For 1901 members only - please

[abc]

Those that attended the early 1901 presentations will recall various promises that haven't quite materialised. Perhaps the most significant was the promise that Members would be able to buy their seat ticket for all non albion events (copies of the power point prsentations used by the Club have been obtained should proof be required). This hasn't been honoured and consequently 1901 members were denied the right to buy their seat for The World Cup Rugby matches. The Albion could have retained this right on behalf of members when negotiating terms with the RFU but clearly chose not to.

This promised 'perk' was amongst a number of offers that persuaded potential 1901 Members to buy their seat for 'life' and start a long term financial commitment to the Albion. Inevitably some are disgruntled and believe they have been let down or worse deliberately misled. Members have attempted to simply discuss the matter with the Club but there has been no discussion or response forthcoming. Consequently legal advice has been taken and action is now being considered. This would be financed by a small number of individuals on behalf of all members, so no one else would have any financial commitment. Furthermore the objective is to bring the Club to the table and reach a long term agreement so that the promise made when marketing the seats is honoured in the future. Should the case proceed to court (hopefully unlikely) the Members involved would not seek any damages or costs from the club, All the Members are of of course Albion fans and have no desire to hurt the club but that does not mean that they automatically give up their right to question the club's actions or policies.

I have been asked by this group of 1901 members to make this post on NSC partly to keep other Members on here informed but also to guage opinion as follows:

If you are a 1901 member

1. Is this an issue that concerns you and you feel should be pursued?

2. Are there are other 'promises' made prior to purchasing your 1901 tickets that you feel have been under delivered upon?

Thank you.

 

[gripper stebson]

You are taking legal action against the club because of rugby?

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Those that attended the early 1901 presentations will recall various promises that haven't quite materialised. Perhaps the most significant was the promise that Members would be able to buy their seat ticket for all non albion events (copies of the power point prsentations used by the Club have been obtained should proof be required). This hasn't been honoured and consequently 1901 members were denied the right to buy their seat for The World Cup Rugby matches. The Albion could have retained this right on behalf of members when negotiating terms with the RFU but clearly chose not to.

This promised 'perk' was amongst a number of offers that persuaded potential 1901 Members to buy their seat for 'life' and start a long term financial commitment to the Albion. Inevitably some are disgruntled and believe they have been let down or worse deliberately misled. Members have attempted to simply discuss the matter with the Club but there has been no discussion or response forthcoming. Consequently legal advice has been taken and action is now being considered. This would be financed by a small number of individuals on behalf of all members, so no one else would have any financial commitment. Furthermore the objective is to bring the Club to the table and reach a long term agreement so that the promise made when marketing the seats is honoured in the future. Should the case proceed to court (hopefully unlikely) the Members involved would not seek any damages or costs from the club, All the Members are of of course Albion fans and have no desire to hurt the club but that does not mean that they automatically give up their right to question the club's actions or policies.

I have been asked by this group of 1901 members to make this post on NSC partly to keep other Members on here informed but also to guage opinion as follows:

If you are a 1901 member

1. Is this an issue that concerns you and you feel should be pursued?

2. Are there are other 'promises' made prior to purchasing your 1901 tickets that you feel have been under delivered upon?

Thank you.

1901 Members WERE offered the right to buy their seats for the RWC.

It was at a ridiculous cost, as part of some fancy package, but they WERE made available.

Just saying, like.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Interesting. I recall being disgruntled at the time as, like you say, numerous promises where made which never materialised in the final debenture contract. The really frustrating part was that the debenture contracts finally came out very very late in the day and well after all other season tickets had been sold; there was no realistic option other than to sign the 1901 deal regardless of content.

I can understand your point of view, but I will not be joining you. I do wish you well with getting some answers and if you want to ask me any questions you're welcome to PM me.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

The club did not 'choose not to' negotiate seating for 1901 members.

If the club had insisted that every 1901 member got their own seat, there would have been no world cup matches at the stadium, as the Rugby World Cup organisers run all the hospitality seating.

Please don't waste your money on legal action doomed to fail.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

The club did not 'choose not to' negotiate seating for 1901 members.

If the club had insisted that every 1901 member got their own seat, there would have been no world cup matches at the stadium, as the Rugby World Cup organisers run all the hospitality seating.

Please don't waste your money on legal action doomed to fail.

Indeed. Absolute nonsense to pretend that the club could have offered the stadium to the IRB and said "Oh, btw, we're holding back the 3,500 best seats, hope that's okay?"

 

[Simster]

I'd be interested to know how Wembley stadium satisfy the 10,000 debenture holders if - as I assume - they are broadly equivalent to our own 1901s. Does anybody know? Afterall, Wembley hosts tons of events aside from FA sanctioned football.

Indeed. Absolute nonsense to pretend that the club could have offered the stadium to the IRB and said "Oh, btw, we're holding back the 3,500 best seats, hope that's okay?"

"Holding back" is one thing. Requesting that a financial arrangement could be made, such that the IRB give first dibs to 1901s is surely not beyond the capability of everyone? And from your previous post on this thread, is probably what happened.

 

[Rookie]

Would be very interested in what solicitor has said you should go for it. And if it did go to court what would be the outcome if you don't want damages or costs from the club (who is going to pay the clubs costs should you win)

 

[Gullflyinghigh]

I'm curious as to what the desired outcome would be if it did end up going to court (though I understand you're hoping that won't happen)?

You don't want to cause a cost to the club but I fail to see how it would be avoided if your intention is/the outcome was for you to 'win'.

 

[abc]

I'd be interested to know how Wembley stadium satisfy the 10,000 debenture holders if - as I assume - they are broadly equivalent to our own 1901s. Does anybody know? Afterall, Wembley hosts tons of events aside from FA sanctioned football.


"Holding back" is one thing. Requesting that a financial arrangement could be made, such that the IRB give first dibs to 1901s is surely not beyond the capability of everyone? And from your previous post on this thread, is probably what happened.

I think this is probably the point. Offering hugely expensive hospitality packages (if they were indeed offered at all) is not the same thing as paying the market price for a seat. But I doubt anyone would have objected to being offered a compromise such as the option to buy a seat elsewhere so hospitality income could still be maximised.

 

[abc]

Would be very interested in what solicitor has said you should go for it. And if it did go to court what would be the outcome if you don't want damages or costs from the club (who is going to pay the clubs costs should you win)

Actually not my money (I have no financial stake in this) nor have I been privy to the legal discussions. It was merely suggested to me that I, as a very occasional NSC poster, seek a bit of feedback on a few people's behalf. But I think the principal of the legal case is breach of verbal contract backed by numerous witnesses and written proof (my words - I'm not a lawyer!). 'Winning' means that the club agree (preferable) or are forced (hopefully avoidable) to respect the promise to offer 1901 members the right to buy a ticket for their seat at all future events or at the very least make an alternative offer (such as alternative seating in non hospitality areas). I have to say I think this is a reasonable objective and one that the Club could easily consider without this matter going any further.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

Speaking as a 1901 club member, my opinion is that anyone thinking about legal action should hang their heads in shame.

 

[Ernest]

So whatever this costs will cost the club and thus costing all of us as it will affect the playing budget , smart work boys

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

The club will obviously defend themselves if legal action taken. So this costs the club.

 

[Pickledegg]

abc, why are you representing this 'party'? Why do they care what users of NSC think?

Surely, if they really cared what others on here thought, they could create their own account and ask the questions themselves?! Are this group of individuals above a 'football forum' and needed someone else to do their dirty work for them or don't they want to read the inevitable responses?!

Like others have said, it's a sad state when a minority consider legal action over 'their' club, which will clearly end in cost to the club, when other threads are moaning that the club are not spending big money to strengthen the squad!!

I for one hope they reconsider their actions!!

 

[Ernest]

It's like SUING your own family, SHAMEFUL and hopefully those involved will be EXPOSED

 

[Eddiespearritt]

I'm not surprised that RWC tickets were not offered to 1901 members in their actual seat for a sensible price. Sadly any big event that goes anywhere demands that the best seats are protected for sponsors and high end corporate guests - but this is par for the course. Champions League group matches are exactly the same - the best seats are spirited away.

However, I would have liked to sit in "my owned" seat for things like an Under 21 international - the Sussex Senior Cup Final - and other smallish events - even if they are nomially controlled by other organisers. This should not be beyond the negotiation skills of the club for its highest paying customers. From memory the Under-21 international was offered at some silly price for a "Bobby Moore" package or something similarly uncomfortably named, which put me off going altogether.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Whilst I don't agree with potentially suing the club, maybe if the club sat round the table with the affected parties it might help, rather than ignoring their requests to meet?

 

[Guy Fawkes]

I think this is probably the point. Offering hugely expensive hospitality packages (if they were indeed offered at all) is not the same thing as paying the market price for a seat. But I doubt anyone would have objected to being offered a compromise such as the option to buy a seat elsewhere so hospitality income could still be maximised.

Were these packages then sold at a lower price to other potential buyers or were the seats offered at the going rate to everyone, including the 1901 seat holders ? & Haven't they sold out at this package price?

If it was at the going rate, haven't the club met it's commitments made at the presentations? They haven't said you get it free for any event, just the chance to buy the seat? They never said anything about guaranteeing it at a certain price level

Actually not my money (I have no financial stake in this) nor have I been privy to the legal discussions. It was merely suggested to me that I, as a very occasional NSC poster, seek a bit of feedback on a few people's behalf. But I think the principal of the legal case is breach of verbal contract backed by numerous witnesses and written proof (my words - I'm not a lawyer!). 'Winning' means that the club agree (preferable) or are forced (hopefully avoidable) to respect the promise to offer 1901 members the right to buy a ticket for their seat at all future events or at the very least make an alternative offer (such as alternative seating in non hospitality areas). I have to say I think this is a reasonable objective and one that the Club could easily consider without this matter going any further.

Couldn't the end result of this challenge mean that the club simply don't look to stage any other non Albion events in future? denying it vital income? especially if they are unable to guarantee that the 1901 members will be able to get first dibs on the seats for an (acceptable for the seat holders) price?

 

[The Merry Prankster]

Whilst I don't think the club have covered themselves with glory in their handling of the 1901 club - anyone thinking of suing them is a ******* (insert your obscenity of choice).