BigBearBlue1974 wrote:They do not want to be a part of covid passport process.
Seems a fair point if terms of entry have been changed. However, i guess the club got this covered in small print.
Legal eagles needed perhaps.
BigBearBlue1974 wrote:They do not want to be a part of covid passport process.
Seems a fair point if terms of entry have been changed. However, i guess the club got this covered in small print.
Legal eagles needed perhaps.
MR BIRCHGROVE wrote:BigBearBlue1974 wrote:They do not want to be a part of covid passport process.
Seems a fair point if terms of entry have been changed. However, i guess the club got this covered in small print.
Legal eagles needed perhaps.
Try asking the club and keep the forum posted!
I'm sure a few others are thinking on similar lines, where as others who haven't yet been to matches because of the covid threat may feel safer with the pass now in place.
pembroke allan wrote:On what grounds can anyone have refund ? If someone doesn't want to get passport thats their prerogative and not a valid reason for refund as club not breaking any conditions of sale .... but as passport is a legal requirement its upto fans to comply .....
Sven wrote:pembroke allan wrote:On what grounds can anyone have refund ? If someone doesn't want to get passport thats their prerogative and not a valid reason for refund as club not breaking any conditions of sale .... but as passport is a legal requirement its upto fans to comply .....
Allan, I'm sure the club have it covered so far as not issuing refunds to the unvaxxed (or in the returning Bear's case just not bothering due to the perceived dross) but it would be useful for the more genuine members with real issues to know
I have sympathy towards anyone who cannot attend for medical reasons but not those who use it as a mere excuse, as many did with the red thing...
Sven wrote:MR BIRCHGROVE wrote:BigBearBlue1974 wrote:They do not want to be a part of covid passport process.
Seems a fair point if terms of entry have been changed. However, i guess the club got this covered in small print.
Legal eagles needed perhaps.
Try asking the club and keep the forum posted!
I'm sure a few others are thinking on similar lines, where as others who haven't yet been to matches because of the covid threat may feel safer with the pass now in place.
The OP raises a fair point but seems to want others to do the legwork for him...
Maybe he can do the research and enlighten us as to the position; particularly as he has already stated he isn't attending to watch the current dross (or words to that effect) so he has a vested interest in grabbing something back in any way he can?
It's certainly a valid question for several potentially affected supporters though and a definitive answer would be appreciated
maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
Bonner wrote:maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
if for medical reasons you can still provide a negative lateral test.. there are options
maccydee wrote:Bonner wrote:maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
if for medical reasons you can still provide a negative lateral test.. there are options
Yeah fair one. I could see a situation where they do give refunds for those who are unable to get jabbed although quite clearly the WAG are trying to make events as safe as possible.
pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:Bonner wrote:maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
if for medical reasons you can still provide a negative lateral test.. there are options
Yeah fair one. I could see a situation where they do give refunds for those who are unable to get jabbed although quite clearly the WAG are trying to make events as safe as possible.
What is the problem? If you cannot be jabbed you just need a lateral test 48hrs before game they are available from most chemists and theres a link in the thread I put up about it all need is proof of its result! What possible reason is there for not having the test? City have put out their criteria what to do so no one has a reason for a refund because of their inability to be vaccinated.... unless they've got a phobia about cotton buds but sure theres alternative to them as well....
Sven wrote:MR BIRCHGROVE wrote:BigBearBlue1974 wrote:They do not want to be a part of covid passport process.
Seems a fair point if terms of entry have been changed. However, i guess the club got this covered in small print.
Legal eagles needed perhaps.
Try asking the club and keep the forum posted!
I'm sure a few others are thinking on similar lines, where as others who haven't yet been to matches because of the covid threat may feel safer with the pass now in place.
The OP raises a fair point but seems to want others to do the legwork for him...
Maybe he can do the research and enlighten us as to the position; particularly as he has already stated he isn't attending to watch the current dross (or words to that effect) so he has a vested interest in grabbing something back in any way he can?
It's certainly a valid question for several potentially affected supporters though and a definitive answer would be appreciated
maccydee wrote:pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:Bonner wrote:maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
if for medical reasons you can still provide a negative lateral test.. there are options
Yeah fair one. I could see a situation where they do give refunds for those who are unable to get jabbed although quite clearly the WAG are trying to make events as safe as possible.
What is the problem? If you cannot be jabbed you just need a lateral test 48hrs before game they are available from most chemists and theres a link in the thread I put up about it all need is proof of its result! What possible reason is there for not having the test? City have put out their criteria what to do so no one has a reason for a refund because of their inability to be vaccinated.... unless they've got a phobia about cotton buds but sure theres alternative to them as well....
My thinking is if people don’t want to go because if they can’t have the vaccine there are still risks.
pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:Bonner wrote:maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
if for medical reasons you can still provide a negative lateral test.. there are options
Yeah fair one. I could see a situation where they do give refunds for those who are unable to get jabbed although quite clearly the WAG are trying to make events as safe as possible.
What is the problem? If you cannot be jabbed you just need a lateral test 48hrs before game they are available from most chemists and theres a link in the thread I put up about it all need is proof of its result! What possible reason is there for not having the test? City have put out their criteria what to do so no one has a reason for a refund because of their inability to be vaccinated.... unless they've got a phobia about cotton buds but sure theres alternative to them as well....
JJ1927 wrote:Sven wrote:MR BIRCHGROVE wrote:BigBearBlue1974 wrote:They do not want to be a part of covid passport process.
Seems a fair point if terms of entry have been changed. However, i guess the club got this covered in small print.
Legal eagles needed perhaps.
Try asking the club and keep the forum posted!
I'm sure a few others are thinking on similar lines, where as others who haven't yet been to matches because of the covid threat may feel safer with the pass now in place.
The OP raises a fair point but seems to want others to do the legwork for him...
Maybe he can do the research and enlighten us as to the position; particularly as he has already stated he isn't attending to watch the current dross (or words to that effect) so he has a vested interest in grabbing something back in any way he can?
It's certainly a valid question for several potentially affected supporters though and a definitive answer would be appreciated
I don't think there is a definitive answer as it raises numerous legal points and we are possibly entering new legal territory. The club would argue they are only complying with the law which is fair enough but it could be argued that at the time the contract was made the law was not in place. As it is not a legal requirement to be vaccinated the contract could be said to be argued to have been "frustrated" as new conditions have been imposed which make it impossible to perform unless you are vaccinated. If this is found to be the case money should be refunded.
However the club may have put this in their terms and conditions -it was after all a strong possibility that passports would be introduced when they went on sale-in which case the club may be on stronger ground. However as many season ticket were not offered a rebate on the previous season ticket money - the vaccine was six months away when they bought them -it could very strongly be argued they were unable to have any say over whether they agreed to those terms so it becomes invalid.
As i said very tricky area, so i dont think a clear answer is forthcoming
And before I get accused of being a DIY lawyer by people on this forum- i was accused of being a DIY accountant before - i used to teach Contract Law, but as that was many yeas ago i admit to being very rusty these days.
JJ1927 wrote:Sven wrote:MR BIRCHGROVE wrote:BigBearBlue1974 wrote:They do not want to be a part of covid passport process.
Seems a fair point if terms of entry have been changed. However, i guess the club got this covered in small print.
Legal eagles needed perhaps.
Try asking the club and keep the forum posted!
I'm sure a few others are thinking on similar lines, where as others who haven't yet been to matches because of the covid threat may feel safer with the pass now in place.
The OP raises a fair point but seems to want others to do the legwork for him...
Maybe he can do the research and enlighten us as to the position; particularly as he has already stated he isn't attending to watch the current dross (or words to that effect) so he has a vested interest in grabbing something back in any way he can?
It's certainly a valid question for several potentially affected supporters though and a definitive answer would be appreciated
I don't think there is a definitive answer as it raises numerous legal points and we are possibly entering new legal territory. The club would argue they are only complying with the law which is fair enough but it could be argued that at the time the contract was made the law was not in place. As it is not a legal requirement to be vaccinated the contract could be said to be argued to have been "frustrated" as new conditions have been imposed which make it impossible to perform unless you are vaccinated. If this is found to be the case money should be refunded.
However the club may have put this in their terms and conditions -it was after all a strong possibility that passports would be introduced when they went on sale-in which case the club may be on stronger ground. However as many season ticket were not offered a rebate on the previous season ticket money - the vaccine was six months away when they bought them -it could very strongly be argued they were unable to have any say over whether they agreed to those terms so it becomes invalid.
As i said very tricky area, so i dont think a clear answer is forthcoming
And before I get accused of being a DIY lawyer by people on this forum- i was accused of being a DIY accountant before - i used to teach Contract Law, but as that was many yeas ago i admit to being very rusty these days.
pembroke allan wrote:JJ1927 wrote:Sven wrote:MR BIRCHGROVE wrote:BigBearBlue1974 wrote:They do not want to be a part of covid passport process.
Seems a fair point if terms of entry have been changed. However, i guess the club got this covered in small print.
Legal eagles needed perhaps.
Try asking the club and keep the forum posted!
I'm sure a few others are thinking on similar lines, where as others who haven't yet been to matches because of the covid threat may feel safer with the pass now in place.
The OP raises a fair point but seems to want others to do the legwork for him...
Maybe he can do the research and enlighten us as to the position; particularly as he has already stated he isn't attending to watch the current dross (or words to that effect) so he has a vested interest in grabbing something back in any way he can?
It's certainly a valid question for several potentially affected supporters though and a definitive answer would be appreciated
I don't think there is a definitive answer as it raises numerous legal points and we are possibly entering new legal territory. The club would argue they are only complying with the law which is fair enough but it could be argued that at the time the contract was made the law was not in place. As it is not a legal requirement to be vaccinated the contract could be said to be argued to have been "frustrated" as new conditions have been imposed which make it impossible to perform unless you are vaccinated. If this is found to be the case money should be refunded.
However the club may have put this in their terms and conditions -it was after all a strong possibility that passports would be introduced when they went on sale-in which case the club may be on stronger ground. However as many season ticket were not offered a rebate on the previous season ticket money - the vaccine was six months away when they bought them -it could very strongly be argued they were unable to have any say over whether they agreed to those terms so it becomes invalid.
As i said very tricky area, so i dont think a clear answer is forthcoming
And before I get accused of being a DIY lawyer by people on this forum- i was accused of being a DIY accountant before - i used to teach Contract Law, but as that was many yeas ago i admit to being very rusty these days.
What would be the reason for refund? You dont need passport or you dont need vaccination to get into ground? All you need is a lateral flow test 48hrs before game which are free and readily available with proof of result..... fail to see what grounds there are for having redund
perhaps you can see one? If a person refuses to have test that is there prerogative but cannot expect refund on that basis.
pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:Bonner wrote:maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
if for medical reasons you can still provide a negative lateral test.. there are options
Yeah fair one. I could see a situation where they do give refunds for those who are unable to get jabbed although quite clearly the WAG are trying to make events as safe as possible.
What is the problem? If you cannot be jabbed you just need a lateral test 48hrs before game they are available from most chemists and theres a link in the thread I put up about it all need is proof of its result! What possible reason is there for not having the test? City have put out their criteria what to do so no one has a reason for a refund because of their inability to be vaccinated.... unless they've got a phobia about cotton buds but sure theres alternative to them as well....
My thinking is if people don’t want to go because if they can’t have the vaccine there are still risks.
Club as designated safe area in top ninian stand for those that are vulnerable and want to be socially distance from others got 7k seats to spread out over so club foing what it can to help vulnerable people... but take point and suspect those unable to be vaccinated will be given refund on the basis you say if they request one.
maccydee wrote:pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:Bonner wrote:maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
if for medical reasons you can still provide a negative lateral test.. there are options
Yeah fair one. I could see a situation where they do give refunds for those who are unable to get jabbed although quite clearly the WAG are trying to make events as safe as possible.
What is the problem? If you cannot be jabbed you just need a lateral test 48hrs before game they are available from most chemists and theres a link in the thread I put up about it all need is proof of its result! What possible reason is there for not having the test? City have put out their criteria what to do so no one has a reason for a refund because of their inability to be vaccinated.... unless they've got a phobia about cotton buds but sure theres alternative to them as well....
My thinking is if people don’t want to go because if they can’t have the vaccine there are still risks.
Club as designated safe area in top ninian stand for those that are vulnerable and want to be socially distance from others got 7k seats to spread out over so club foing what it can to help vulnerable people... but take point and suspect those unable to be vaccinated will be given refund on the basis you say if they request one.
The club are doing brilliantly but people will not feel safe and probably will be be catered for.
As Sven said. Much like with the red I’m sure people will try and use those rules to get refund due to our current performance.
pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:Bonner wrote:maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
if for medical reasons you can still provide a negative lateral test.. there are options
Yeah fair one. I could see a situation where they do give refunds for those who are unable to get jabbed although quite clearly the WAG are trying to make events as safe as possible.
What is the problem? If you cannot be jabbed you just need a lateral test 48hrs before game they are available from most chemists and theres a link in the thread I put up about it all need is proof of its result! What possible reason is there for not having the test? City have put out their criteria what to do so no one has a reason for a refund because of their inability to be vaccinated.... unless they've got a phobia about cotton buds but sure theres alternative to them as well....
My thinking is if people don’t want to go because if they can’t have the vaccine there are still risks.
Club as designated safe area in top ninian stand for those that are vulnerable and want to be socially distance from others got 7k seats to spread out over so club foing what it can to help vulnerable people... but take point and suspect those unable to be vaccinated will be given refund on the basis you say if they request one.
The club are doing brilliantly but people will not feel safe and probably will be be catered for.
As Sven said. Much like with the red I’m sure people will try and use those rules to get refund due to our current performance.
Yes the probably will try but they will say why didnt ask for refund at beginning of season? But as far as I can see nobody as a reason for refund now?
JJ1927 wrote:pembroke allan wrote:JJ1927 wrote:Sven wrote:MR BIRCHGROVE wrote:BigBearBlue1974 wrote:They do not want to be a part of covid passport process.
Seems a fair point if terms of entry have been changed. However, i guess the club got this covered in small print.
Legal eagles needed perhaps.
Try asking the club and keep the forum posted!
I'm sure a few others are thinking on similar lines, where as others who haven't yet been to matches because of the covid threat may feel safer with the pass now in place.
The OP raises a fair point but seems to want others to do the legwork for him...
Maybe he can do the research and enlighten us as to the position; particularly as he has already stated he isn't attending to watch the current dross (or words to that effect) so he has a vested interest in grabbing something back in any way he can?
It's certainly a valid question for several potentially affected supporters though and a definitive answer would be appreciated
I don't think there is a definitive answer as it raises numerous legal points and we are possibly entering new legal territory. The club would argue they are only complying with the law which is fair enough but it could be argued that at the time the contract was made the law was not in place. As it is not a legal requirement to be vaccinated the contract could be said to be argued to have been "frustrated" as new conditions have been imposed which make it impossible to perform unless you are vaccinated. If this is found to be the case money should be refunded.
However the club may have put this in their terms and conditions -it was after all a strong possibility that passports would be introduced when they went on sale-in which case the club may be on stronger ground. However as many season ticket were not offered a rebate on the previous season ticket money - the vaccine was six months away when they bought them -it could very strongly be argued they were unable to have any say over whether they agreed to those terms so it becomes invalid.
As i said very tricky area, so i dont think a clear answer is forthcoming
And before I get accused of being a DIY lawyer by people on this forum- i was accused of being a DIY accountant before - i used to teach Contract Law, but as that was many yeas ago i admit to being very rusty these days.
What would be the reason for refund? You dont need passport or you dont need vaccination to get into ground? All you need is a lateral flow test 48hrs before game which are free and readily available with proof of result..... fail to see what grounds there are for having redund
perhaps you can see one? If a person refuses to have test that is there prerogative but cannot expect refund on that basis.
I agree with you and had seconds earlier posted a correction as i thought a PCR was needed. If all that's needed is lateral flow I think this would be seen as reasonable and club would be entitled to reject any claim.
maccydee wrote:pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:pembroke allan wrote:maccydee wrote:Bonner wrote:maccydee wrote:If you can’t have a vaccine for medical reasons then your terms have changed.
If you won’t have a vaccine for stupidity reasons then your terms haven’t changed.
if for medical reasons you can still provide a negative lateral test.. there are options
Yeah fair one. I could see a situation where they do give refunds for those who are unable to get jabbed although quite clearly the WAG are trying to make events as safe as possible.
What is the problem? If you cannot be jabbed you just need a lateral test 48hrs before game they are available from most chemists and theres a link in the thread I put up about it all need is proof of its result! What possible reason is there for not having the test? City have put out their criteria what to do so no one has a reason for a refund because of their inability to be vaccinated.... unless they've got a phobia about cotton buds but sure theres alternative to them as well....
My thinking is if people don’t want to go because if they can’t have the vaccine there are still risks.
Club as designated safe area in top ninian stand for those that are vulnerable and want to be socially distance from others got 7k seats to spread out over so club foing what it can to help vulnerable people... but take point and suspect those unable to be vaccinated will be given refund on the basis you say if they request one.
The club are doing brilliantly but people will not feel safe and probably will be be catered for.
As Sven said. Much like with the red I’m sure people will try and use those rules to get refund due to our current performance.
Yes the probably will try but they will say why didnt ask for refund at beginning of season? But as far as I can see nobody as a reason for refund now?
Agree. Maybe change of rules I don’t know. You know people are gonna try don’t you?
welshrarebit wrote:I believe the way around it is to get tested before isn’t it? Within 48 hours.
Firstly it’s not the clubs fault. Blame mark drakeford who forced it through and refused any allowances to the conservative member unable to join remotely.
Secondly, regardless of your views on vaccination, Is a lateral flow that much of a big deal to do??
bluesince62 wrote:welshrarebit wrote:I believe the way around it is to get tested before isn’t it? Within 48 hours.
Firstly it’s not the clubs fault. Blame mark drakeford who forced it through and refused any allowances to the conservative member unable to join remotely.
Secondly, regardless of your views on vaccination, Is a lateral flow that much of a big deal to do??
I cannot have the jab, but have no problems doing the lateral flow tests.would think anyone in the same boat would be the same?
I do see a slight issue though,this covid pass was not Law. When people bought their st,so things have changed as to the rules and people may have a point regards that? To use their st,the terms have changed? As said, would be good to know what club thinks, although I guess they will find some small print, that prevents refunds under these circumstances?
bluesince62 wrote:welshrarebit wrote:I believe the way around it is to get tested before isn’t it? Within 48 hours.
Firstly it’s not the clubs fault. Blame mark drakeford who forced it through and refused any allowances to the conservative member unable to join remotely.
Secondly, regardless of your views on vaccination, Is a lateral flow that much of a big deal to do??
I cannot have the jab, but have no problems doing the lateral flow tests.would think anyone in the same boat would be the same?
I do see a slight issue though,this covid pass was not Law. When people bought their st,so things have changed as to the rules and people may have a point regards that? To use their st,the terms have changed? As said, would be good to know what club thinks, although I guess they will find some small print, that prevents refunds under these circumstances?
maccydee wrote:bluesince62 wrote:welshrarebit wrote:I believe the way around it is to get tested before isn’t it? Within 48 hours.
Firstly it’s not the clubs fault. Blame mark drakeford who forced it through and refused any allowances to the conservative member unable to join remotely.
Secondly, regardless of your views on vaccination, Is a lateral flow that much of a big deal to do??
I cannot have the jab, but have no problems doing the lateral flow tests.would think anyone in the same boat would be the same?
I do see a slight issue though,this covid pass was not Law. When people bought their st,so things have changed as to the rules and people may have a point regards that? To use their st,the terms have changed? As said, would be good to know what club thinks, although I guess they will find some small print, that prevents refunds under these circumstances?
Out of interest and feel free to tell me to do one but how come you can’t have the jab?
Users browsing this forum: DotBot [Bot], Facebook [Bot], Google [Bot], Grapeshot [Bot], ias [Bot] and 120 guests