Compensation Claim against me

NikNox

Registered User
Messages
43
Hi there,

I'm new to this, but am after some advice please. Short version of events is:-

My son is in a band, band were booked by an Agent to perform on 8th December. I signed a contract (although it's acutally Terms & Conditions rather than an actual contract) and sent it to the Agent, which they had sent as an attachment to an email. Never received a signed copy from them. Anyway, day of gig arrived and one of the band members was too ill to perform. Tried desperately to organise something else, for 3 hours, and failed and had to cancel gig. Contacted Venue to cancel. Shortly afterwards got a phone call from the Agent, very aggressive, telling me I had to 'do something about it'. Explained that I had tried everything I could think of, short of performing myself, and had failed. They said they would find a replacement and get back to me. Never did.

Thought it was done and dusted. Couple of weeks ago I get Court papers because they have filed a claim for compensation, £1000 plus Court fees. As far as I can see, no Solicitor involved at present. I have sent back a defence. Had my stepmother look over the original 'contract' (she used to work in a Solicitors) and she could see nothing about what happens if there is illness. No clauses to cover cancellation by the Act either. And, because I never received a signed copy of the 'contract' myself, she thinks that it is therefore null and void and does not exist. Today had more papers from the Court, who are transferring the case to a Court more locally. Have to fill in an Allocation Questionnaire, but can ask for a 'stay' of one month where no action is taken on the case, and giving both parties time to try and sort things out without Court.

What I would like to know is:-

(a) Are we right in thinking that a Contract is not proper unless it's signed by both parties?
(b) Could I write to the Agent and suggest to them that since they did not send a signed copy of the Contract to me they haven't got a leg to stand on?

I will not be paying this £1000 compensation under any circumstances because I do not believe that they have a right to claim it. Illness is an unforseen circumstance, beyond my control.

Advice please?? Many thanks.
 
Are you based in the UK? NI or GB? Bear in mind that Askaboutmoney is an Irish site ficusing mainly on Irish personal finance and related issues. You may not get detailed feedback on UK specific issues.
 
Hi there...
I signed a contract.........
...What I would like to know is:-

(a) Are we right in thinking that a Contract is not proper unless it's signed by both parties?
(b) Could I write to the Agent and suggest to them that since they did not send a signed copy of the Contract to me they haven't got a leg to stand on?
Advice please?? Many thanks.

Hi NikNox
Sorry, but...
Q(a) You started off by saying "...I signed a contract.........". Do you not think they have signed it (by now) too? So I suspect there is at least one contract in existance signed by two parties...
Q(b) See answer (a)... They sent you a copy and you agreed to the terms by signing it!

I've no legal background but I think it would be closer to you not having a leg to stand on...
You really do need good legal advice. See a solicitor, soon...
 
Crugers,

I see what you're saying, but I am supposed to have, in my possesion, a copy of the contract signed by them. As you would an employment contract, for example. They keep the copy signed by you, you keep the copy signed by them.

My stepmother worked in conveyancing, dealing with contracts all the time. So she knows what they mean.

I have never received a copy of the contract signed by them. OK, they could send one to me now, but the postmark on the envelope would be proof that I wasn't sent it BEFORE the performance date, which was 8th December 2007.

The original contract was sent to me by email. I had to download it, print it off and send it back to them.

As far as I see it, the contract is null and void.
 
Contracts dont have to be written, 2 signed copies etc. to be enforceable (although this helps a lot). If it is clear that a "contract" existed between the 2 parties, even if this is a verbal contract, then the court will say that it must be honoured.
 
I've signed a contract with a government body and I haven't received their part back. They sent me 2 copies in the post with no signatures but showing their department and I kept one copy and sent the other one signed by me back to them

I think what's more important is what is in the the contract given to you
 
It doesn't matter that they didn't give you a copy before the event as long as you had seen the terms and conditions before you signed. There doesn't have to be a second copy either.

Looking at it logically, why would the situation be any different if you had a copy in your possession.

As our contract law is based on the same system as the UK I'd imagine you are goosed but get local legal advice.
 
If one party signs a contract then they are usually bound by its terms, even if the other party does not sign, and it can be enforced against them. You should probably get legal advice from a local solicitor. You could also consider trying to establish where the claimed fee of €1,000 comes from, was this the cost of booking another band?
 
[FONT=Verdana, Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial][/FONT]

Thanks to everyone for your replies. I thought it might be a good idea to type out the contract for all to see. I cannot see anywhere where it states that the Act is liable if they cancel, and nothing about cancelling due to illness. In fact, Clause 2 leaves the onus down to the Agent. I cannot see that the Act were in breach of this contract at all. If anyone can, please point it out to me.

As for the £1000, I have no idea where that figure comes from. There hasn't been a breakdown given, and the Act were only being paid £300 for the gig. They paid £70 for the hire of a van, which they never used in the end, so they were, in fact, out of pocket themselves. It was a very unfortunate situation, and they really wanted to do the gig because £300 would have been enough for them to produce their next EP. But, someone was ill, I tried to find a replacement and couldn't, the Agents said they would find a replacement and didn't, so I see it as completely unfair that they are suing for compensation. The band member who was ill has a doctor's certificate, and a back to work certificate to prove his illness, so the Agent cannot claim falsehood or misstatement. It was just one of those things that happens from time to time.

I do understand what everyone is saying about them not signing the Contract, but surely because it states in Clause 1 that the parties to the Contract are solely the Agent and the Act, then they should have sent me their signed copy?
____________________________________________________


1. The parties to this contract are solely and Agent and the Act.
2. The Agent undertakes to provide by all reasonable means and endeavours the services herein defined and undertakes all obligations and liabilities incurred as a result of the provision of these services.
3. The services to be provided by the Agent are to be the provision of the Act to the specification of the Engager at such times as specified by the Engager.
4. The Act agrees to be solely contracted to the Agent for the purpose of the provision of the services defined in this agreement and all obligations and liabilities incurred in the provision of these services shall be enjoyed exclusively by the Agent subject to the provisions herein defined as:-
a) The Engager undertakes to provide full provision of a safe supply of electrical power to the Act, where appropriate
b) The Engager will assume full responsibility for any loss or damage incurred by the Act where such damage is as a result of any reasonably forseeable event outside the control of the Act whilst they are at the venue.
5. The Agent does not accept liabilty for any loss or damage occurring as a result of falsehoods or misstatements declared by either the Act or the Engager.
6. Where a deliberate falsehood or misstatement has resulted in loss or damage caused by the Agent, the Agent reserves the right to seek remunerative compensation from the party deemed to have made such representations for any losses caused to it's good name and reputation or in a pecuniary manner.
7. All fees payable to the Act shall be agreed solely between the Agent and the Act, and should not be disclosed to the Engager.
8. In the event of cancellation of the performance by the Engager not more than one calendar month before the contracted date, a compensatory payment of fifty percent of the full agreed fee shall be payable to the Act, except where otherwise mutually agreed in writing and signed by both parties.
9. Any communications required between the Act and the Engager shall be made exclusively through the Agent.
10. Any modifications to the contractual terms shall only be made with the full agreement of the Agent and the Act, and will not form any alteration of any of the general contractual obligations herein agreed.
 
NikNox,

I seems to me that you are the Agent under the contract and are liable under Clause 2. There was definitively a verbal contract that you would supply the band and by your actions in trying to find a replacement I do not think that you could argue no contract existed.

I think that the Venue may be successful against you as undertook to provide an Act by "all reasonable means and endeavours" and failed to do so. You could try and settle the matter for a lesser amount. I would speak to a solicitor before you do this and get their advice.
 
FKH, I am not the Agent. I am the mother of one of the band members, the Act, and I signed the contract on their behalf.
 
Oh and it is the Agent that is taking me to Court for compensation. I would assume that the Venue and the Agent had their own contract.
 
Sorry NikNox, I see what you mean now. You probably should have contacted the Agent when you first had to cancel, not the Venue, but that is irrelevant now.

The Agent may be facing a compensation claim from the Venue and this is why they are suing you. The £1,000 may be what they are being sued for by the Venue.

I think in this instance if it went before a judge they may have sympathy for the band but you could be liable for maybe the £300. If you have to go to court you should really have a solicitor with you to show that you are taking the matter seriously.
 
I have today called the Citizens Advice Bureau, and they have confirmed that it doesn't matter that the contract wasn't signed by the Agent. But, I read out the contract to them on the phone and they couldn't see any breach of contract. They also suggested I try to find out whether the Venue had to cancel it's party (it was a private party that the band were hired for, where no tickets were sold, for 50 people, which is why we contacted them in the first instance to give them time to get a replacement/disco/whatever. I felt it was common courtesy to do that) or not. They did suggest I go to a Solicitor and take advantage of various offers for free time. There's one locally that offers a 30 minute free consultation, which if I'm prepared well, should be enough time. I reckon I could self-represent in Court too. Sadly, I'm not a wealthy woman, and therefore cannot afford either Solicitors fees or the compensation! I also do not believe that I am in the wrong here. It was an unforseen circumstance, regrettable yes, but totally beyond my control.
 
Someone lost out as a result of your band failing to perform.

The agent.
The venue.
The people attending the party.

What do you expect of them? It seems to me that they have lost out and should be compensated by you or by the band.

This is not a legal opinion, just a matter of fairness.

Brendan
 
Someone lost out as a result of your band failing to perform.

The agent.
The venue.
The people attending the party.

What do you expect of them? It seems to me that they have lost out and should be compensated by you or by the band.

This is not a legal opinion, just a matter of fairness.

Brendan

And the band lost out too, to the tune of £300. It wasn't their fault that one of the members was too ill to perform. It happens. No-one was particularly pleased with the nature of events, least of all the member who was ill because he felt that he was letting everyone down. But he couldn't help it that he was ill could he? I don't think it's fair that I should have to pay £1000 for something that was beyond anyone's control.
 
Also, the Agents have got insurance for this kind of thing, so effectively they won't have lost anything financially, whereas the band lost the £70 they spent on hiring a van they didn't use. Maybe WE should be the ones suing for compensation!
 
What does the compensation sought relate to? Is it reputational damage (to the agent) or is it the cost of getting a replacement band at short notice? Or is it something else?
 
What does the compensation sought relate to? Is it reputational damage (to the agent) or is it the cost of getting a replacement band at short notice? Or is it something else?

I have no idea, except 'losses incurred' and 'failure in my contractual obligation'. If I could see somewhere in the contract that had been breached by the band I could understand it. There is no breakdown of the compensation demanded.
 
I have no idea, except 'losses incurred' and 'failure in my contractual obligation'. If I could see somewhere in the contract that had been breached by the band I could understand it. There is no breakdown of the compensation demanded.

Maybe I am being suspicious but I think the Agent was being paid considerably more than they were paying the Act? The conditions appear to be arranged to prevent the Act finding out the cost of the Act and the Venue finding out the price of the Act. I am sure the Agent wants to make money but maybe the difference is quite sizeable.

Not by any means a legal-eagle but it would seem to me that in Point 2
The Agent undertakes to provide by all reasonable means and endeavours the services herein defined and undertakes all obligations and liabilities incurred as a result of the provision of these services

and Point 4
The Act agrees to be solely contracted to the Agent for the purpose of the provision of the services defined in this agreement and all obligations and liabilities incurred in the provision of these services shall be enjoyed exclusively by the Agent subject to the provisions....

indicate that the Agent is saying that they are solely liable...

By point 8 there is a performance obligation for the Engager but none for the Act which seems odd given that according to point 1 the only parties to this contract are the Act and the Agent (basically why would the performance obligation on the Engager be listed in a contract they are not party to? Surely that performance obligation in this contract could only be discharged by the Agent?)

It just reads to me like the Agent had themselves a contract of terms and conditions with the Engager and they just fiddled it around a bit to use with the Act but didn't actually make the terms fit.

Ask a local legal expert, but I think that contract might be found a little bit wanting from the Agents perspective. There is nothing to say that the Agent can't sue for recompense but that does not mean they have any entitlement to the £1000 they have asked for. Whether or not the band were discommoded by not being able to perform is pretty immaterial, they are the ones that didn't fulfil their obligation but that doesn't mean that they owe everything the Agent is being approached for.
 
Back
Top