by Harpers So Solid Crew » 06 Feb 2011 11:38
by AthleticoSpizz » 06 Feb 2011 19:58
YesRoyal LadyAthleticoSpizzyou agree, or do not agree with what you want "Red".Red Interesting use of frimmers style punctuation.
I don't agree I'm afraid - people will still want to get names put on the back of shirts - and most people accept that players move on.
I am still in the costly "son wanting to buy shirt with name on" stage of parenthood
Yes, and like Red said, you have to accept that players move on if you do buy a shirt with a name on. My son went through about 3 in 3 seasons where he'd just get a name put on and they'd leave - didn't bother me, or him, to be fair.
by Huntley & Palmer » 06 Feb 2011 20:28
by AthleticoSpizz » 06 Feb 2011 20:32
by Harpers So Solid Crew » 07 Feb 2011 00:14
by RoyalBlue » 07 Feb 2011 05:19
Huntley & Palmer Yeah, I can see swathes of staff cuts as the commercial department is brought to it's knees by this caseI'm with the club on this one, you've bought a product that has a limited shelf life and then decided to further limit that shelf life by putting one of our most attractive assets names' on the back of it. If the club offer a refund then it opens the gates for other claims and where do you stop then? When the kid decides Kebe isn't his favourite player any more??
by Wimb » 07 Feb 2011 08:04
by Rex » 07 Feb 2011 08:31
by Shaka's Giant Hands » 09 Feb 2011 11:54
by TFF » 08 Mar 2011 09:16
Reading Football Club has settled out of court in a dispute with a fan who fought for a refund on a replica shirt.
Middlesbrough-based Royals fan James McGhee had brought a small claim against the club at the county court in the Teesside town.
His son Jon, 13, had bought the shirt online last July with £42 of his birthday money.
He had the name Sigurdsson printed on the back but within a few months the Icelandic midfielder had been sold to Hoffenheim in Germany and Jon no longer wanted the shirt.
When Gylfi Sigurdsson left Mr McGhee asked for a refund but was refused. He wrote to the club and was further refused. He then started a small claim and the club settled out of court, paying him £72 to include court costs.
Last spring Gylfi Sigurdsson had signed a new contract and the McGhees argued the club had indicated he would stay.
Mr McGhee, who first got interested in the club around eight years ago through family connections in Shinfield, said: “For anybody else in the same position who feels equally aggrieved, this just shows it is well worth pursuing it. It shows what can be done if you are prepared to fight your corner.”
Mr McGhee said he remained a fan and distinguished between the team and the business side of the club.
Club spokesman Craig Mortimer said: “We only settled because the hearing was right up in Middlesbrough and frankly for the time and effort it would take to get up there, it was far more logical to settle.”
He said the matter could have been avoided if Mr McGhee had read the terms and conditions.
He added: “The vast majority of feedback I have seen shows that most supporters are fully aware that it is standard practice across most football clubs that printed shirts are not refundable.”
by Royal Lady » 08 Mar 2011 09:18
by T.R.O.L.I. » 08 Mar 2011 09:18
by Royal Lady » 08 Mar 2011 09:20
T.R.O.L.I. Additionally, isn't English law based on precedent and as such surely this opens the club to far more claims of this nature?
by TFF » 08 Mar 2011 09:23
T.R.O.L.I. Additionally, isn't English law based on precedent and as such surely this opens the club to far more claims of this nature?
by T.R.O.L.I. » 08 Mar 2011 09:26
by Wycombe Royal » 08 Mar 2011 09:26
Royal LadyT.R.O.L.I. Additionally, isn't English law based on precedent and as such surely this opens the club to far more claims of this nature?
I hope so. Maybe people who had already booked train tickets for the City game and then failed to get a ticket should sue the club.....
by T.R.O.L.I. » 08 Mar 2011 09:30
Wycombe RoyalRoyal LadyT.R.O.L.I. Additionally, isn't English law based on precedent and as such surely this opens the club to far more claims of this nature?
I hope so. Maybe people who had already booked train tickets for the City game and then failed to get a ticket should sue the club.....
Why would you be so stupid as to buy a train ticket BEFORE you have a match ticket? You deserve all you get if you have ZERO common sense......
by bigmike » 08 Mar 2011 09:31
Mr McGhee, who first got interested in the club around eight years ago through family connections in Shinfield
by Royal Lady » 08 Mar 2011 09:32
by RoyalBlue » 08 Mar 2011 09:34
T.R.O.L.I. Additionally, isn't English law based on precedent and as such surely this opens the club to far more claims of this nature?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 95 guests