Cancelling my Wedding Band - HELP!

Dublinstiofán

DesperateDan wrote: »

Care to enlighten us with the details of that one? Because I highly doubt it's the same scenario. This is a rather specific case and the band have no recourse whatsoever.

I spoke about it on page three of the thread without the specifics. It is roughly the same scenario except the band in question had a contract drawn up which was signed.

In this case there is no signed contract but there is a verbal agreement and deposit so the same conditions will apply even though it might be more difficult
to prove it.

I cant/wouldn't comment further on it.

Evil_Bilbo

I understand I handled this poorly - I am not on here saying "I am right, so back me up" - I'm looking for advice on where I stand / what to do.

As for people talking about "what you are really paying for when you hire a band" - I'm not complaining about their price - the new band are slightly cheaper - we did not book them to save money, we booked them because we like them and they play good music. I know how hard bands work, my brother is in a band - cancelling was not a decision I took lightly which is why I've been busting a nut trying to contact them over the last few weeks.

I have emailed them an offer of compensation (dont care to admit how much), have stressed that this is not an admission of guilt from a legal standing, but just a gesture because I feel bad for handling it badly (which I do), and that we are eager to put this behind us and move on.

No reply yet.

Laters.

foggy_lad

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

Ha that's not the way it works and if this band are professionals they won't be fobbed off with €50 and good luck. From a case I witnessed before and if the bands terms and conditions are correct the OP can expect to be paying at least 50% of the original fee if settled out of court. Or the full fee, compensation and legal fees if settled through the courts provided they have his emails and they can prove the date of original agreement with him.

Change of mind is not a good legal basis for non payment, believe me!

In this case there are no terms and conditions and this is the first thing any reasonable judge will ask for! Case would be thrown out after an order for costs was made against the band!

muffler wrote: »

So they are to blame because they didnt take enough of a deposit


Was this not your choice and your decision?


You arent really helping yourself with comments such as that.


The first band you booked didtnt put you in this position - you did that all by yourself.

Yes they are to blame for not taking more of a deposit and for not having proper terms and conditions, something which thousands of other bands can arrange for weddings and even for a friday night session in the local.

The comments are in retaliation to comments made by others

D3PO wrote: »

I dont think they have an recourse if you never signed a contract with them. Its there fault for not demanding a proper deposit from or getting you to sign a contract that would discourage the type of attitute you have shown.


Whilst they may have to take it on the chin that doesnt me I dont find your behaviour morally repugnant.

Karma's a pain in the ass remember that.

D3PO wrote: »

The band messed up by not having you sign a contract but your attitude shows a lack of common decency unfortunatly not something that can be legislated for.

slimjimmc wrote: »

Do you ask what their terms and conditions were before you booked?
Did you ask them to put their terms in writing?
You can't put all the blame on them if you didn't ask.

The prudent thing would be to know the terms before you enter in to a contract to the value of €2000.

The best you can do now is negotiate a settlement, you don't want the hassle of dealing with it closer to your big day.

I'd agree €500-750 seems fair.

This band should have their terms and conditions on display for all potential customers and should email and post same to customers after they have booked! This whole mess is the fault of unprofessional band members not the OP.

Evil_Bilbo wrote: »

Update:

I've just received another email from the band leader in the same vaguely threatening tone - basically saying I have to make an offer of compensation by tonight "or else he will pass on my contact details to the band members who will pursue me individually"

here's the jist of the last bit:
"I am of the opinion that they may prefer not to pursue this through legal channels but it will be out of my hands by this evening."

There is an implication they may pursue illegal means

As I have to make a decision tonight, could you guys just please give me your opinions on what you think I should do:
A - offer to pay 450 (that makes 500 including my deposit)
B - offer them nothing, say that "we were never informed about cancellation fees, and we paid you a deposit"
C - offer less (around 200?)
D - other

At the moment I'm flipping between all 3 - they all have pro's & con's

Give them nothing! B

tightropetom wrote: »

2 hours work per night? Are you having a laugh OP? Firstly the wedding market tends to be 2-3 nights/week max. The cost is split between numerous members, there is often equipment hire/maintenance to be paid, fuel costs, accommodation costs if it is a long way from home. 2 hours of music time is the minimum, there's also the 1 hour setting up before and after the gig, the rehearsal time for first dances etc., not to mention driving time to and from the gig. Some bands have worked a day job, then driven 2 hours to a gig, spent 4-5 hours setting up, gigging, taking down and the driven 2 hours home again. Hardly easy peasy. Wedding music isn't a 7 day a week industry.

What if that 's the only gig they have booked that week - yes they will be significantly out of pocket. They will be unlikely to re-fill that booking slot, at least with a wedding or function in the 6 weeks notice period that you left them. Most wedding band bookings are at least 1 or 2 years in advance.

Quibbling over 50 bucks? It's probably the least you could offer for the inconvenience.

Just my 2c. Rant over.

Ah yes but that is the nature of the business!

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

And i'm sure your not their favourite at the moment either.

You put yourself in this position, i didn't put you in it so don't blame me. But the only way your going to
get yourself out of the mess you got yourself into, without penalty is if the original band play the gig you
contracted them to play, weather you like it or not! Its a fact, you don't like it or want it but unfortunately
for you your going to end up paying for your mistake otherwise, and €50 wont get you out of it which is
what you are upset about.



And am i really the mental one? You want to change your wedding band at a months notice to let some 'new friend' play it
at the drop of a hat. Maybe you should have though about the consequences of cancelling your original band before you
double booked them for an occasion you already have a band contracted for!



Please :rolleyes: I'm not in your predicament so, i hope the original band get justice!

There are no terms and conditions so the OP may cancel at any time even a few hours before the wedding and there is nothing the band can legally do!

Howjoe1 wrote: »

What if your wife saw a nicer dress a few weeks before the wedding and cancelled the order?

What if you saw a better hotel offering a better last minute deal, would you cancel the booking?

Probably not if you stood to lose a significant deposit.

What happened here? you secured the initial band for a token/goodwill deposit, which I'm sure you were grateful about at the time. Now you want to dump them and leave them with a wedding date booking that they are unlikely to be able to replace at this short notice. Sounds a bit mean spirited to me, but then given the terms you can go ahead and do what you want. You might have felt a bit peeved if someone cancelled on you at the last minute.

The dress shop and hotel will all have provided a copy of their terms and conditions as they are professionals.

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

To me it sounds like they know exactly where they stand going to court and are hoping he doesn't
pay them by tonight as they have requested.

They can then pursue him for loss of earnings and compensation and it almost certainly will end up
costing much more than the original €2000 in the end. If he loses (which i suspect from a previous
case i've seen) he may be out of pocket by up to €5000 when legal fees from both sides and
compensation is taken into account.

If it was me i'd rather call them today and iron out a figure around the €500 to €1000 mark and
admit my mistake and make sure it never happens again. Rather than getting caught up in the
legal system and have it go on for years.

Only other option is to let them play it as contracted, pay them what their due
and thats it, whether you like it or not.

Utter nonsense, there were and are no stated terms and conditions so the OP is not bound by any terms and conditions!

The first thing any court will ask is what were the terms and conditions especially relating to cancellations!

sadie06 wrote: »

The band have messed up by failing to set out terms and conditions and taking such a small deposit, but I strongly feel you are morally obliged to compensate them. It looks like you have decided to do so....great.

Of course it matters whether the deposit was placed a year ago, or three months ago. Why? Because as others have said, the working week is limited for wedding bands, and the longer they have had your booking in place, the more times they have refused that date to others. Can you not understand how galling that would be?

You stress that you have made a lot of sacrifices over the last 18 months, and I get that. You don't own financial hardship though. You know nothing about what's going on in the member of this band's lives, or how much any or all of them may have been relying on your booking. I'm a musician, and I can tell you this much; I don't know many wealthy musicians!

Also, you clearly have no idea what it is you are actually paying for. Maybe this will help:

Again all this about them having turned down work etc is the nature of the wedding band business and has nothing to do with the OP, the OP is not responsible for the failings of the band in not securing their own work by laying out proper terms and conditions!

Dublinstiofán wrote: »

I spoke about it on page three of the thread without the specifics. It is roughly the same scenario except the band in question had a contract drawn up which was signed.

In this case there is no signed contract but there is a verbal agreement and deposit so the same conditions will apply even though it might be more difficult
to prove it.

I cant/wouldn't comment further on it.

This contract would have contained the terms and conditions for things like cancellations and if the band broke up etc.

Because the OP's band did not have terms and conditions the OP is not bound by anything except the deposit they paid!

Hanalei

I don't like what the OP has done but at the same time this band sounds rather amateurish in how they handled this. (Tiny deposit, lack of written agreement)

Fair play to you for offering compensation because from what I can see you have absolutely no obligation to whatsoever legally speaking.

Hopefully the band will learn a few lessons from this.

GBXI

Evil_Bilbo wrote: »

I understand I handled this poorly - I am not on here saying "I am right, so back me up" - I'm looking for advice on where I stand / what to do.

As for people talking about "what you are really paying for when you hire a band" - I'm not complaining about their price - the new band are slightly cheaper - we did not book them to save money, we booked them because we like them and they play good music. I know how hard bands work, my brother is in a band - cancelling was not a decision I took lightly which is why I've been busting a nut trying to contact them over the last few weeks.

I have emailed them an offer of compensation (dont care to admit how much), have stressed that this is not an admission of guilt from a legal standing, but just a gesture because I feel bad for handling it badly (which I do), and that we are eager to put this behind us and move on.

No reply yet.

Laters.

I followed this whole thread - like a previous poster out of boredom and it caught my interest - and I have to say I feel like slapping you OP for giving them any more than the original deposit!

As has been said by most posters here with a brain, I know you don't want to be stressed before your wedding but these guys should have proper T&Cs in place and you giving them money because you feel bad is not going to help one bit.

whippet

@Foggy Lad ... can you point to anywhere where it might be mentioned that T&C's have to be provided for a contract to be enforceable?

T&Cs would be in addition to the expectations and requirements of the underlying contract.

Therefore; in the absence of T&Cs both parties would be of the understanding that a particular service would be provided for the exchange / consideration of a specific sum of money. It is the OP who is now failing to perform on their end of the contract and as such the band would be entitled to either compensation and or full payment.

The absence of written T&Cs do not absolve the OP from the requirement to perform on their side of the contract.

Any reasonable person would form the understanding that should you need to book a band over 12 months in advance it is implied that both parties are aware that either side unilaterally pulling out of the contract would put the other party in a position of loss.

I would be sure a court would look at it a lot more sympathetically from the Band's perspective than the OP's. The OP engaged the services of the band over 12 months before the date to ensure the booking ... yet the OP's actions made no consideration to the band's situation and was only worried about a) having to pay money and b) keeping them in reserve long enough to secure the services of another band.

foggy_lad

whippet wrote: »

@Foggy Lad ... can you point to anywhere where it might be mentioned that T&C's have to be provided for a contract to be enforceable?

T&Cs would be in addition to the expectations and requirements of the underlying contract.

Therefore; in the absence of T&Cs both parties would be of the understanding that a particular service would be provided for the exchange / consideration of a specific sum of money. It is the OP who is now failing to perform on their end of the contract and as such the band would be entitled to either compensation and or full payment.

The absence of written T&Cs do not absolve the OP from the requirement to perform on their side of the contract.

Any reasonable person would form the understanding that should you need to book a band over 12 months in advance it is implied that both parties are aware that either side unilaterally pulling out of the contract would put the other party in a position of loss.

I would be sure a court would look at it a lot more sympathetically from the Band's perspective than the OP's. The OP engaged the services of the band over 12 months before the date to ensure the booking ... yet the OP's actions made no consideration to the band's situation and was only worried about a) having to pay money and b) keeping them in reserve long enough to secure the services of another band.

Bacause a deposit was requested/paid there is an expectation that the contract(verbal) can be cancelled without further penalty upon forfeiture of any deposit paid.

The court is going to ask what conditions or terms were offered to the OP in case of cancellation.

The way you put it tha op could insist that the band provide and pay for alternative similarly qualified/standard muscisians if they themselves could not play on the night. this is not the case, all the OP would be entitled to is the refund of their deposit!

Beagslife

On a slightly different note, the new band may indeed be awesome, in a concert, or in a pub/club venue situation. You mention they are on tour in Ireland. Do they play a lot of their own music?

Wedding bands tend to play for a more mixed audience, in terms of ages and tastes. Depending on the size of your wedding and the mix of guests, it's something to consider.

Have the new band committed to mixing it up, playing a requested first dance and God forbid, a Siege of Ennis/Abba medley, if requested!

My tupence worth!

Tdoyle

While technically you probably don't owe them anything, I think it was a pretty miserable thing for you to do cancelling them like that for no good reason

BenEadir

OP, you entered into a verbal contract with the band. They offered their services on the day/night of your wedding for €x, you accepted their offer and you paid consideration in the form of the €50 with the balance (presumably) payable on the night. You didn't agree a cancellation clause with them did you so there isn't a cancellation clause in your contract.

So long as they are available to play as agreed they are fulfilling their end of the contract. You can't just cancel them on a whim and expect them to write off their lost earnings. Wedding bands play once or max twice a week. If they got another gig for the night of your wedding you'd be entitled to set off what they earned form that gig against what you owe them assuming they charged less to their new client to get the new gig but who books a wedding band at short notice? It's extremely unlikely they'll be able to source a new gig so they're going to be out of pocket if you don't pay what you owe them.

You fcuked up but you're only human, we all fcuk up from time to time. You saw a better band and booked them but you can't ignore the contract you have with the first band. You need to man up a bit, accept your responsibility and treat them fairly.

If I was in your shoes I'd offer to pay them 50% of the balance you owe them. I'd write them a letter apologizing for the way I'd behaved and attach a cheque for 50% of the balance "in full and final settlement". Make sure to write that on the letter and make sure to also write it on the reverse of the cheque. What that means is that if they go ahead and cash the cheque they will have accepted your offer to settle the debt you owe them and that should (hopefully) be the end of it. If they try and come after you for the balance you can get the cheque back from the bank and use it as evidence that they accepted the reduced payment in full settlement of your contract with them. It's highly unlikely to come to that but it's better to be safe than sorry.

I'd also send the letter registered post so there is a record of them receiving it and I'd scan both the letter and cheque so you have records of them if you ever need them.

Hope that helps.

The alternative is to cancel the 2nd band (if they are genuinely your pals maybe they'll happily agree to a cancellation without any cost to you) and go with the original band. I know it's your big day and everything but seriously, who's really going to remember who the band were? If they were good enough for you to book in the first place I'm sure they're fine and will do the job.

Ben

BenEadir

foggy_lad wrote: »

The way you put it tha op could insist that the band provide and pay for alternative similarly qualified/standard muscisians if they themselves could not play on the night. this is not the case, all the OP would be entitled to is the refund of their deposit!

Only true if there was a limitation of liability clause agreed between the parties i.e. "our liability to you is limited to the value of any monies actually paid by you to us" etc. If I hired Band A for €3,000, pay them a €50 deposit and they didn't turn up resulting in me having to make frantic calls to source a replacement band who charged me €5,000 I would absolutely sue the ba$tards for €1,950 and I'd be very confident of getting it.

The reason we have a commercial court system is to give effect to contracts and to prevent people from just walking away from their commitments and that applies equally to a band who don't turn up or a client who changes his mind on a whim.

Ben

Kenny Logins

Sure why would they need proper T&Cs written up when they can just ignore, stampy-foot, and then bully for compensation in the event of a cancellation?

whippet

foggy_lad wrote: »

Bacause a deposit was requested/paid there is an expectation that the contract(verbal) can be cancelled without further penalty upon forfeiture of any deposit paid.

!

@foggy ... Can you point to any contract law that backs up your assumption?

I have never seen a contract where there is an implied or specific assumption of cancellation. Contracts are made upon the basis of assumption of specific performance.

You can't make up contract law as you go along and also just because you assume it does not mean its legal.

By virtue of no terms and conditions there is no cancellation clause at all - by either party

foggy_lad

whippet wrote: »

@foggy ... Can you point to any contract law that backs up your assumption?

I have never seen a contract where there is an implied or specific assumption of cancellation. Contracts are made upon the basis of assumption of specific performance.

You can't make up contract law as you go along and also just because you assume it does not mean its legal.

By virtue of no terms and conditions there is no cancellation clause at all - by either party

No I can't but if I entered into any contract by agreeing a price and paying a deposit I would reasonably expect that forfeiture of the deposit would be the limit of my obligations in the event of me cancelling, unless otherwise stated by the business.

BenEadir

foggy_lad wrote: »

No I can't but if I entered into any contract by agreeing a price and paying a deposit I would reasonably expect that forfeiture of the deposit would be the limit of my obligations in the event of me cancelling, unless otherwise stated by the business.

You'd be 100% wrong to expect such a thing just as the band would be 100$ wrong to expect that if they don't show up on the day and spoil their client wedding that their only liability would be to pay back the €50 deposit.

You should never ever assume anything when it comes to contracts. If something, like a right to cancel the contract, is important to you you need to specifically agree it with the other party at the time the contract is entered into.

Ben

Zillah

whippet wrote: »

@foggy ... Can you point to any contract law that backs up your assumption?

I have never seen a contract where there is an implied or specific assumption of cancellation. Contracts are made upon the basis of assumption of specific performance.

You can't make up contract law as you go along and also just because you assume it does not mean its legal.

By virtue of no terms and conditions there is no cancellation clause at all - by either party

Well, this (http://www.consumerhelp.ie/paying-deposits) website says:

"If you pay a deposit and then change your mind about the product or service, the supplier or seller may not have to return your deposit."

Which certainly implies that you are entitled to cancel at the cost of forfeiting the deposit.

BenThere wrote: »

You should never ever assume anything when it comes to contracts.

Actually, reasonable assumptions play a huge part of contracts. When I walk into a shop I don't say "Hello, I am willing to exchange the sum of eighty cent, euro, for possession of this packet of green Extra chewing gum. Upon completion of the exchange I will then be the sole owner of said chewing gum, and am entitled to consume, destroy, sell or otherwise dispose of it as I see fit with no further obligations of any sort to you", to which he explicitly states that he agrees to the just-described terms.

No, I hand him the chewing gum, he gives it back, then he takes my money. Every single detail of the contract is assumed based on context, and the law allows for such reasonable assumptions. If he chases me down two days later and demands that I return the chewing gum as he only meant for it to be leased, the court will back me up because my assumption was the reasonable one.

I would certainly argue that the existence of a deposit, in the absence of specific terms and conditions, implies the right to cancel at the cost of the deposit. Why else is it there?

foggy_lad

BenThere wrote: »

The reason we have a commercial court system is to give effect to contracts and to prevent people from just walking away from their commitments and that applies equally to a band who don't turn up or a client who changes his mind on a whim.

Ben

I would see this as being a consumer issue rather than a commercial issue, the OP is not a company or business but the band should be at least professional enough to give certain terms and conditions for bookings.

BenEadir

Zillah wrote: »

Actually, reasonable assumptions play a huge part of contracts. When I walk into a shop I don't say "Hello, I am willing to exchange the sum of eighty cent, euro, for possession of this packet of green Extra chewing gum. Upon completion of the exchange I will then be the sole owner of said chewing gum, and am entitled to consume, destroy, sell or otherwise dispose of it as I see fit with no further obligations of any sort to you", to which he explicitly states that he agrees to the just-described terms.

No, I hand him the chewing gum, he gives it back, then he takes my money. Every single detail of the contract is assumed based on context, and the law allows for such reasonable assumptions. If he chases me down two days later and demands that I return the chewing gum as he only meant for it to be leased, the court will back me up because my assumption was the reasonable one.

Zilah, assumptions don't govern the scenario you describe, The Sale of Goods and Supply of Services act 1980 regulates consumer transactions, see http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1980/en/act/pub/0016/. It's nothing to do with Assumptions, reasonable or otherwise.

BenEadir

foggy_lad wrote: »

I would see this as being a consumer issue rather than a commercial issue, the OP is not a company or business but the band should be at least professional enough to give certain terms and conditions for bookings.

Foggy, I wouldn't disagree with you that the band left themselves open to the OP doing what he (wrongfully) did by only taking a €50 deposit. If I was in their business I'd be taking a non refundable €500 deposit or a 50% deposit. A deposit should be large enough to thwart people from doing what the OP did.

Ref whether the OP is a consumer and therefore the transaction falls under the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980 the act states that:-

"3.—(1) In the Act of 1893 and this Act, a party to a contract is said to deal as consumer in relation to another party if—

(a) he neither makes the contract in the course of a business nor holds himself out as doing so, and

(b) the other party does make the contract in the course of a business, and

(c) the goods or services supplied under or in pursuance of the contract are of a type ordinarily supplied for private use or consumption"

I'm not sure whether engaging a band to play at a wedding can be defined as "ordinarily" supplied for private use or consumption in the same way a packet of sweets would be or renting a DVD would be but I'm open to correction on that.

Ben

whippet

foggy_lad wrote: »

No I can't but if I entered into any contract by agreeing a price and paying a deposit I would reasonably expect that forfeiture of the deposit would be the limit of my obligations

So you are stating your assumptions as fact and then backing them up with further assumptions. It is assumptions like these that have the OP in the situation they find themselves.

If he band took the deposit and then cancelled at the last minute would you accept that they could just hand back the €50 and that be the end of it?

Contracts are a two way street and can't be overly onerous on one party. So if the contract only allows the OP to walk away without any penalty apart from the token € 50 deposit it wouldn't be a fair contract.

slimjimmc

BenThere wrote: »

Foggy, I wouldn't disagree with you that the band left themselves open to the OP doing what he (wrongfully) did by only taking a €50 deposit. If I was in their business I'd be taking a non refundable €500 deposit or a 50% deposit. A deposit should be large enough to thwart people from doing what the OP did.

Ref whether the OP is a consumer and therefore the transaction falls under the Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Act 1980 the act states that:-

"3.—(1) In the Act of 1893 and this Act, a party to a contract is said to deal as consumer in relation to another party if—

(a) he neither makes the contract in the course of a business nor holds himself out as doing so, and

(b) the other party does make the contract in the course of a business, and

(c) the goods or services supplied under or in pursuance of the contract are of a type ordinarily supplied for private use or consumption"

I'm not sure whether engaging a band to play at a wedding can be defined as "ordinarily" supplied for private use or consumption in the same way a packet of sweets would be or renting a DVD would be but I'm open to correction on that.

Ben

Don't know many wedding parties that are open to the public. It's normally limited to invited guests (bar a few gate crashers), so yes I would expect the service provided by a wedding band to be of a type ordinarily supplied for private use. Would be a different story if you hired them for a fund-raiser, or similar.

BenEadir

slimjimmc wrote: »

Don't know many wedding parties that are open to the public. It's normally limited to invited guests (bar a few gate crashers), so yes I would expect the service provided by a wedding band to be of a type ordinarily supplied for private use. Would be a different story if you hired them for a fund-raiser, or similar.

My interpretation of the act is "how are bands ordinarily supplied?" Off bands are normally hired for private use then you may be correct but afaik bands are normally/moist frequently hired commercially by pubs, clubs and event organisers. They are less frequently hired for private functions like weddings thus the "normal" engagement of a band is commercial not consumer but I'm open to correction if anyone has actual precedent in this area.

foggy_lad

BenThere wrote: »

My interpretation of the act is "how are bands ordinarily supplied?" Off bands are normally hired for private use then you may be correct but afaik bands are normally/moist frequently hired commercially by pubs, clubs and event organisers. They are less frequently hired for private functions like weddings thus the "normal" engagement of a band is commercial not consumer but I'm open to correction if anyone has actual precedent in this area.

In cases where bands/performers are hired by a ppublican/hotelier and are playing to people in a public lounge or bar it would surely be considered commercial but where the person hiring the band or performer is doing so for a private function it would be considered consumer.

BenEadir

foggy_lad wrote: »

In cases where bands/performers are hired by a ppublican/hotelier and are playing to people in a public lounge or bar it would surely be considered commercial but where the person hiring the band or performer is doing so for a private function it would be considered consumer.

You're 100% correct Foggy Lad but are bands "ordinarily" hired for commercial or private functions. If the former then the sale of goods act won't apply, that's my reading of the legislation.

Even if the sale of goods act does govern the transaction between the OP and the band does it show the OP to terminate the contract without liability other than the forfeiture of his deposit?

bladebrew

This thread is bonkers! The OP said himself if the deposit was bigger he would not have cancelled the first band at all! So the band as said, left themselves open to things like this happening, I bought a car for $2600 a few weeks ago and they wanted a $500 deposit, we paid $200 and had to sign forms saying we would lose the $200 if we don't complete the sale! A simple sheet of paper but the garage were covered,
How would a verbal agreement stand up in court with no evidence whatsoever?
Some crazy suggestions in the thread, I would imagine the amateur band will now have a normal deposit and some paperwork from now on.

Gileadi

I wonder if this wedding band are declaring these earnings to revenue. From my experience I would doubt it, for this reason alone I doubt they would pursue the OP.

My two cents is that they can keep the deposit but wouldn't give a cent more, these things happen in business and without defined terms and conditions they will happen again.

BenEadir

bladebrew wrote: »

I would imagine the amateur band will now have a normal deposit and some paperwork from now on.

You're spot on there Blade, it may well be the lesson they need to learn if they want to avoid situations like the OP has created here but a verbal agreement is every bit as enforceable as a written agreement. It's more convenient to have a written document but when the contract is as simple as "If I give you a €50 deposit will you play at my wedding on xx/xx/2014 and I'll pay you another €XXX at the end of your performance"

This will never get to court. The OP acted like a spoilt child who saw a bigger/better toy he wanted to play with and the band left themselves open to being abused by the OP by not having a simple one page contract and larger deposit. The fact they were naive doesn't mean a judge wouldn't find in their favour if both parties presented their case to him/her which as I said earlier is never going to happen. You see this sort of mickey mouse crap on Judge Judy all the time. I said, he said, she said etc etc.

hoodwinked

ok after reading through *most* of this thread, two things i see are:


a) the op paid a deposit for a service with no terms and conditions attached, that deposit is now lost to the op with the cancelation of services, if the deposit wasn't sufficient to them, that is on the band as they decided €50 was enough of a deposit,



b) when i got married, every service i used got back to me promptly, if my dj or band took more than a week to get back to me for ANY request/question i would have been questioning their reliability and professionalism, this band took 4 weeks to return the op's calls/emails, i'm sorry but two weeks before my wedding or not i would be replacing these guys,


clearly they are not a professional outfit as anyone i have met who is, is more organised,curtious (knowing word of mouth is what generates most business in the wedding industry) and they make themselves available to the people paying them (even when dealing with some real bridezilla's which im sure they will tell you) in the run up to the event,


while the op's reasons for canceling are not the nicest way of going about their business, the behavior of this band is no better imo

Bepolite

I got bored reading through all the outrage at the OP so skipped to the end, apoligies if I missed something. Moral obligation does not equal a legal one. Basically OP is a punter band is a business. If a business wants to protect itself it does things properly, they haven't. While I agree it's poor form on behalf of the OP, I believe the band are making idle threats.

Frankly if they're this sloppy about their contracts I doubt they're paying tax etc so I find it hard to be too sypathetic.

PS at work no spell check

slimjimmc

BenThere wrote: »

My interpretation of the act is "how are bands ordinarily supplied?" Off bands are normally hired for private use then you may be correct but afaik bands are normally/moist frequently hired commercially by pubs, clubs and event organisers. They are less frequently hired for private functions like weddings thus the "normal" engagement of a band is commercial not consumer but I'm open to correction if anyone has actual precedent in this area.

If you hire an oil truck to deliver 1000 litres of heating oil to your home that is a consumer contract for delivery, yes?
If that same truck then delivers another 1000 litres of heating oil to each of the 3 different commercial premises down the road, those are business contracts for delivery, yes?

Does the fact that the same truck serves 2 different markets make your contract any less a consumer one? No, because because its still an ordinary part of the service, it doesn't have to be the larger part.