Change of performer at comedy gig - any right to a refund?

ceh209

We booked tickets to a comedy 'festival' about 6 weeks ago. I say 'festival' as it's an evening event with 3 comedians plus a compere - taking place tomorrow - so basically a comedy gig for a specific comedian plus support. We booked because we wanted to see the headline act. We have heard of one of the others, never heard of the other 2.

Have had an email from the theatre lunchtime today to say the headline act has pulled out 'due to filming commitments', which I think is total rubbish because you know about those more than a day in advance! But don't worry, they've booked someone else to replace them... Only thing is, I can't stand the replacement act and never would have considered booking these tickets if they were performing in the first place.

Is there any right to a refund? Or because they've quoted the magic line when booking 'Lineup subject to change' is there sweet FA I can do about it?

Jonboy_1984

on a practical note Is it sold out? Ring the theatre and see if they have a waiting list for resales.

We have quite a few line up changes at these type of gigs over the years and they do seem to be par for the course and they all use the line up may change t&c, particularly if advertised as a comedy night/gala/festival rather than ABC plus supporting acts.

tightauldgit

I think to be honest yes if you booked for a 'festival' with a lineup subject to change then that's the line they will take. No chance to resell the tickets? If you'd booked tickets for a named individual gig then possibly different. 

Doesn't of course mean you can't complain or kick up a fuss and try to get something back but just bear in mind that you probably have no legal right to anything. 

TELLIT01

I think your assumption of sweet FA you can do about it is correct.  Unless you had made a booking wth the specific agreement that if the headline act didn't appear you would be refunded your chances are slim to none.

pinkshoes

I think the 'subject to change' line is the catch but then filming commitments sounds dodgy to me as surely they'd have know that for ages??

I'd phone and ask for a refund or even a credit note and make it clear the replacement is rubbish!

MorningcoffeeIV

ceh209 said:

Have had an email from the theatre lunchtime today to say the headline act has pulled out 'due to filming commitments', which I think is total rubbish because you know about those more than a day in advance! 

It would have been much more than a day in advance.

The agent gets told, the artist grumbles, the agent negotiates, the artist finally agrees, the agent tells the venue, the venue objects, a few days of back and forth, compensation is discussed, the venue finally accepts, they talk about what to tell customers, they compose the email, they argue over the email, they pull a campaign file, they send the email.

So all in, maybe 3-4 weeks. So certainly unlikely to be 'total rubbish '.

screech_78

pinkshoes said:

I think the 'subject to change' line is the catch but then filming commitments sounds dodgy to me as surely they'd have know that for ages??

I'd phone and ask for a refund or even a credit note and make it clear the replacement is rubbish!

But, surely that is subjective? There’s plenty of comedians I can’t stand that other people seem to love. Peter Kay for example, I struggle to see what people find funny. He bores me to tears. 

user1977

Yes, I don't think whether the replacement is "rubbish" or not is really the point (and they probably have had to reach a certain level of success for you to know that you think they're rubbish!), it's the change in bill which is relevant.

Probably pushing it to describe "obvious headliner and two support acts" as a "festival" though. It's not like one band pulling out of Glastonbury.

tightauldgit

MorningcoffeeIV said:

ceh209 said:

Have had an email from the theatre lunchtime today to say the headline act has pulled out 'due to filming commitments', which I think is total rubbish because you know about those more than a day in advance! 

It would have been much more than a day in advance.

The agent gets told, the artist grumbles, the agent negotiates, the artist finally agrees, the agent tells the venue, the venue objects, a few days of back and forth, compensation is discussed, the venue finally accepts, they talk about what to tell customers, they compose the email, they argue over the email, they pull a campaign file, they send the email.

So all in, maybe 3-4 weeks. So certainly unlikely to be 'total rubbish '.

Or they were filming on Day X and the weather was bad and suddenly the whole schedule is changed and they need to be there on a day that they hadn't planned to be there. Things do happen all the time.

photome

pinkshoes said:

I think the 'subject to change' line is the catch but then filming commitments sounds dodgy to me as surely they'd have know that for ages??

I'd phone and ask for a refund or even a credit note and make it clear the replacement is rubbish!

They may have only known the day before and apart from the OP who says the replacement is rubbish

Money_Grabber13579

If it’s the headline act which has been changed, that sounds like a pretty material change to me and I’m not convinced that hiding behind a “subject the change” clause in the contract would not be considered unfair. The tickets were sold with a named lineup (rather than just a festival of whoever is available on the day) which no doubt will have been what convinced many people to purchase the tickets.

Otherwise, what would there be to stop me from buying a Ferrari and the local dealer delivering a ford instead and then pointing to a make/model subject to change in the contract? It wouldn’t happen and I don’t see why a change in the headline act should be allowed either.