40 minutes before curtain up. 

Alderbank

jon81uk said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

Kinhh said:

...We were told to get there at 1:30. Email received at 1:48! ...

Where were you told to get to by 1:30?  London?  The theatre?  Settled in your seats?  And you were informed of cancellation at 1:48?

What do the T&Cs say about cancellation and giving notice of cancellation?

I'm pretty sure nobody else will agree with me but I don't see why all of you shouldn't be asking for both your travel costs and time off work!

It might be that their T&Cs are so watertight that they cover this situation, but I can't see that it's at all reasonable that they should tell you the show is cancelled with no prior notice after the time you have been told to arrive.  If their T&Cs do allow that I think I'd argue that they were blatantly unfair under Part 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (legislation.gov.uk).

I would suggest that it should be perfectly foreseeable to the venue that if they cancel at no notice then people travelling to see the show will have paid out on train tickets etc to get there, and that those are losses stemming directly from their breach of contract.  (Assuming that a cancellation with no warning whatsoever is a breach, and I don't see how it can't be... )

However, I'm sure nobody else will agree with me so I accept I'm probably wrong and the OP should just be satisfied with the ticket refunds...

Matinee showings start at 14.30 so they were told 40 minutes before curtain up. 

There's no guaranteed delivery time for emails.
The email header will show when it was sent.

jon81uk

Alderbank said:

jon81uk said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

Kinhh said:

...We were told to get there at 1:30. Email received at 1:48! ...

Where were you told to get to by 1:30?  London?  The theatre?  Settled in your seats?  And you were informed of cancellation at 1:48?

What do the T&Cs say about cancellation and giving notice of cancellation?

I'm pretty sure nobody else will agree with me but I don't see why all of you shouldn't be asking for both your travel costs and time off work!

It might be that their T&Cs are so watertight that they cover this situation, but I can't see that it's at all reasonable that they should tell you the show is cancelled with no prior notice after the time you have been told to arrive.  If their T&Cs do allow that I think I'd argue that they were blatantly unfair under Part 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (legislation.gov.uk).

I would suggest that it should be perfectly foreseeable to the venue that if they cancel at no notice then people travelling to see the show will have paid out on train tickets etc to get there, and that those are losses stemming directly from their breach of contract.  (Assuming that a cancellation with no warning whatsoever is a breach, and I don't see how it can't be... )

However, I'm sure nobody else will agree with me so I accept I'm probably wrong and the OP should just be satisfied with the ticket refunds...

Matinee showings start at 14.30 so they were told 40 minutes before curtain up. 

There's no guaranteed delivery time for emails.
The email header will show when it was sent.

Not sure that matters?

jon81uk

ATG tickets are linked from the Moulin Rouge site and their terms are here Terms and Conditions | Legal | ATG Tickets

"6.1 It is Your responsibility to ascertain whether an Event has been cancelled or re-scheduled and the date and time of any re-scheduled Event. Where an Event is cancelled or re-scheduled, We will use Our reasonable endeavours to notify You using the details You provided Us with at the time of ordering. We do not guarantee that You will be informed of such cancellation before the date of the Event."

"7.6 Where such a refund is sought due to cancellation, rescheduling or a material change to the programme of the Event, You must bring this to Our attention as soon as possible upon becoming aware of such material change, cancellation or where the Event has been rescheduled, prior to the rescheduled Event. The refund for Ticket(s) equals the price paid by You to Us for such Ticket, including the applicable per Ticket booking fee but excluding the per transaction collection or delivery fee, in accordance with the STAR Code of Practice. If You have opted to purchase Ticket Protection, please note that this is also non-refundable"

"8.1 Personal arrangements including travel, accommodation or hospitality relating to the Event which have been arranged by You are at your own risk. Unless otherwise stated in our Terms and Conditions, Our and the Event Partner(s)’ liability to You in connection with the Event (including, but not limited to, in the event of cancellation, rescheduling or material change to the programme of the Event) shall be limited to the Ticket price paid by You including the per Ticket booking fee but excluding any ticket protection purchased and the per transaction collection or delivery fee."

Manxman_in_exile

So have I read that correctly?

The T&Cs say that if the consumer wants to cancel (refund or exchange tickets) then they have to give (at least?) 48 hours notice, but if the ticket seller wants to cancel then there is no minimum period of notice, and in fact they put the onus on the consumer to check beforehand that the event has not been cancelled or re-scheduled!

If I wanted to be argumentative I might say those T&Cs were a pretty good example of unfair terms insofar as they lead to an imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations under the contract.  If the ticket seller wants the consumer to give 48 hours notice of cancellation, shouldn't the seller have to give the consumer 48 hours notice as well?

(Have I misunderstood what those terms are saying?)

I don't know whather 8.1 limits the seller's liability or not.  Again if I was being argumentative I might say it shouldn't as the seller shouldn't be able to exclude liability by relying indirectly on the unfair (ie imbalanced) contract terms regarding cancellation.  If the seller had had to give 48 hours notice of cancellation then the OP's party could have had an opportunity to make other arrangements (change travel plans, arrange to visit other attractions in London etc) and limit their own losses.  But as they weren't given reasonable notice of the cancellation they couldn't do so.  I think they've suffered at least partial direct losses on travel etc.

Of course I'm just being argumentative and thinking aloud.  I'm not saying the OP can necessarily get anything back other than ticket refund.

sheramber

If  a number  of the cast went down with a sickness bug  an hour before curtain up then a late cancellation would be the only option.

jon81uk

Manxman_in_exile said:

So have I read that correctly?

The T&Cs say that if the consumer wants to cancel (refund or exchange tickets) then they have to give (at least?) 48 hours notice, but if the ticket seller wants to cancel then there is no minimum period of notice, and in fact they put the onus on the consumer to check beforehand that the event has not been cancelled or re-scheduled!

If I wanted to be argumentative I might say those T&Cs were a pretty good example of unfair terms insofar as they lead to an imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations under the contract.  If the ticket seller wants the consumer to give 48 hours notice of cancellation, shouldn't the seller have to give the consumer 48 hours notice as well?

(Have I misunderstood what those terms are saying?)

I don't know whather 8.1 limits the seller's liability or not.  Again if I was being argumentative I might say it shouldn't as the seller shouldn't be able to exclude liability by relying indirectly on the unfair (ie imbalanced) contract terms regarding cancellation.  If the seller had had to give 48 hours notice of cancellation then the OP's party could have had an opportunity to make other arrangements (change travel plans, arrange to visit other attractions in London etc) and limit their own losses.  But as they weren't given reasonable notice of the cancellation they couldn't do so.  I think they've suffered at least partial direct losses on travel etc.

Of course I'm just being argumentative and thinking aloud.  I'm not saying the OP can necessarily get anything back other than ticket refund.

That doesn't seem unusual though, if you want to cancel tickets you need to give enough notice that they could feasibly re-sell them.
But if a theatre show is being cancelled by the producer its usually very last minute as its either sickness in the cast or an issue with the venue such as a power cut. Very rare for shows to be cancelled with notice.

Manxman_in_exile

jon81uk said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

So have I read that correctly?

The T&Cs say that if the consumer wants to cancel (refund or exchange tickets) then they have to give (at least?) 48 hours notice, but if the ticket seller wants to cancel then there is no minimum period of notice, and in fact they put the onus on the consumer to check beforehand that the event has not been cancelled or re-scheduled!

If I wanted to be argumentative I might say those T&Cs were a pretty good example of unfair terms insofar as they lead to an imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations under the contract.  If the ticket seller wants the consumer to give 48 hours notice of cancellation, shouldn't the seller have to give the consumer 48 hours notice as well?

(Have I misunderstood what those terms are saying?)

I don't know whather 8.1 limits the seller's liability or not.  Again if I was being argumentative I might say it shouldn't as the seller shouldn't be able to exclude liability by relying indirectly on the unfair (ie imbalanced) contract terms regarding cancellation.  If the seller had had to give 48 hours notice of cancellation then the OP's party could have had an opportunity to make other arrangements (change travel plans, arrange to visit other attractions in London etc) and limit their own losses.  But as they weren't given reasonable notice of the cancellation they couldn't do so.  I think they've suffered at least partial direct losses on travel etc.

Of course I'm just being argumentative and thinking aloud.  I'm not saying the OP can necessarily get anything back other than ticket refund.

That doesn't seem unusual though, if you want to cancel tickets you need to give enough notice that they could feasibly re-sell them.
But if a theatre show is being cancelled by the producer its usually very last minute as its either sickness in the cast or an issue with the venue such as a power cut. Very rare for shows to be cancelled with notice.

It may be usual but that doesn't mean it's right.  Maybe they are all wrong.

[Edit:  But if it's reasonable to give the ticket seller sufficient notice to re-sell the tickets, why isn't it equally reasonable to give the buyer the same amount of notice to make other arrangements try to minimise their losses?  Why does it go one way?  I'd hazard a guess that the ticket seller will find it easier to re-sell the tickets at very short notice than the buyer will find it to change their arrangements even if they had the luxury of 48 hours notice]

Manxman_in_exile

sheramber said:

If  a number  of the cast went down with a sickness bug  an hour before curtain up then a late cancellation would be the only option.

Surely a show like Moulin Rouge would have understudies for indispensable roles for precisely that eventuality?

munchpot

Manxman_in_exile said:

sheramber said:

If  a number  of the cast went down with a sickness bug  an hour before curtain up then a late cancellation would be the only option.

Surely a show like Moulin Rouge would have understudies for indispensable roles for precisely that eventuality?

They do - but it could be that the alternate / understudy was the one who was due to perform and was taken ill

It might also not be cast sickness that has forced the cancellation - it could be some of the production crew and they don't have understudies in the same way as the cast do