GAME FAIR ACTION GROUP

[Jager SA]

This is very interesting, I didnt think it would be long before the trade stand holders would get together.

 

 

http://www.gamefairactiongroup.org.uk

 

 

Quite rightly so I think its outragious what the CLA have done.

 

 

 

Kal

[Guest 308Panther]

Stealing is still Stealing...

I wish the individual vendors the best of luck on getting their money back.

That is a raw deal.

 

308Panther

[6mmBR]

No refund, thats outrageous.

Dave

[Jager SA]

not really,sit back and think about it for a minute,the CLA is a business providing a show for trders to make money and sell there wares,trader pay a fee to stand there which in turn the fee paid goes towards the costs of advertising for the run up to the date and the costs of the rent for the ground

no refund may sound harse but the organizers have already paid out for ther expensense so they will also need to claim this back but a lot like advertising and admin will not be able to be claimed for

unfortunatly thats business and the weather/ nature cannot be hald responsable so shouldnt the organizers

now a partial refund less there expenses thjats already been paid out may be the way to go

just look at the last time foot and mouth kicked off and all the leases and rents paid by game shoots and stalkers that couldnt be paid back

act of god or act of nature,theres nothing that can be done about it,yes it hurts at the time but thats life

 

Pete,

 

Now thats a fair statement but there is a lot more too than meets the eye otherwise the legal team heading this up would just say not a chance.

 

For example, the CLA had no insurance but in the contract they expect the traders to have, the CLA are refunding the day tickets (Joe Public) for those who purchased them. The CLA went Ltd this year after 40 odd years as an association, interesting.

 

Without the traders there is no CLA, pi** the traders off like this and it is sure to come round and bite you. There was in excees of a 1000 traders this year, 100 have already signed up to the action group in just over 2 weeks.

 

Now ok it might be 50/50 in getting money back, but how much damage with this do to the CLA???

 

 

 

Kal

[Jager SA]

I understand what your saying BUT if the trader hasnt taken there own insurance thats there fault NOT the CLA as they would have already paid a lot of money out during the year to the run up to the show,traders cant just demand a refund due to natural causes,

as to traders this will be a lesson to them for future shows as it wont make a blind bit of difference to traders attending future events as its there banker for the year with the amount of money they take on the day

The public are bound to get refunded as the charge is for addmission unlkie the charges for the traders which is towrds the costs of organizing and renting the event,they book and pay for there spot in advance,just like game shooting you book and pay if the weather cancells it unlucky,unless you have insurance

the problem is now with the climet changes the weather cant destroy a show and the potential earnings of a company

 

Insurance was the way to go if the insurance company would insure you! Most I have spoken to (Traders) wouldnt insure them against the weather due top the excessive rainful already encountered. The CLA could of had insurance but refused to pay (Alledgadly) so it was said a 100ks worth of cover.

 

 

Kal

[Vermincinerator]

In my opinion none of these fairs, exhibitions or shows would go ahead if there was not a profit to be made by all, so insurance should be an integral part of any event.

It is unfair that the CLA is keeping the exhibit money, an event such as this should not have been allowed to go ahead without the CLA having comprehensive insurance against cancellation.

On the other hand as a trader, not insuring yourself against such an eventuality is just as absurd.

However because the CLA was not covered it does not give them the automatic right to keep the money.

I think the exhibitors have every right to pursue the CLA through the courts for full reimbursement of all fees

 

Ian.

[Jager SA]

In my opinion none of these fairs, exhibitions or shows would go ahead if there was not a profit to be made by all, so insurance should be an integral part of any event.

It is unfair that the CLA is keeping the exhibit money, an event such as this should not have been allowed to go ahead without the CLA having comprehensive insurance against cancellation.

On the other hand as a trader, not insuring yourself against such an eventuality is just as absurd.

However because the CLA was not covered it does not give them the automatic right to keep the money.

I think the exhibitors have every right to pursue the CLA through the courts for full reimbursement of all fees

 

Ian.

 

 

I agree with you totally, the way they have gone about this is wrong and potentially damaging to the trade as well as the CLA.

 

I couldnt get insurance as a result of the overwhelming claimants throughout the UK due adverse weather.

 

 

Kal

[Jager SA]

Why is this action group asking for donations from the public ??

 

 

Thats another story, im not to sure of that one either, I thought the same thing when I read it.

 

 

 

Kal

[Redfox]

THe ClA would only be able to insure against cancellation for other things, only a partial cover for the weather. But traders can insure agains cancellation by the organiser as what is known as "force majeur" in other words outside of their control, nothing to do with weather just cancellation by the organisers. Part of being in business and as for the electrical company, they delivered what they were paid for, the fact that stallholders didnt use it is nothing to do with them and no refund should be paid for that.

Business is hard sometimes and you just have to take the knocks and get on with it, but not taking out insurance ( which would/shouldHave been long before the event and the floods) is stupidity for which you eventually pay. The CLA is offering a fair reduction on stand fees for the following year which is at least a show of good faith.

The world of reality is usually pretty harsh.

Redfox

[Guest 308Panther]

Rent money for a 10x10 booth for X amount of days of the show is one thing....

 

But....Alot of these vendors order inventory in advance on 30,60,90 day deferred billing/payment.

Now they built up their inventory, for the show...only to have the show canceled....

The distributor needs to get paid or the vendor looses his credit limit....since the vendor inventory is now overstock he has to pay the freight to ship it back and a percentage on restocking fees to the distributor...if they even bother to take it back at all.

Sometime you can get lucky and negotiate a type of consignment payment...that is to mean you only pay for what you sell....But that is all on the vendor and the distributor.

 

In most cases if you can get insurance its for product damage...not cancelations

and its so derated its hardly worth it.

 

I used to be a vendor at M/C Rallies across the U.S.....Seen alot and slept in the truck with a .45 under the pillow too....That is...when I did sleep.

 

308Panther.

[Wsm]

The CLA are offering a 20% discount for bookings for the 2008 show at Blenheim.Whether the pitch fee`s increase by that amount next year remains to be seen .

 

I haven`t heard of one trader that was able to get cover as of yet (we tried) let alone get paid out

 

It was apparent weeks before that there were serious reservations whether the show would go ahead with the CLA spending their entire slush fund on just laying the main services onto the site.The only fault was insisting right up till the Saturday before that there wasn`t a problem

 

Theres no chance that an organisation can pay back all the money that they already forked out but perhaps a 50% discount for next year would be a good compromise for all.

[Alycidon]

There is an interview with David Hough in last weeks (9/8/07)shooting times that puts the cla's case.

 

I can see where the CLA are coming from, the overheads are massive on a show of this size. I wonder if traders might be covered under a business all risks policy that some companies have. In firness it may not be worth claiming as premiums for all insurance are now climbing rapidly to pay for the flood damage.

 

A

[Bambi-basher]

The CLA has taken the profit for the last 49 game fairs, this year things go wrong and they make a loss, well that is business.

 

In the letter that I saw sent to a trader it stated that the CLA could not afford to pay the traders their money back and they should claim off there insurance. It did not point to any Terms and conditions that were in the contract between the Trader and the CLA which the “CLA could use as a get out of jail card” which if they were in the contract I am sure they would of high lighted. I have had a quick look at the T&C I am not sure if the ones I saw were a summery or the full terms and conditions, now while terrorism and acts of war were mention I did not see the cause “act of god” or “circumstances beyond our control” in there. The fact that the CLA has made a offer of £135/20% discount could be constituted as a admission of guilt. As has already been mention if a 100 traders have already sited up to the group I think you can be sure before pledging there donation they will have gone though the T&C with a fine tooth comb and or had them checked by a solicitor.

 

I know at Lowther Game fair to put it mildly all traders were very angry I am sure if it was not for the fact that most being shooting men and therefore law abiding citizens, they would have been a number of confrontational situations on the CLA stand.

 

How much do you want to bet that the price for a stand at next years CLA will be a £135 more than this year? I know that a lot of the trader were saying f**k the CLA next year and were talking about doing the Scottish game fair along with one or two small fairs and the Midland for there English customers (always a better fair IMO apart from the traffic.)

 

B-b

[Redfox]

The thing that surprises me is that in previous years they have treated us all to a good mud bath and then slightly apologised, why not this year?

I suspect that Harewood estate said not on our land, rather than any cold feet on the CLAs part.

I am not defending the CLA at all, but if you attend outdoor events in the line of business cancellation is something you live with. At Lowther, most seemed to be doing a brisk trade and numbers were good as was the weather ( obviously better connections upstairs at the Lowther estate )

Redfox

[Guest 308Panther]

I would be willing to bet that next years show wont be as big.

No matter how much of a reduction they offer.

it will be interesting to see what all works out.

 

308Panther

[Guest The Equaliser]

This is very interesting, I didnt think it would be long before the trade stand holders would get together.

http://www.gamefairactiongroup.org.uk

Quite rightly so I think its outragious what the CLA have done.

Kal

 

 

 

Why not take out a claim on line yourself then others will follow.

 

I think the admin cost is £70.00 the CLA would not be able to take on numerous actions for damages so would have to cough up

[Jager SA]

Why not take out a claim on line yourself then others will follow.

 

I think the admin cost is £70.00 the CLA would not be able to take on numerous actions for damages so would have to cough up

 

 

I was advised that wouldnt do much good, that a group action was the way forward. The action group has asked for 5% of the total net stand fees, this isnt far off £70.

 

Now I know theres 50/50 chance it can go either way, I appreciate there are differing views on the whole subject, however, there must be something in the Ts&Cs that is worth persuing or else why bother.

 

 

 

Kal

[Guest The Equaliser]

I was advised that wouldnt do much good, that a group action was the way forward. The action group has asked for 5% of the total net stand fees, this isnt far off £70.

 

Now I know theres 50/50 chance it can go either way, I appreciate there are differing views on the whole subject, however, there must be something in the Ts&Cs that is worth persuing or else why bother.

Kal

 

 

Just to put the cat amongst the pigeons

 

If it goes to trial and they dont settle and the action goes against you or the action group

You all could be liable for the costs which could run into megga bucks especially if a barrister is involved.

Nothing gauranteed in this life etc a pine box at the end of it.

[Guest Hoot]

If it goes to trial and they dont settle and the action goes against you or the action group

You all could be liable for the costs which could run into megga bucks especially if a barrister is involved.

 

Very true! There is always the possibility that the CLA will call their bluff. In fact I'm almost certain that the CLA will do just that.

 

They will be very sure of their ground over this one you betcha!

[Wsm]

Its alright talking of a boycott now but come next spring most traders will be looking towards Blenheim.

 

Realistically where else can you display your wares to 150,000 potential customers over three days.A lot of traders can`t afford not to be there

[Bambi-basher]

exactly,and maybe next time traders will pay for insurance its OK moaning about it now but what about the other 49 shows where the traders made that which promotes growth and vigour load of money,did they give the CLA a bit more as they had a good 3 days

 

Pete

 

As I see it the CLA entered into a contract with the traders, that contract was to rent a specific area of land for the trader to retail his goods at a “game Fair” which the CLA would organise.

 

CLA failed to supply said goods, pure and simple.

 

There is nothing in the T&C that I have seen to cover the CLA in the eventuality that they had to cancel the fair. The letter sent out to traders is very softly, softly, the reason they give for not paying out is not “we do not have to because under section X of paragraph X of the terms and condition” but because the CLA had not taken out any insurance and it did not have enough money to refund traders.

 

If the CLA is a limited company then it could well be trading fraudulently if its liabilities are more than its assets, the fact that they have issued a statement saying they cannot afford to pay is a admission that they are indeed trading illegally which of cause could mean 5 years in prison for its directors.

 

I think you are right about the threats by traders to boycott next years event (assuming the CLA is not in the hands of receivers) it would not make good business sense, if fact they really need to hope that they can make a bit more next year than this to cover the loss this year. No doubt one or two might dig there heels in on a point of principle. The problem is next years event is all ready under a bit of a cloud.

 

Stu

 

Even if the traders were to be successful in there court action they could still be out of pocket. I think rather than a group action they would be better individually going to the small claims court, that way there would be no big legal bills. They could as a group get one solicitor to prep a template case for them all to use, but it is not that difficult to do the work your self if you are reasonably switch on.

 

B-b

[Guest The Equaliser]

Pete

 

As I see it the CLA entered into a contract with the traders, that contract was to rent a specific area of land for the trader to retail his goods at a “game Fair” which the CLA would organise.

 

CLA failed to supply said goods, pure and simple.

 

I agree with you but the courts will view an act of god as something that all parties in the contract could not foresee and will award costs against the action dont forget the CLA will already have on board legal advisers as to the consequences of there actions

I accept its not right and a bitter pill to swallow but lifes a bitch

 

Its alright for me to give these comments as they do not directly affect me i know but as someone on the sidelines i reckon that this is what any Court will say.

 

Stu

 

Even if the traders were to be successful in there court action they could still be out of pocket. I think rather than a group action they would be better individually going to the small claims court, that way there would be no big legal bills. They could as a group get one solicitor to prep a template case for them all to use, but it is not that difficult to do the work your self if you are reasonably switch on.

 

B-b

 

 

I would shame them publicly rather than take them to court keep it in front of the publics view by press releases etc the power of the press sticks and if those who have lost money in this walk with their feet by not going in future years and not supporting the CLA then they will realise they made one big mistake in not refunding their money

 

Stu

[charly hunter]

If you were to buy tickets to see your favorite band or singer, and at the last minute it was cancelled because said person had become ill and could not perform, the organisers would and do refund your money. These companies do not say "It was an acted of god as the person didn't know he was going to be ill so you can't have you money back" surely these organisers know that they can't get away with it so they take the pain and pay up. You are not offered a part payment because they have to pay for the advertising etc. You get a full refund. Is there really that much difference?

[millpool]

heres a question

how come the cla did not insure themselves against the show being cancelled? so that if reqd they could refund the exhibitor's ?

[Bambi-basher]

A couple of point I would like to make Stu, having read of the letter to the traders and reading between the lines I think they know they are on shaky ground. If it went to court, especially small claims/arbitration I bet judge would awarded the traders at least half there money back, it is just the kind of compromise the judges like to come to if the case is not a clear cut one.

 

I think the CLA are trying it on and are hoping that 50% of traders will be insured and claim on it, 25% will just write it off, the remainder will issue court proceeding then it will get interesting. That way the CLA will have got off with out paying a lot of the traders out. It would be the best commercial course of action for them.

 

B-b