Fan suing the club

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

And in the future that shirt with a name of an ex player could be a nice momento of that season.

Much like the Jamie T-Shirts.

[AthleticoSpizz]

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.

you agree, or do not agree with what you want "Red".

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.

Yes


and the dangerous precedent being set here is..(bearing in mind.. we are talking a couple of weeks not a few months or couple of years here..............and these are extreme circumstances during hard times)


that mugs like you (and me) will not pay next season...nor seasons to come

A quiet simple gesture (by the club) would have diffused what sparked this very thread....and therefore will not have cost them more than their retail penny purchase price of a shirt.............the lost revenue (from the likes of me) and some on here (and those that will read the media fallout) will outweigh the former.........seemples

[Huntley & Palmer]

Yeah, I can see swathes of staff cuts as the commercial department is brought to it's knees by this case I'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??

[AthleticoSpizz]

one point perfectly missed there HP

keep kowtowing

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

If and it seems unlikely that the club lose the case the floodgates will really open, where as ASR says a gesture of goodwill by the club, and it gets no mention.

[RoyalBlue]

Yeah, I can see swathes of staff cuts as the commercial department is brought to it's knees by this case I'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??

There might have been some foundation to that argument until you made it ridiculous to the extreme.

Unlike matters of law, the club is not bound by any precedent nor need to set any. It is quite within its rights and common sense to decide on a case by case basis according to merits.

A credit note (not to the full value) against a future shirt purchase would have cost precious little and resulted in a possible win/win situation. But then I guess you have to exercise a degree of intelligence to come up with alternative solutions such as that.

[Wimb]

I do not personally see how the guy has a case here.

His kid still has the product he purchased, an official Reading shirt that just so happens to have the Sigs name and number on the back. It shows he was a fan during that time and the shirt isn't 'devalued' in any way at all.

A one off gesture isn't going to set a legal precedent but as others have said where do you draw the line? The only time the club would have a case to answer is if they sold the shirt KNOWING or having a confidence that the player was due to be sold, on which case the sales assistant could have quietly mentioned this when the shirt was being bought or just made an excuse such as 'oh we're out of U's at the moment.

There is implied risk if you buy a shirt with a players name on that they will then be sold. The club in no way deceived the fan unless he was told 100% Sig wouldn't be sold.

[Rex]

Let me think - the shirts are a blank canvas. A choice is made to pay for the lettering/number/patches and the shop staff will have a secret list under the counter of future player sales. That is a position of power right there.

Just pick up another shift when the sales are on and put the underdog on the back.

[Shaka's Giant Hands]

For what its worth (and is sort of relevant in this thread) I was in the club shop a few years back and bumped into Steve Sidwell just before our first Premiership campaign, had a chat with him and asked if he would sign my shirt...went over to the display and there weren't any 'Sidwell 4' ones so I asked for one to be made up so I could get it signed.

Once Sidwell had left and I was paying for my shirt the shop assistant told me 'We havent made any shirts up because we don't know if he's staying'.

Seemed sensible enough to me.

[TFF]

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2088 ... irt_payout

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.”

This club really is Mickey Mouse.

I'm sure they don't think twice about scouting a game at Boro but sending someone to court to defend this spurious claim is out of the question?

[Royal Lady]

Good old Craig Mortimer.

[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?

[Royal Lady]

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.....

[TFF]

Additionally, isn't English law based on precedent and as such surely this opens the club to far more claims of this nature?

There's no legal precedent set at County Court

[T.R.O.L.I.]

Fair enough.

[Wycombe Royal]

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......

[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?

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......

Agreed

[bigmike]

Mr McGhee, who first got interested in the club around eight years ago through family connections in Shinfield

Bloody Glory hunter..

oxf*rd off

what sort of dimwit expects a player to stay at a club for as long as they have a shirt with his name on it..

Mr McGhee I hope you read this your a dickhead

[Royal Lady]

Re: my comment - Because, I suspect, at the time of knowing we were playing City, people might have decided to get a cheap train ticket, thinking there would be no problem in securing a match ticket. Don't people do this all the time? Book their trains before getting their match ticket? Doesn't bother me, was just saying.

[RoyalBlue]

Additionally, isn't English law based on precedent and as such surely this opens the club to far more claims of this nature?

It's only based on precedent when a court reaches a decision. The court did not sit in judgement on this case. It was settled out of court.

Not the best statement in response though, it has to be said.