Entitlement to deposit back

AndrewJRenko

Darc19 wrote: »

They have done nothing wrong. Morally they could have done better.

But if you name and shame them you leave yourself open to very expensive defamation actions.

On such actions, the legal costs are in the region of €20,000+

Not advisable in the slightest.

Has anyone ever been subject to a defamation action in Ireland arising from a review on Google or Facebook or Tripadvisor?

Dav010

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Has anyone ever been subject to a defamation action in Ireland arising from a review on Google or Facebook or Tripadvisor?

They certainly have for professional services left on other review sites. If memory serves me right Boards.ie was subject to legal action by MCD concert promoters a few years ago and there is a famous case where a solicitor took action after a poor review on a rating site.

dubrov

Dav010 wrote:

It’s very relevant, the band did not cancel and can perform on the June date, the op just needs to provide the venue.

They cannot perform on the agreed date at the agreed venue. Changing venue and/or date is a material change to the agreement and essentially nullifies it.

I agree that it is not their fault but that doesn't make a difference. Fairness does not come into it.

Dav010

dubrov wrote: »

They cannot perform on the agreed date at the agreed venue. Changing venue and/or date is a material change to the agreement and essentially nullifies it.

I agree that it is not their fault but that doesn't make a difference. Fairness does not come into it.

The venue is not the bands problem, it is the booker’s. As another poster posted, you can book them to perform in your back garden if you want. Their booking is not dependent on the ops venue being open to perform.

dubrov

Dav010 wrote:

The venue is not the bands problem, it is the booker’s. As another poster posted, you can book them to perform in your back garden if you want. Their booking is not dependent on the ops venue being open to perform.

I'm afraid it is. I'm not going to convince you anyway so good luck

Dav010

dubrov wrote: »

I'm afraid it is. I'm not going to convince you anyway so good luck

Ok, who books the venue, the op or the band? That should simplify things for you.

dubrov

Dav010 wrote:

Ok, who books the venue, the op or the band? That should simplify things for you.

You keep repeating this angle and I've addressed it several times which you've ignored. Does that simplify things for you?


Anyway, this is my last post on this thread. I've had my say

StupidLikeAFox

Some people here have taken very clear opposing sides OP which I would say is an indication that its at least a grey area. Its not your fault that the band can't play and its not the band's either I guess. This is the very point of the Small Claims Court - to hear both sides and make an impartial judgement one way or the other.

If I were you I would contact the band and say "I am not entirely sure on how this scenario should be covered and whether your terms and conditions that I signed up for cover this specific scenario. I am going to raise a claim to the SCC to have them adjudicate on the case for a definitive answer"

They might come back and give you the money to avoid the hassle/publicity. If not, you can raise the claim and the SCC will give you a definitive answer one way or another - that is what its whats its there for. I would not let it go until you have this answer based on the snarky reply alone, that was unnecessary

son.of.jimi

You book a date with a band to provide a service on a specific date, they confirm that date for you. Deposit is paid. Any changes to the original date - Band keeps deposit.

Even if the new date is able to be completed, they might have to move something else around to facilitate the new date which is extra work on their end, if you're not in a band or part of the music industry you don't know the work that goes on in the background.

It's not as simple as You've paid for the service therefore "when i say jump you say how high"

OP I don't think it's worth your time or stress to try chase this down. If it comes to a they said / we said scenario in SCC without any written contract it'll be very hard to prove.

Cupatae

son.of.jimi wrote: »

You book a date with a band to provide a service on a specific date, they confirm that date for you. Deposit is paid. Any changes to the original date - Band keeps deposit.

Even if the new date is able to be completed, they might have to move something else around to facilitate the new date which is extra work on their end, if you're not in a band or part of the music industry you don't know the work that goes on in the background.

It's not as simple as You've paid for the service therefore "when i say jump you say how high"

OP I don't think it's worth your time or stress to try chase this down. If it comes to a they said / we said scenario in SCC without any written contract it'll be very hard to prove.

Seems like bands are very sneaky people, with very low morals, this situation deserves a refund or at the very least a partial refund, Why exactly do they get to keep the 500 euro? what losses do they have to cover in this exact situation? I think if op presses this issue the band would lose.

But all legal mumbo jumbo aside, what sort of a person takes 500 euro of someones money and keeps it in a situation like this? its a low thing to do. I hope it gets well known and the band loses alot of business because they deserve to.

OnYerPike

son.of.jimi wrote: »

You book a date with a band to provide a service on a specific date, they confirm that date for you. Deposit is paid. Any changes to the original date - Band keeps deposit.

Even if the new date is able to be completed, they might have to move something else around to facilitate the new date which is extra work on their end, if you're not in a band or part of the music industry you don't know the work that goes on in the background.

It's not as simple as You've paid for the service therefore "when i say jump you say how high"

OP I don't think it's worth your time or stress to try chase this down. If it comes to a they said / we said scenario in SCC without any written contract it'll be very hard to prove.

Are you the drummer or the lead vocals?

OP, pay the €25 to the SCC and go for it. Teach them a lesson for the manky email.

son.of.jimi

OnYerPike wrote: »

Are you the drummer or the lead vocals?

OP, pay the €25 to the SCC and go for it. Teach them a lesson for the manky email.

I'm neither.

kirving

Dav010 wrote: »

Would you include in your truthful review that you are responsible for venue and that the band can play on the date you booked them for?

Like I said, factual.

I don't think the OP needs to leave anything out, for people to make their own mind up about the band's attitude.

Not that I suggest being deliberately vindictive whatsoever, but if I was to pay a lot of money for any service, I'd like to know there was some flexibility from both sides.

The current situation is neither the band, nor the OP's fault, and yet the OP loses 100%.

Dav010

Kevin Irving wrote: »

Like I said, factual.

I don't think the OP needs to leave anything out, for people to make their own mind up about the band's attitude.

Not that I suggest being deliberately vindictive whatsoever, but if I was to pay a lot of money for any service, I'd like to know there was some flexibility from both sides.

The current situation is neither the band, nor the OP's fault, and yet the OP loses 100%.

The op didn’t lose 100% of the cost, just the deposit. And, the op has confirmed that he/she knew the deposit was non refundable.

Like all disputes over services, It comes down to what you agreed to when contracting the service provider. The op booked a band for a certain date, the band can play on that date as booked, but the op can’t provide the venue to perform, through no fault of their own. There is a reason why you have to have reached a certain age before being able to enter a contract, you are expected to be mature enough to understand what you are agreeing to.

The bands attitude is that they can provide the service, so they are entitled to retain the deposit if the op has to cancel.

paddy19

Dav010 wrote: »

There is a reason why you have to have reached a certain age before being able to enter a contract, you are expected to be mature enough to understand what you are agreeing to.

The bands attitude is that they can provide the service, so they are entitled to retain the deposit if the op has to cancel.

"No contract just paid €500 by online banking."

Why are putting the onus on the consumer to ensure that agreement is clear?

Does the band not have to be mature and professional in how it runs it's business?

I think the onus is on the professional provider who knows and understands the business to ensure that the contract is clear, documented and agreed.

The provider is doing this every day, the consumer does it once.

Dav010

paddy19 wrote: »

"No contract just paid €500 by online banking."

Why are putting the onus on the consumer to ensure that agreement is clear?

Does the band not have to be mature and professional in how it runs it's business?

I think the onus is on the professional provider who knows and understands the business to ensure that the contract is clear, documented and agreed.

The provider is doing this every day, the consumer does it once.

You missed the post where the op stated that he/she ticked the box on the booking form informing him/her that deposit is non refundable. To be fair, that is clear. Also, I don’t think you need to be a member of Mensa to understand that the band does not provide the hotel, the person making the booking is responsible for the venue.

paddy19

"You missed the post where the op stated that he/she ticked the box on the booking form informing him/her that deposit is non refundable."

The whole discussion is about what "non-refundable" means and when it applies.

Ticking a box does not give away all rights.

By not having clear terms and conditions the band leaves itself open to
being pursued in the the small claims court.

I can tell you courts expect businesses to be clear about what is contracted.

EU law puts an onus on suppliers to be clear to consumers what T & C's apply.

Why would you think virtually every large service provider explains in details
how the contract will work, it's not for the benefit of the consumer?

They try to limit the consumer's rights and still be within EU law.

Dav010

paddy19 wrote: »

"You missed the post where the op stated that he/she ticked the box on the booking form informing him/her that deposit is non refundable."

The whole discussion is about what "non-refundable" means and when it applies.

Ticking a box does not give away all rights.

By not having clear terms and conditions the band leaves itself open to
being pursued in the the small claims court.

I can tell you courts expect businesses to be clear about what is contracted.

EU law puts an onus on suppliers to be clear to consumers what T & C's apply.

Why would you think virtually every large service provider explains in details
how the contract will work, it's not for the benefit of the consumer?

They try to limit the consumer's rights and still be within EU law.

According to CCPC, the service provider has no obligation to refund a deposit. In this case, the op is obviously the one responsible for the venue, the band can play on that date.

I agree that the band should return the deposit, but that is not the same as saying they have to. They are available to play on the day, to them that is all that matters.

StupidLikeAFox

Dav010 wrote: »

According to CCPC, the service provider has no obligation to refund a deposit. In this case, the op is obviously the one responsible for the venue, the band can play on that date.

I agree that the band should return the deposit, but that is not the same as saying they have to. They are available to play on the day, to them that is all that matters.

Are they really available to play? Surely government directives are dictating that they can't?

paddy19

Dav010 wrote: »

According to CCPC, the service provider has no obligation to refund a deposit. In this case, the op is obviously the one responsible for the venue, the band can play on that date.

I agree that the band should return the deposit, but that is not the same as saying they have to. They are available to play on the day, to them that is all that matters.

Well we agreed that the band should return the deposit.
Which I suppose is the important thing

I respectfully disagree with the CCPC who are the usual Irish regulator with two contractionary roles:
Representing both consumer and supplier at the same time.

Happily the old days when the law treated consumers and suppliers as equal participants are long gone.
The EU recognises that the supplier is a much better position to know the types of issues that arise than the consumer.
In this case the venue is not available on the date. EU puts the onus on the supplier to ensure that the contract is clear.

Why wouldn't the band have a clause in the contract that says something like
The client is responsible for providing the venue.
If the venue is not available for any reason the deposit will not be returned.
It is recommended that the client purchase insurance to cover such eventualities.

No debate with that clause!

Here is my bet, OP goes to the SCC they will get their deposit back.

Dav010

paddy19 wrote: »

Well we agreed that the band should return the deposit.
Which I suppose is the important thing

I respectfully disagree with the CCPC who are the usual Irish regulator with two contractionary roles:
Representing both consumer and supplier at the same time.

Happily the old days when the law treated consumers and suppliers as equal participants are long gone.
The EU recognises that the supplier is a much better position to know the types of issues that arise than the consumer.
In this case the venue is not available on the date. EU puts the onus on the supplier to ensure that the contract is clear.

Why wouldn't the band have a clause in the contract that says something like
The client is responsible for providing the venue.
If the venue is not available for any reason the deposit will not be returned.
It is recommended that the client purchase insurance to cover such eventualities.

No debate with that clause!

Here is my bet, OP goes to the SCC they will get their deposit back.

Honestly? You’d have to be simple not to understand that the venue you are booking the band to play in, is the responsibility of person doing the booking.

dubrov

Dav010 wrote: »

According to CCPC, the service provider has no obligation to refund a deposit. In this case, the op is obviously the one responsible for the venue, the band can play on that date.

I see Davo is still posting falsehoods on this thread.

Here is the source on the CPCC website if anyone wants it.

Below is the key text again so that other posters can make their mind up

If the business tells you that your delivery will be delayed, you should try to agree a new, reasonable date for delivery. If the product is delivered and is not what you ordered, you should contact the business immediately to arrange for it to be changed. In these situations, it is important for you to have written confirmation for proof of what you ordered.

When can I ask for a refund of my deposit?
You have a right to ask for your deposit back if:

you cannot agree a new delivery date
the new delivery date suggested is much later than you originally agreed
the business fails to meet the new agreed delivery date
the business cannot give you the item you agreed to buy

If the business refuses to return your deposit, you may have to take legal action to try to get your deposit back. If your claim is less than €2,000, you can use the Small Claims procedure to try and resolve the issue. It costs €25 to lodge an application with the Small Claims Registrar and the procedure is a relatively cheap, fast and easy way for consumers to resolve some types of disputes, generally without having to use a solicitor.

It all comes down to what the court determine is the product of the implied contract. Is it the band playing or is it the band playing at the agreed location and date?

Dav010

dubrov wrote: »

I see Davo is still posting falsehoods on this thread.

Here is the source on the CPCC website if anyone wants it.

Below is the key text again so that other posters can make their mind up



It all comes down to what the court determine is the product of the implied contract. Is it the band playing or is it the band playing at the agreed location and date?

I see you still don’t understand, read the first sentence of your quote from CCPC, the business (band) isn’t telling the op the service delivery is delayed, the op is telling the band that they can’t provide the venue.

I’m with you that the band should return the money, but they can and probably would provide the entertainment on the day the op booked, but they didn’t agree to supply the venue and you can’t imply they did.

Consumer legislation, contracts verbal and written are there to protect both parties, not just the consumer.

paddy19

Here is the source on the CPCC website if anyone wants it.

Below is the key text again so that other posters can make their mind up

It all comes down to what the court determine is the product of the implied contract. Is it the band playing or is it the band playing at the agreed location and date?

No it doesn't, it comes down to unfair contracts:

4. One-sided compensation for cancellation:

Terms which allow a trader to keep pre-payments if the consumer
cancels the contract without allowing for equivalent compensation
to the consumer where the trader cancels.

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/unfair-treatment/unfair-contract-terms/index_en.htm

---

"Consumer legislation, contracts verbal and written are there to protect both parties, not just the consumer. "

That is very much the theory, favoured by Irish law.

The EU deals with the reality that contracts are written by and in favour of the supplier.

"Under EU law, standard contract terms used by traders have to be fair.
This doesn't change if they're called "terms and conditions"
or are part of a detailed contract that you actually have to sign.
The contract is not allowed to create an imbalance between your
rights and obligations as a consumer and the rights and obligations
of sellers and suppliers."

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/unfair-treatment/unfair-contract-terms/index_en.htm

Dav010

paddy19 wrote: »

No it doesn't, it comes down to unfair contracts:

4. One-sided compensation for cancellation:

Terms which allow a trader to keep pre-payments if the consumer
cancels the contract without allowing for equivalent compensation
to the consumer where the trader cancels.

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/unfair-treatment/unfair-contract-terms/index_en.htm

---

"Consumer legislation, contracts verbal and written are there to protect both parties, not just the consumer. "

That is very much the theory, favoured by Irish law.

The EU deals with the reality that contracts are written by and in favour of the supplier.

"Under EU law, standard contract terms used by traders have to be fair.
This doesn't change if they're called "terms and conditions"
or are part of a detailed contract that you actually have to sign.
The contract is not allowed to create an imbalance between your
rights and obligations as a consumer and the rights and obligations
of sellers and suppliers."

https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/unfair-treatment/unfair-contract-terms/index_en.htm

Which part of that link to legislation deals with when the consumer cancels even though the trader can deliver the service ordered on time?

Again, under Irish consumer law, there is no obligation on the trader to refund a deposit when the consumer cancels. In this case, the op cancelled because the venue isn’t open. That is not an onerous or unfair condition of the contract. The provision of the venue is not a condition of the service being provided by the band.

You should also be aware that EU directive/laws are up to each country to adopt into their own consumer laws, many were not adopted by Ireland because our consumer laws were considered to offer more protection. The CCPC, the independent statutory body states that traders are not obligated to return deposits, especially as in this case that the trader is not the one responsible for the cancellation.

dubrov

paddy19 wrote: »

No it doesn't, it comes down to unfair contracts:

In fairness, the band would have to demonstrate that the OP breached the contract before that would even apply. The band would then have to show the clause was fair. E.g. They suffered a material loss as a result of the cancellation.

dubrov

Dav010 wrote: »

Which part of that link to legislation deals with when the consumer cancels even though the trader can deliver the service ordered on time?

The CCPC, the independent statutory body states that traders are not obligated to return deposits, especially as in this case that the trader is not the one responsible for the cancellation.

Can you please reference this on the CPCC site?
I assume you have made several leaps to come up with the above.

Dav010

dubrov wrote: »

Can you please reference this on the CPCC site?
I assume you have made several leaps to come up with the above.

“The obligations of the contract work both ways so the business doesn’t have to return your deposit if you change your mind. For example, if you paid a deposit to a shop to hold an item for you and you later decide you don’t want the item, the shop may not be obliged to refund you your deposit”


The op doesn’t want the band because he/she can’t get the venue.

dubrov

Dav010 wrote: »

“The obligations of the contract work both ways so the business doesn’t have to return your deposit if you change your mind. For example, if you paid a deposit to a shop to hold an item for you and you later decide you don’t want the item, the shop may not be obliged to refund you your deposit”


The op doesn’t want the band because he/she can’t get the venue.

That is not what you said. You said "traders are not obligated to return deposits, especially as in this case that the trader is not the one responsible for the cancellation."

Secondly the OP did not change their mind.

Lastly, you left out the following bit from your quote

If you signed a contract, there should be details in the terms and conditions about paying a deposit and whether a refund is possible.

The OP mentioned no terms and conditions. A service provider cannot just trouser a deposit in all circumstances where the event does not go ahead.

I assume the band really is broke though so it may not be possible to get blood out of a stone.

Dav010

dubrov wrote: »

That is not what you said. You said "traders are not obligated to return deposits, especially as in this case that the trader is not the one responsible for the cancellation."

Secondly the OP did not change their mind.

Lastly, you left out the following bit from your quote


The OP mentioned no terms and conditions. A service provider cannot just trouser a deposit in all circumstances where the event does not go ahead.

I assume the band really is broke though so it may not be possible to get blood out of a stone.

The op is changing his/her mind about the band, he/she unilaterally cancelled them, albeit due to an event beyond their control. Also, the op has confirmed that he ticked the box agreeing that the deposit was non-refundable.

If you pay a deposit on an item in a shop then cancel because you can’t get the money together due to circumstances beyond your control, the shop isn’t responsible for you having the finance anymore than the band in this case is responsible for the op having a venue.