SaintBobby

Its about 4-6 hours work and would open the door to others reclaiming their cash. Also, I dont think - morally - that Saints Trust should get away with what they have done. Have probably spent longer on here discussing it now then it will actually take to do it!

I spent £60 (6 tickets) for a service that was absolutely nothing like the service advertised.

Thanks, have replied on otehr thread. Welcome to PM me. Not a hopeful sign that he describes it as a "boast". Also, not hopeful that he seems to think a reply (which I did get, promising a fuller reply a week later) might be the limit of his obligation. I havent met him, but he does give the impression of needing to be taken down a peg or two frankly.

Im not boasting about taking legal action. I am taking legal action. He is welcome to PM me - he has not replied to my emails to saints trust...nor has anyone else.

You sue West Quay. Unless (a) there are specific contractual terms to the contrary or (b) West Quay ticket office is a legal subsisiary of Southampton FC ticket office. (I'm guessing both apply) "Events" are not, despite your slightly strange implication to the contrary, a separate legal category of contract law. A distributor of events tickets is in exactly the same position as a retailer selling products acquired from a wholesaler. It's possible you are right on this point, and the top lawyer from Slaughter and May I spoke to, with over twenty years experience of contract law, is wrong. But Id be surprsied.

The reply that it wasn't deliberate and Everton fans smanaged to organise a good party? What reply?

Even if they are the distributors, they are responsible. They took my cash. They can go on to sue to the venue if they choose. Their contract with me. If you pay someone to deliver you X, and they don't deliver X because someone further down the supply chain screws up, you sue them and they sue further down the supply chain. If you buy a tin of beans from Asda, and it turns out to be a can of warm turd, you sue Asda. The fact that they are just the distributors, and Heinz actually produced and packaged the warm turd doesnt come into it - unless Asda want to sue Heinz.

Promised - Short queues, cheap beer, ex-players, food served...amongst other things. Got - Queues six deep, very expensive beer, no ex-players, no food...in a urine soaked death hole.

Not deliberate maybe, but grossly negligent. It's been the thoroughgoing lack of contrition and refusal to reply to emails in 4 months since then that is especially riling.

Good luck or shame on me??? They were the people who sold me the tickets...if they want to sue the venue in turn, thats up to them. My contract was with them. If people are Saints fans, but rip off other Saints fans in a pretty disgraceful way, whilst simultaneously portraying themselves as the voice of the fans, then I dont think I shoudl just let them get on with it, just cos they support the same club as me.

The legal advice I've received is they will probably have to defend it, because were they to lose, then any other p*ssed off Silverspoons attendee could also automatically get their cash back. I'm happy to take a little time and money to do this. I dont much like being treated this way, and I particularly dislike a group parading as the Saints Trust, with high public profile, behaving like this. The Saints Trust promised me a reply within a week about 4 months ago. They haven't replied to any emails from me since - even though I said I'd rather avoid legal action, but did at least need the courtesy of a reply and explanation. Nope, that was too much for them. If Illingsworth is getting annoyed about hearing nothing back from the club after sending several emails etc., perhaps he should put his own house in order first.

Dont have any idea what the Trust AGM discussed. Am not a member and didn't go. I have however emailed them stating my intention to bring a legal action against them for recovery of my Silverspoons ticket costs. I have yet to receive a reply. Maybe they discussed it at the AGM. I'd be worried if I faced legal action that might open the gateway to £20,000 of claims.

Good luck, I yearn for the old fanzines....but I wonder what they can bring in the world of online stuff (sorry, not very technical that)

Actually, having just read this, they are a bit more f*cked than I thought.

I hope Wednesday go up (as runners up to us). Always had a soft spot for them and - along with Saints - they definitely don't naturally belong in L1. They are taking a huge financial risk from what I can gather, but that's their business. If they get back up to the CCC, it may pay off. If not, they know the sort of sh!t they are in. Their team is clearly the biggest, most obvious threat to Saints. I think we just edge it, and have the stability/ability to build further (both now and in January). But Wednesday have a few players I'd love at St Marys (Purse, Mellor, Tudgay especially) and their starting XI is very good.

Interesting. I wonder when we overtake teams like Reading in desirability stakes for players? At a wild guess, I'd say we probably pay similar wages. We maybe need to show that we really are going to get out of League One (and we could show this long before May 2011 of course)

Would be a great signing. I don't think it's totally implausible - certainly more credible than the Benjani stuff. Maybe NC will block the transfer though as the Echo has it before the OS...

In some ways, it is representative - even (especially?) the polls. I'd say that the balance of opinion on e.g. player of the season, Pardew stay or go, prospects for the coming season, best all time players etc. are about in line with mainstream/casual fan opinion. But, in other ways, we are totally unrepresentative. Mainly, I'd say, in terms of depth of knowledge/trivia. There are season ticket holders around me in Kingsland who sometimes fail to recognise subs (e.g. "who the hell is Oxlade-Chamberlain?" as he comes on for his home debut....). They certainly wouldn't know e.g. whether wed every had an Italian/half-Italian player, who the last player was who had a Z in his name etc. They will be blissfully unaware that there's a rumour we might sign Tyson etc... I don't actually think people on here are madder/weirder/more opinionated that the wider fan base. There are plenty of mad, weird, opinionated people at every Saints game. It just posting on here lays it bare.

I'm told by police officers I know, that numbers play a big part in the categorisation. Given - as a statistical average - a certain percentage of away fans will cause trouble, there's a hell of a difference between 4,000 away fans descending on, say, Leyton Orient and 400 doing so. Ok, perhaps Norwich fans are disporportionately charming and well behaved. And there may be other teams who are a particular problem, even with more modest levels of away support (Millwall?) But I'm pretty unsurprised - and unembarrassed - that we are the only regular category c team in League One now. I think Stu is right that we do have a slightly worse than average problem with young scrotes (is this because of the relative affluence of the south? i.e. more young pikeys can afford tickets?), but overall I'd say Saints are about average or slightly better than average in terms of behaviour.

I'd say, on the face of it, Illingsworth probably has been banned (or, at least, refused a season ticket) beacuse of his public pronoucements. No, I'm not certain of this. No, I haven't heard the club's position, I've only heard one side. And even then, it's incomplete. There are dozens of other possible explanations. But it is probably reasonable to believe at this stage that he's been blocked because he's a perceived troublemaker. That's what I believe, until more evidence comes to light. I reserve the right to change my mind at any time, but I dont need 100% of the facts - or even 50% of them - before Im willing to form a belief.

Turkilymaz (sp) - that Swiss striker in Euro 96.

Here's a thought. Maybe Illingsworth hasn't heard from the club because the email address on the Saints Trust website doesn't work....

You may be right that this is more common practice on the Continent. But, I'd say there is a difference between a restaurant and a football club. We have 32,000 seats to fill every fortnight, and - by and large - fail to fill them. The Ivy restaurant in central london can afford to be rather more picky. They have a couple of hundred seats and a one year waiting list for mere members of the public.

I'm not sure I deserved to lose my money, but that's not the point. I don't know the Wembley area at all. Wanted to go to an all-Southampton fan pub and - given the overall cost of the day - 6 tickets at a tenner each was a relatively small outlay. My annoyance wasn't I'd lost sixty notes - it was that I'd been ripped off by the Saints Trust. The event was nothing like billed - and anyone with a mere smattering of IQ would have known this if they'd visited the venue. Pulling in £20K from genuine Southampton fans on a special day out at Wembley on the basis of promises you can't keep is shoddy behaviour, even ignoring whether or not it's criminal. And that's putting aside whether smarter or more seasoned Saints fans didn't fall for it. Or whether those who did were gullible. If NC wants to ban Illingsworth from St. Mary's on this basis, then more power to his elbow.

I don't know Nick Illingsworth at all. But I was furious about the Silverspoons fiasco and am still pursuing it. I did write to the club afterwards saying that I think they should take appropriate steps to try to ensure that no Saints fan could reach the erroneous conclusion that the Trust was in any way an official or licensed part of Southampton Football Club. Their behaviour over Silverspoons was embarrassing and outrageous. Being forceful in refusing to allow them to use the club crest etc is absolutely right and justified. I guess my opinion on this issue depends on: (a) if Illingsworth has actually been banned and, if so (b) why and for how long? I think, say, a one season ban from St Mary's because of Silverspoons would be entirely justified. But banning him for life on the grounds that "he's a bit of a bell end", would not be at all reasonable.