Being harrassed over tickets

rannerap

About 6 months ago I sold some tickets to a concert to someone via an online site. I bought them via ticketmaster. Apparently the concert was cancelled as they have been sending me threatening messages that I am to meet them in town with money that I owe them since it's cancelled or they will call the guards or show up at my work. The site I sold it through basically said it's a legal grey area. That I don't have to give them anything. Surely once tickets are sold that's it? I don't think Ticketmaster have refunded me yet, but the same happened to me once and I just accepted I had lost the money on them.

noodler

rannerap wrote: »

About 6 months ago I sold some tickets to a concert to someone via an online site. I bought them via ticketmaster. Apparently the concert was cancelled as they have been sending me threatening messages that I am to meet them in town with money that I owe them since it's cancelled or they will call the guards or show up at my work. The site I sold it through basically said it's a legal grey area. That I don't have to give them anything. Surely once tickets are sold that's it? I don't think Ticketmaster have refunded me yet, but the same happened to me once and I just accepted I had lost the money on them.

Em, when ticket master refund you, you should refund him.

Legal grey area it may be.

If you were to walk away from this with twice the cash then and the buyer completely out of pocket then I would absolutely understand this person's anger.

I assume ticket master have said they will be refunding as per usual practice?

gerard2210

Surely if a concert is cancelled ticketmaster will refund you. Have you contacted ticketmaster to see what the story is?

hognef

rannerap wrote: »

About 6 months ago I sold some tickets to a concert to someone via an online site. I bought them via ticketmaster. Apparently the concert was cancelled as they have been sending me threatening messages that I am to meet them in town with money that I owe them since it's cancelled or they will call the guards or show up at my work. The site I sold it through basically said it's a legal grey area. That I don't have to give them anything. Surely once tickets are sold that's it? I don't think Ticketmaster have refunded me yet, but the same happened to me once and I just accepted I had lost the money on them.

Surely, if and when Ticketmaster does refund you, it'd be reasonable to forward the refund to whomever bought the tickets off you? Until such time, however, I can't see any reason to entertain their claim.

GerardKeating

hognef wrote: »

Surely, if and when Ticketmaster does refund you, it'd be reasonable to forward the refund to whomever bought the tickets off you? Until such time, however, I can't see any reason to entertain their claim.

A more interesting question, were the tickets sold for more than face value, and how much does the OP intend to refund, what they paid for the tickets, or what they sold them for.

RHJ

This post has been deleted.

noodler

Yeah, OP you are being a bit vague.

Bad enough to gauge someone but to not refund them when the concert is cancelled is terrible form.

Jutton

You said " I don't think ticketmaster refunded me yet" . Surely the first thing to do is check that first on your statements....before posting on boards.
I bought tickets few years ago from Ticketmaster outlet, I simply went back to same outlet and got refund straight away. Was very simple.
I'm no legal expert but I imagine the law is on buyers side.

Samuel T. Cogley

Are you even allowed to sell tickets on?

2Mad2BeMad

How is the OP a mod? :L is this post a troll or what?

nxbyveromdwjpg

RHJ wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes, minus the fee's from the sale/commission for the tout site. Unless they refund too, which I doubt they do.

ScouseMouse

Russell Brand perhaps?

Ticketmaster will have credited you and you have to give the person their money back.

If the buyer makes a claim of fraud to the gardai, they can get your details and can pay you a visit.

Just give them their money back and stop messing.

ScouseMouse

Jutton wrote: »

You said " I don't think ticketmaster refunded me yet" . Surely the first thing to do is check that first on your statements....before posting on boards.
I bought tickets few years ago from Ticketmaster outlet, I simply went back to same outlet and got refund straight away. Was very simple.
I'm no legal expert but I imagine the law is on buyers side.

How could you not know if they refunded you yet? That is quite an evasive comment. It is not hard to check your account or ring them. Is that what you told the buyer? "I am not sure if they credited me yet"?

Zulu

Wow, really? People really can be jerks! Just give them back their money, and quit messing them around.

the Gardai may not get involved, but the karma police will

Eggonyerface

You'll be refunded,give them the money back

Pete Moss

rannerap wrote:

I don't think Ticketmaster have refunded me yet

Did you check your bank account to see if money has been credited back from Ticketmaster? Did you call Ticketmaster to ask when you will get a refund?

rannerap wrote:

the same happened to me once and I just accepted I had lost the money on them.

Do you mean the same happened you in the sense that someone ripped you off before or that Ticketmaster never refunded you for a previously cancelled gig? Because, neither is right.

It's simple. You're due a refund from Ticketmaster and the guy is due a refund from you.

ScouseMouse

Deleted User wrote: »

the Gardai may not get involved, but the karma police will

If a complaint of fraud is made, the gardai can force adverts to hand over the persons details. The OP is acting the bollix here and is storing up a whole world of trouble here.

duffgirl

"I don't think Ticketmaster have refunded me yet, but the same happened to me once and I just accepted I had lost the money on them."

How can you not know if you've recieved a refund? Online banking is a miraculous development that allows you to easily check these things. Are you using this situation to reimburse yourself because this happened to you in the past? Did you think that you would get resounding support from others on here for not refunding the money? Refund this person, its the right thing to do. Sadly, the fact that you need to be encouraged to do so makes me question your ethics and the chances of you actually doing the right thing though.

ScouseMouse

I have just realised, the Op appears to be a boards moderator. Are boards aware yet of the questionable attitude this person has?

my3cents

The OP didn't say how much he sold the tickets for? If it was at a good profit that may be a reason they don't want to refund the money?

ScouseMouse

I think it's kinda obvious what's going on here and the Op needs to sort it out.

dzilla

rannerap wrote: »

About 6 months ago I sold some tickets to a concert to someone via an online site. I bought them via ticketmaster. Apparently the concert was cancelled as they have been sending me threatening messages that I am to meet them in town with money that I owe them since it's cancelled or they will call the guards or show up at my work. The site I sold it through basically said it's a legal grey area. That I don't have to give them anything. Surely once tickets are sold that's it? I don't think Ticketmaster have refunded me yet, but the same happened to me once and I just accepted I had lost the money on them.

Are you actually for real? Or are you just looking for confirmation that you are being a pr1ck?

Pat Mustard

Mod:

This is the Legal Discussion forum. Generally, responses are required to be civil and relevant.

There are a number of uncivil posts up there and one of them has earned an infraction. Please keep the discussion civil.

Furthermore, posts should be relevant to legal discussion. That means discussing law/legal principles etc. Keep on topic or don't post at all, please.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

innuendo141

I think OP hasn't responded because he did not get the response he was looking for.

If an event is cancelled, you get refunded. Check your bank account. If you didn't get refunded, it shouldn't be hard to get that sorted.

If you have charged over the odds for the ticket, then it's a double whammy of scum-baggish behaviour from you. Your post has left yourself open for people to think this could be the case.

Just refund the person, you really are in the wrong here.

banie01

ScouseMouse wrote: »

I have just realised, the Op appears to be a boards moderator. Are boards aware yet of the questionable attitude this person has?

You assume Boards care?!
I'd be shocked if they did!

As for the O.P, they should refund the money paid and the fact that they are quite willing to let the person stand the loss says a lot about their lack of character.

enda1

Sounds awfully like a legal grey area indeed.

A resale ticket is not like an original ticket in that you've sold two items, 1. the ticket and 2. the service of having bought the ticket (potentially joining a queue, being ready by the computer at 7am and refreshing etc.), plus fronting the money for the ticket for a long time.

So in the concert being cancelled, this doesn't negate the service component the OP provided. I would feel that a fair valuation on this is what should/could be retained but that would require some precedence to establish.

I'd say that the amount refunded to the OP should in turn be refunded and then a fair withholding of any surplus charge could be help to cover the admin component of the service. Again highly difficult to quantify but unlikely to be more than €10.

(this is not of course what i'd do myself I imagine - I think I'd refund the amount ticketmaster refund me plus the delta between the resale and sale price - but then this isn't the humanities forum so that's not really relevant)

s8n

Love the threat of the guards turning up at your work !!

YEP. this would be the biggest high priority case on their books !!

Peregrinus

enda1 wrote: »

Sounds awfully like a legal grey area indeed.

A resale ticket is not like an original ticket in that you've sold two items, 1. the ticket and 2. the service of having bought the ticket (potentially joining a queue, being ready by the computer at 7am and refreshing etc.), plus fronting the money for the ticket for a long time.

No. That's like arguing that the grocer who sells me a block of cheese is actually selling me the cheese, plus the service of going to the market, buying the cheese and bringing it to a shop convenient to where I live.

If the cheese turns out to be not fit for purpose - it's mouldy, say - the grocer repays me the full price. He doesn't get to withhold a portion to compensate him for his trouble in selling me the cheese in the first place.

Same goes here. This is a concert ticket which doesn't secure admission to a concert; it's completely worthless. It's not fit for purpose. Refund the guy his money. Do it now, and with a good grace.

Pat Mustard

Mod:

Certain posts have been deleted.

Please note that personal attacks on the OP are not allowed.

The standard of posting on this thread needs to fall into line with what is expected on this forum.

Last on-thread warning.

tomwaits48

Give back the money ffs. If it was cancelled you were refunded, no doubt about it. I'd make it my business to track you down if I was on the other end of this.

the_pen_turner

It's a tricky one. Personal y I would refund.

How does buyer beware apply here. If it was a car or TV and it stopped working a week later there would be calls for buyer beware. The tickets were perfectly good at the time of sale and sold in good faith.

Legally it could go either way

Peregrinus

the_pen_turner wrote: »

It's a tricky one. Personal y I would refund.

How does buyer beware apply here. If it was a car or TV and it stopped working a week later there would be calls for buyer beware. The tickets were perfectly good at the time of sale and sold in good faith.

Legally it could go either way

When I buy a ticket to see a particuler performance, I have a contract with the promoter. The terms of the contract include (a) I will be admitted to the performance and (b) if the performance is cancelled I will get my money back.

If I sell the ticket to you, I am assigning you my rights under the contract. Now you are entitled to be admitted to the concert, or to have the ticket price refunded if the concert is cancelled.

If, as is common with event tickets, it's a term of the original contract between me and the promoter that the contract is non-transferable, you won't be able to enforce the contract directly against the promoter. In that case, the courts will readily imply a term into the contract between me and you that (a) if any benefit under the contract comes to me as the original purchase, I will pass it on to you, and (b) if you need me to enforce the terms of the contract on your behalf, I will do so.

So, if the OP has received a refund, he must pass it on. And if he hasn't received a refund, he has a duty to pursue the matter with the promoter, obtain the refund, and pass it on.

What if the purchaser on-sold the ticket for more than face value? That's the only area where I think there could any talk at all of a "grey area". He could argue that the markup is a service fee in return for him sourcing the ticket, and assisting the ultimate buyer in enforcing his rights under it, and that if he does in fact obtain the refund and pass it on he is providing the service which has been paid for, and he doesn't have to repay the service fee. But that argument only holds water if the mark-up does in fact look like a reasonable sum to pay for the service provided. If it simply reflects the scarcity value of the tickets I think the court would take the view that it's not a service fee, it's part of the market value of the ticket and, if the event isn't held, it should be returned along with the face value of the ticket.

ichabod

Two pages of replies, not one response from the OP. Most responses advising the same thing : Pay back the money. Little of value from a legal point of view. According to cccp.ie, a buyer has no consumer rights if he buys tickets privately, either face to face or via an auction site. Additionally, other issues might arise. If anything goes wrong, such a buyer ( as in all other private sales ) is dependent on the integrity of the seller. The buyer is debarred from a Small Claims Court action as the seller is a private individual. I would say the Guards would have as much interest in pursuing this type of thing as they have in, say, stopping ticket touts selling tickets outside Croker. Other civil action would be costly with slim chance of success, even if grounds could be established for a case.
In other words, the principle of Caveat Emptor applies.
From a purely moral viewpoint, the seller should refund the buyer. But money and morals are never a good mix.

Agent Smith

Deleted User wrote: »

the Gardai may not get involved, but the karma police will

I often Fear Tom Yorke calling round...

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

wellwhynot

Of course you pay the money back. Why would you not? I can’t believe you even have to ask.

Adamocovic

Like everyone else I cannot wrap my head around not giving them a refund.

You will get a refund from Ticketmaster, something they will be well aware of, and so give them one. The only reason not would be to just screw them out of money. You'll get your money back and what they paid, doesn't seem fair.

I know this is different circumstance but recently bought a ticket for someone for a concert, they paid me face value for it. It got cancelled and so re-scheduled to later in the year and I received a second ticket for the new date (since I bought the original), could you imagine the absolute cheek if I took your "legal grey area" approach and refused to give them the new ticket by turning around and telling them..

"Tough luck, I sold you the ticket for that date, all sales are final. Have one for their new date though if you're looking to buy"


To answer your question however it depends how you sold them. I know most of the big resale sites make refunds mandatory. The buyer will send the tickets back to the seller then receive their refund. Simple as. If using Ticketmaster Ticket Transfer the refund is sent to the original buyer, this may be the grey area you are referring to, but I imagine they expect the people to pass the refund over but can't guarantee it.

Like I said to find out the proper details on whether it is legal to withhold a refund depends on how you sold them. Whether it's a good thing to do or not has clearly been stated.

Peregrinus

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I addressed that in my post. In that circumstances, since you can't assign your rights under your contract with the promoter, your contract with the ultimate purchaser must be to the effect that you will obtain, and pass on to him, the benefits under your contract with the promoter. So if one of your rights under the contract with the promoter is a refund in the event of cancellation, then you must obtain that refund and pass it on to the ultimate purchaser.

NIMAN

Note to self : never buy tickets off OP.

Guy:Incognito

[Deleted User] wrote: »

the Gardai may not get involved, but the karma police will

Radiohead are looking after this stuff now? Times must be tough.

the_syco

rannerap wrote: »

Apparently the concert was cancelled as they have been sending me threatening messages that I am to meet them in town with money that I owe them since it's cancelled or they will call the guards or show up at my work.

Did they go straight into the deep end regarding the threats? If so, screw them. If they only started threatening you after a few messages of being nice, consider refunding them if you wish.

If they wanted the full rights, they should have bought the ticket off ticketmaster. In this case, it was a private sale. Touting is legal in Ireland, so the OP hasn't broken any laws.

As for fraud that someone mentioned; when the OP sold the ticket, the concert had not been cancelled, so I don't see how the OP acted fraudulently over the sale.

innuendo141 wrote: »

I think OP hasn't responded because he did not get the response he was looking for.

The OP hasn't posted on boards.ie since he posted the post. Perhaps he has not being on boards since he posted, as he has a life offline?

Sunflower 27

the_syco wrote: »

Did they go straight into the deep end regarding the threats? If so, screw them. If they only started threatening you after a few messages of being nice, consider refunding them if you wish.

If they wanted the full rights, they should have bought the ticket off ticketmaster. In this case, it was a private sale. Touting is legal in Ireland, so the OP hasn't broken any laws.

As for fraud that someone mentioned; when the OP sold the ticket, the concert had not been cancelled, so I don't see how the OP acted fraudulently over the sale.


The OP hasn't posted on boards.ie since he posted the post. Perhaps he has not being on boards since he posted, as he has a life offline?

Clearly he has a life offline if he goes to concerts.

The sale in itself wasn't fraudulent, it is the non-refund that is. And Ticketmaster do refund so there is no excuse.

I am shocked anyone in this situation would not make it a priority to find out they have been refunded and give the money back.

Disgraceful, op. Do the right thing.

Peregrinus

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Clearly he has a life offline if he goes to concerts.

He didn't go. He onsold the ticket. And, anyway, the concert never happened; it was cancelled.

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

The sale in itself wasn't fraudulent, it is the non-refund that is.

Fraud requires obtaining money (or money's worth) with a dishonest intent. The sale, as you correctly point out, was not fraudulent. Receiving the refund, if indeed the OP did receive a refund, was not fraudulent; as against the concernt promoter the OP is entitled to a refund. Failing to pass on the refund is probably not (legally, criminally) fraudulent; there's no evidence of dishonest intent (as opposed to "I can't be bothered" or "I don't believe I'm obliged to") and certainly there no action that we can point to, like asking for money or telling lies.

I don't think the guards will be interested in this. It's a civil matter; a contract dispute between the OP and the person to whom he sold the ticked.

the_syco

IMO, it really depends on how the buyer started asking for the refund. Did they start out threatening, or did they start off nice? If the latter, I think the OP should refund, but if the former, screw them. If they came to the OP's workplace, the OP could contact the Gardai and file harassment charges against them.

Peregrinus

It doesn't matter how the buyer started out asking; if he's entitled to a refund he doesn't lose his entitlement because he is rude or brusque when he seeks it.

As for "filing harrassment charges", the OP should not waste his time (or the guards'). The harassment offence requires a persistent course of action. If the buyer kept calling to the OP's workplace ever after he had been refunded, that would be the time to think about a harassment charge.

Sunflower 27

Peregrinus wrote: »

He didn't go. He onsold the ticket. And, anyway, the concert never happened; it was cancelled.


Fraud requires obtaining money (or money's worth) with a dishonest intent. The sale, as you correctly point out, was not fraudulent. Receiving the refund, if indeed the OP did receive a refund, was not fraudulent; as against the concernt promoter the OP is entitled to a refund. Failing to pass on the refund is probably not (legally, criminally) fraudulent; there's no evidence of dishonest intent (as opposed to "I can't be bothered" or "I don't believe I'm obliged to") and certainly there no action that we can point to, like asking for money or telling lies.

I don't think the guards will be interested in this. It's a civil matter; a contract dispute between the OP and the person to whom he sold the ticked.

If the money was returned by Ticketmaster, and I can't see why it would not have been, and is meant to go to the person that paid for the ticket, then it is wrong for the OP to keep it. The money from Tickmadter is not his. The OP was paid for the ticket. The buyer of the ticket purchased the tickets off the op in good faith he would be going to a show. It was cancelled and the refund (most likely issued, or should have been) is his.

The op has made money here, paid by the OP and Ticketmaster, and probably a nice sum, too.. I cannot believe Ticketmaster did not refund. They are very good at that sort of thing.

If fraud is the wrong word, I'm sure there is another for withholding money that should be given to someone else?

In fact, it's not about the word, it's about the act of not returning what money rightfully belongs to another person.

No one needed to be out of pocket. I think the Op wanted to keep the money (as if you wouldn't check your bank account when you are being harassed) and is annoyed the other party didn't just let him.

Sunflower 27

Peregrinus wrote: »

It doesn't matter how the buyer started out asking; if he's entitled to a refund he doesn't lose his entitlement because he is rude or brusque when he seeks it.

As for "filing harrassment charges", the OP should not waste his time (or the guards'). The harassment offence requires a persistent course of action. If the buyer kept calling to the OP's workplace ever after he had been refunded, that would be the time to think about a harassment charge.

I don't know if he has to have got the money back and still be harassed to make a complaint at least.

If there is harassment, there is harassment. It can be phone calls, emails, not just turning up at at workplace persistently. A complaint could be made.

In saying that, I don't think anyone would be overly sympathetic to the OP as it's quite clear the other person is only seeking what is rightfully theirs.

Peregrinus

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

If the money was returned by Ticketmaster, and I can't see why it would not have been, and is meant to go to the person that paid for the ticket, then it is wrong for the OP to keep it. The money from Tickmadter is not his. The OP was paid for the ticket. The buyer of the ticket purchased the tickets off the op in good faith he would be going to a show. It was cancelled and the refund (most likely issued, or should have been) is his.

The op has made money here, paid by the OP and Ticketmaster, and probably a nice sum, too.. I cannot believe Ticketmaster did not refund. They are very good at that sort of thing.

If fraud is the wrong word, I'm sure there is another for withholding money that should be given to someone else?

In fact, it's not about the word, it's about the act of not returning what money rightfully belongs to another person.

No one needed to be out of pocket. I think the Op wanted to keep the money (as if you wouldn't check your bank account when you are being harassed) and is annoyed the other party didn't just let him.

Oh, sure. The purchaser should definitely be refunded by the OP. No question.

But "he should do this" does not mean "it is a crime not to do this", nor "it is fraud not to do this". I don't think this is fraud, within the legal sense of the term. We're in the legal discussion forum, and in terms of analysis of the legal issues, or consideration of the legal remedies available, characterising this as fraud is likely to send people off in all the wrong directions (including a direction whereby they think this is a matter for the guards).

Sunflower 27

Peregrinus wrote: »

Oh, sure. The purchaser should definitely be refunded by the OP. No question.

But "he should do this" does not mean "it is a crime not to do this", nor "it is fraud not to do this". I don't think this is fraud, within the legal sense of the term. We're in the legal discussion forum, and in terms of analysis of the legal issues, or consideration of the legal remedies available, characterising this as fraud is likely to send people off in all the wrong directions (including a direction whereby they think this is a matter for the guards).

From wiki:

In law, fraud is deliberate deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain, or to deprive a victim of a legal right. Fraud itself can be a civil wrong (i.e., a fraud victim may sue the fraud perpetrator to avoid the fraud or recover monetary compensation), a criminal wrong (i.e., a fraud perpetrator may be prosecuted and imprisoned by governmental authorities), or it may cause no loss of money, property or legal right but still be an element of another civil or criminal wrong.[1] The purpose of fraud may be monetary gain or other benefits, such as obtaining a passport or travel document, driver's license or qualifying for a mortgage by way of false statements.

Given the above, if the OP knows he was refunded by Ticketmaster (or refused to check to confirm) then I believe it can be classed as fraud.

I doubt the op intentionally set out to make a profit, but he now has by deception (claiming he doesn't know if he was refunded).