[Albion] Independent Football Ombudsman rules on Albion fan ban and loyalty points deduction

[Stat Brother]

Took you long enough but you got there in the end.

No one ever said it was a race.

 

[Stat Brother]

Took you long enough but you got there in the end.

The very final point still stands though.

I'd still have to say 'no punish me, not the person who fraudulently bought tickets in my name'.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

On the other hand with the digital tickets for Spurs away and Wembley everyone I legitimately bought for got an email from me that I forwarded so they could download. And I had full sight of who I’d bought for.

And Everton away. Digital ticketing will help prevent people from doing this. Has anybody asked the club why they don’t send such an e mail confirmation ? Sounds like a good idea for everyone, and particularly for people that can’t trust their friends and family.

 

[southstandandy]

The strange thing with all of this is that we have a number of 'members' who pay the £30 membership fee who are actually fans from other clubs, mostly in London. I knew of four fans when I was working who were Chelsea, Tottenham, and Palace fans but also paid for memberships to us, so they could buy tickets at the Amex in the home end, and generally kept their allegiances quiet at these games, in order to be able to get to see their teams play away.

For them the £30 membership fees didn't put them off even if they only bought a ticket once a season when their team visited the Amex.

To me this is worse than the issue of the OP on this thread. The club must know that this goes on but if you are a 'paid up member' there's little they can do, unless they misbehave in the home stands.

 

[Springal]

The strange thing with all of this is that we have a number of 'members' who pay the £30 membership fee who are actually fans from other clubs, mostly in London. I knew of four fans when I was working who were Chelsea, Tottenham, and Palace fans but also paid for memberships to us, so they could buy tickets at the Amex in the home end, and generally kept their allegiances quiet at these games, in order to be able to get to see their teams play away.

For them the £30 membership fees didn't put them off even if they only bought a ticket once a season when their team visited the Amex.

To me this is worse than the issue of the OP on this thread. The club must know that this goes on but if you are a 'paid up member' there's little they can do, unless they misbehave in the home stands.

Good point - let’s make it £100 a season

 

[Deleted member 37369]

The strange thing with all of this is that we have a number of 'members' who pay the £30 membership fee who are actually fans from other clubs, mostly in London. I knew of four fans when I was working who were Chelsea, Tottenham, and Palace fans but also paid for memberships to us, so they could buy tickets at the Amex in the home end, and generally kept their allegiances quiet at these games, in order to be able to get to see their teams play away.

For them the £30 membership fees didn't put them off even if they only bought a ticket once a season when their team visited the Amex.

To me this is worse than the issue of the OP on this thread. The club must know that this goes on but if you are a 'paid up member' there's little they can do, unless they misbehave in the home stands.

And yet some on here complain about paying the £30 a year to enable season ticket transfer - which could be used on multiple occasions!

 

[Official Old Man]

Does all this mean I'll not get away fans sat next to me? No, thought not.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

On the other hand with the digital tickets for Spurs away and Wembley everyone I legitimately bought for got an email from me that I forwarded so they could download. And I had full sight of who I’d bought for.

Did you even need to forward it ? I just checked and for Everton away (also digital tickets) we were all notified separately by e Mail with digital tickets to download. No forwarding necessary.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Did you even need to forward it ? I just checked and for Everton away (also digital tickets) we were all notified separately by e Mail with digital tickets to download. No forwarding necessary.

Wembley all came to me and I had to forward. You might be right about Spurs thinking about it

 

[Dave the hatosaurus]

Reading through the entire report , as i understand it , the summary is this :-
Both parties agreed there had been a breach of t and c
The club , as is their right , were determined to hold someone to account
However they were wrong to apply the sanction to the fan not his son
Also wrong to offer for them to choose to whom the sanction should apply
Also wrong to state an appeal must be made in 7 days when it should have been 14
Also wrong to allow a second appeal with no new evidence

In light of this the independent ombudsman did not rule that the club was wrong to apply a sanction but that it had applied it to the wrong person and in a poor fashion so , in my opinion quite correctly , advised the club to reinstate the fan and apologise to him ( but obviously not his son who should have been accountable in the first place )
I must say that i am surprised that the club have not reacted to that advice as i would hope they would have done .
That is the way i read it and hope someone will point out if i have made an error in my understanding .

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Reading through the entire report , as i understand it , the summary is this :-
Both parties agreed there had been a breach of t and c
The club , as is their right , were determined to hold someone to account
However they were wrong to apply the sanction to the fan not his son
Also wrong to offer for them to choose to whom the sanction should apply
Also wrong to state an appeal must be made in 7 days when it should have been 14
Also wrong to allow a second appeal with no new evidence

In light of this the independent ombudsman did not rule that the club was wrong to apply a sanction but that it had applied it to the wrong person and in a poor fashion so , in my opinion quite correctly , advised the club to reinstate the fan and apologise to him ( but obviously not his son who should have been accountable in the first place )
I must say that i am surprised that the club have not reacted to that advice as i would hope they would have done .
That is the way i read it and hope someone will point out if i have made an error in my understanding .

They can’t. The consequence would be fan A with lots of points could add random fan B to their friends and family and allow fan B to buy a ticket in fan A’s name in order to access fan A’s loyalty points. This situation only came to light because of random ID checks. These are also opposed by those who want to get around the LP system. Penalizing fan B may not be much of a consequence if fan B only rarely goes to games. There has been a lot of criticism of the club on this thread but the fault for this situation lies with people trying to game the rules. The club simply want a level playing field for all fans without the requirement of being mates with the right person, whilst rewarding frequent attendance. That said perhaps the club could send a confirmation e mail to all fan numbers that buy tickets. That doesn’t shift the blame for this saga though.

 

[Dave the hatosaurus]

They can’t. The consequence would be fan A with lots of points could add random fan B to their friends and family and allow fan B to buy a ticket in fan A’s name in order to access fan A’s loyalty points. This situation only came to light because of random ID checks. These are also opposed by those who want to get around the LP system. Penalizing fan B may not be much of a consequence if fan B only rarely goes to games. There has been a lot of criticism of the club on this thread but the fault for this situation lies with people trying to game the rules. The club simply want a level playing field for all fans without the requirement of being mates with the right person, whilst rewarding frequent attendance. That said perhaps the club could send a confirmation e mail to all fan numbers that buy tickets. That doesn’t shift the blame for this saga though.

As i understand it in this case the son had enough points to buy his own ticket and bought one in his dads name for his girlfriend so the simple answer to the scenario you describe above would be to only allow a family and friends member to buy a ticket in someone else's name if they are buying , or have bought , one for themselves . In this circumstance the penalty would be effective .

 

[sydney]

prrrfft.....really...?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

As i understand it in this case the son had enough points to buy his own ticket and bought one in his dads name for his girlfriend so the simple answer to the scenario you describe above would be to only allow a family and friends member to buy a ticket in someone else's name if they are buying , or have bought , one for themselves . In this circumstance the penalty would be effective .

Isn’t that exactly what the son did ? Bought one for himself in his own name and one for his girlfriend in his Dad’s name. That’s the problem not the solution.

 

[drew]

Absolutely, and as a believer in democratic process I defend their, your and Gary Lineker's right to express their opinions.

You appear to take the same view as that of the club, that a 10 match ban and loss of 50 loyalty points is appropriate for someone who did not buy a ticket, attend the match or read an email, and others think that it is harsh.

He chose to take the punishment rather than his son. That was his choice. You could argue that, once the club knew who had breached the rules then they should have just punished the son with the father being given the choice.

 

[drew]

I currently have an issue with an insurance claim.

It's a pretty open and shut case and it looks like (after a lot of too-ing and fro-ing), the insurance company have finally agreed to settle the claim in full, and are paying a small sum to compensate for a complaint I made.

I did threaten them with taking my case to the Financial Ombudsman.

So let's just imagine, if I had - the Ombudsman found in my favour, and asked the Insurance Company to apologise and pay my claim in full.

But the Insurance Company said feck off, and then plastered my name over their website inferring that I had made a fraudulent claim.


I can't see that this case is that different - albeit, the legal entity is a "Club Ltd", not an Insurance Company Ltd.

Reasonably certain that the insurance companies agree to abide by the decision although that obligation would not apply to yourself. You could still take it to court.

 

[Dave the hatosaurus]

Isn’t that exactly what the son did ? Bought one for himself in his own name and one for his girlfriend in his Dad’s name. That’s the problem not the solution.

Yes , and if the club had applied the sanction to him as it should have done it would have been an effective solution would it not ?
My response to your suggestion about your fan a and fan b scenario was to suggest that fan b should not be allowed to buy a ticket in fan a's name if he did not have sufficient points to buy one in his own name thus eliminating that issue .

 

[drew]

To be honest, I’m as disenfranchised with football, and with the way fans are dealt with by our club, as I’ve ever been (I say that as I’m replying on our football board on my weekend). It is a shame to be missing the best team we’ve ever had, but there’s enough ways to watch us on TV or online that I don’t really feel like I’m missing out - plus I don’t have the stress of dealing with the club, which caused issues on multiple occasions. I just don’t get why we make it so difficult for fans to be paying fans, ultimately.

Sorry, but I disagree. For the vast majority of fans there aren't really any issues so your assertion that the club make it difficult for paying fans is an exaggeration. That doesn't mean you haven't had problems but you can't suggest that applies to everyone else.

 

[Dave the hatosaurus]

He chose to take the punishment rather than his son. That was his choice. You could argue that, once the club knew who had breached the rules then they should have just punished the son with the father being given the choice.

If you read the report the ombudsman makes it fairly clear that he should not have been offered that choice .

 

[drew]

As i understand it in this case the son had enough points to buy his own ticket and bought one in his dads name for his girlfriend so the simple answer to the scenario you describe above would be to only allow a family and friends member to buy a ticket in someone else's name if they are buying , or have bought , one for themselves . In this circumstance the penalty would be effective .

Because that solution means the girlfriend who didn't have enough LP jumped the queue. That is what the system is trying to prevent and quite rightly.