Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hobnail you don't know Elms too well yet. I am surprised that they got as close as they did to adding up to 30. I think the poor dears get confused because most other letters they send out are to give 28 days notice. They even  have difficulty with their two times table and often consult with the char lady to confirm that 2 plus 2 equals 4.  Just act on the notion that they are total numpties and you won't be far out.
    • To carry on from the above post it may be helpful to go through their WS using their numbers. 9] motorists do NOT accept the contract when entering the land. First they have to read it and understand it and then they realise that a] "No stopping" is prohibitive and cannot offer a contract. b] the signs around the bus stop do not mention who issued the No Stopping signs so it could not have been issued by VCS since the IPC CoP states that their signs should include the IPC logo and the creditor be identified.  10]There is no mention of £100 charge for breaching the No stopping request or if there is it is far too small to read even for a pedestrian. 11] no matter how often VCS say it, it is NOT a contractual clause   22]" the claimant has given the Defendant its contractual licence to enter the site". No it hasn't. This is a road leading to the airport. All sorts of people are going to the airport-travellers, taxis, fuel bowsers, airport staff, companies delivering food and drink for each aircraft, air traffic controllers, buses. It is absolutely ridiculous to attribute VCS wth any sort of permissions. The land owners yes, but not VCS . There can be no sort of analogy between a car park and a major thoroughfare where VCS have no place as it is not relevant land.   23] there can be no contract as there is no offer only a prohibition. And it is not relevant land no matter how Mr Walli attempts to prove otherwise. 25] VCS may have won a few times but none quoted was on an airport covered by the RTA and its own Byelaws. They also have lost more cases than they have won using their prohibitive signs. 26] First one has to consider if there is a contract. Is it relevant land? No. Does a valid contract exist betweer VCS and Peel? NO.  27] the signage at the bus stop may show the conditions ie  no stopping, and restricted zone but not the terms ie is there a charge for stopping and who is the creditor. The last section of the sign is illegible  29] already stated that a WS between VCS and peel is not a valid document 31] it will need more than the Claimants feather to outweigh the case against the Defendant no matter who was driving. 32] there is no law of agency involved. This is not a case of employer/employedd relationship. VCS are muddying the waters because they have no way of transferring the driver's liability to the keeper 33] this a red herring. There is no list of highways at all  on the Highways act 1980 so this is a deliberate strategy to debunk the fact that this road is not relevant land. VCS are put to strict proof that it is relevant land not covered by the Road Traffic Act nor by Byelaws. 34] there ican be no comparison between a railway station and an airport. Totally fatuous analogy.  35] yes the landowners can bring in their own terms but what the cannot do is overrule Byelaws and the Road Traffic Act. 39] surely the paralegal cannot be that ignorant of PoFA. If Bye Laws are involved then the bus stop is not relevant land and so the specious argument about FGW is rubbish   36] what on earth is he talking about with Permits. There is no mention of permits on the signage and even if there were  would it mean that Permit holders were allowed to stop on No Stopping roads? There are enough examples on CAG to counter act their idiocy on continuing charging the extra £60   46] VCS had NO reasonable cause to apply to the DVLA for the Defendants details. No valid  contract with the landowners No stopping is prohibitive therefore cannot form a contract the event happened on a bus stop over which VCS has no jurisdiction the signage either does not show that there was a charge of £100 for stopping, or the font size was too small for a motorist to be able to read it  the signage does not show the Creditor which fails the IPC CoP so not valid the WS contract does not appear to authorise VCS to pursue motorists to Court Given all these factors it seems that VCS have breached the GDPR of the Defendant quite substantially and it would appear right that an exemplary award is made against VCS in the hope that they will drop all further cases at Doncaster airport where they are pursuing motorists on non relevant land.   48] what is this guy on? You weren't in a car park you were on a bus stop 59] this case is totally without merit. I am not surprised that the paralegal will not be turning up. Some statements are pretty close to perjury and others are designed to mislead or misdirect. None of the analogies seem appropriate or relevant. Could have been said in at least half the time without the repetition and trying to make a case where none was there. One particularly bad example of misdirection was in the photographs. The Clearway sign shown near the bus stop is very unclear  unlike the Clearway sign two photos before it which may well include terms and conditions. The one by the bus stop is totally different.      
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote...   your defence doesnt need any return of docs.. carefully read what has been posted here and in the other threads i pointed to in your old thread merged here too.   redwood/harwood or STA or brachers.   just use our enhanced google search box.   uni fees is useful too.   this guy is just in front of you    
    • Tech firm CEO Jeff Lawson warns bosses not to make hasty judgements about their employees.View the full article
    • I have just spent last few hours registering and signing up and filling in all the details.   Below is a POC I have drafted.   The defendant is a parcel delivery company DPD (UK) LIMITED On 09/08/2021 the defendant agreed to deliver the claimant's parcel containing a PlayStation 5 Disc Version value £530, to an address in the UK. The delivery fee of £7.79 was paid by the claimant. Parcel tracking number: ???????? Parcel reference no: ????????? The defendant failed to deliver the parcel and have reported it as lost on 20/08/2021. The defendant refuses to refund the full value of the item and the delivery fee. The claimant seeks £530 being the value of the item, £7.79 delivery cost and legal fees.        (Sorry for being stupid but this POC is supposed to go where it says    " Claim details Why you believe you’re owed the money: " right? Reason why I'm asking is because I don't see anywhere it specifically says what are your particulars of claim)   Tomorrow being the 15th day, I will be ready to click it off (assuming the POC is ok)    I have read a few more hermes/packlink etc stories where they were resolved and gives me hope I will regain my lost money.  Will carry on reading up as much as I can.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Ticket Master Error! Where Do I Stand?


sitcom123
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5265 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I recently bought 4 tickets to go and watch the police in concert at the MEN in Manchester purchasing tickets via ticket master. I specifically asked for lower tier seats and was told there were seats available on lower tier block 106. when i looked at the seating plan i went ahead with the purchase. I got the tickets through last month but never really checked them, i have just got them out to confirm the date with my friend and have noticed that the seat allocation is on the upper level behind the actual stage, so not only am i on the upper level in the gods but have got a rear view of the stage!!!!!!!!!! I have rung ticketmaster and they say that i am in 106 but up in the gods not where i asked, she said it looked like it might be an operator error but couldnt discuss it with me as i wasnt the cardholder who booked the seats, I booked them on my hubbys credit card and he is out for the evening so will have to get him to ring first thing tomorrow. Just wondered if any of you could give me any advice on where i stand with this and any advice anyone could give me before we ring them tomorrow

Link to post
Share on other sites

IF it is operator error then they're bound to rectify it, however it all hinges on how long you have had the tickets before querying them. If you've only had them a day or so, a swap should be possible, but if you've only notice and had the tickets for awhile, they could assert you had time to check the tickets and did not complain at the time, and therefore accepted them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the order made over the telephone?

 

I think Ticketmaster record all calls to their ticket order lines.

PUTTING IT IN WRITING & KEEPING COPIES IS A MUST FOR SUCCESS

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes it was made over the phone and the operator def said they were lower tier block 106. I have had the tickets about four weeks my husband rang me and told me they had come and he put them away, never even thought about checking them at the time as i have never had any problems before

Link to post
Share on other sites

on the phone to them now, they have put me on hold to discuss what they can do, says ticket master operate a no refund policy though, but as it is operator error should i insist on one

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't insist on a refund if you still want to see The Police!

 

However, have you checked the tickets to see if they say "Restricted View"? - normally, if you are to the rear of a stage, etc they say that on them.

 

If you have been sold tickets with a confirmed Restricted View I would tell them you should have been informed of this. (Normally these seats would be discounted slightly).

 

Are you ABSOLUTELY sure of where the seats are in relation to the stage that The Police will be using? I had tickets for a gig recently that looked like we would be able to see nothing without a periscope, however, when we arrived we were pleasantly suprised to find we were actually right next to the stage, as the band arranged the staging differently to one we had seen before in the same venue.

 

I hope you get it sorted and that you have a great time. (V jealous - they were sold out by the time I got through!)

 

;)

2007 Issues ALL RESOLVED

2008 Issues ALL RESOLVED

£4,200 in charges claimed back succesfully from a total of 5 Creditors

2009 Issues ALL RESOLVED

NEXT Directory - No Agreement, No Further Action **WON**

2010 Issues

Court Claim from Black Horse - AOS 22.11.10, CPR 23.11.10

Assisting Daughter with Employment Tribunal for Wrongful Dismissal/Discrimination

 

:) My Head is officially out of the Sand :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ticket master have rang me today to say they have credited my account with a full refund. The tickets were in the gods at the back of the stage with very limited view of the back of the stage!!! The error they say was that within this section of the arena is a block 106 and the operator had made an error. They were very nice and it was easily refunded without any hassle at all.

 

thanks to everyone for their advice

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...