fans spent 1,700 yuan to buy a concert ticket. They were full of expectations, but when they arrived at the concert, they discovered that their view was half blocked.
This article was published in "Chinese Women" magazine
The view is blocked and the experience is discounted
Compared with some more affordable performances, the ticket price of the concert is relatively high. Consumers originally hope to get a better audio-visual experience, but often Unsatisfactory. After attending the concert, some consumers could only complain helplessly that what they spent thousands of yuan on were "pillar tickets", and watching the singer became "looking at the pillars".
The so-called "pillar tickets" usually refer to seats with blocked views and blind spots purchased by consumers without their knowledge. During performances, such seats are blocked by the stage, pillars and other equipment, and the audience often "can only hear their voices but cannot see them" .
In life, controversies surrounding "pillar votes" occur from time to time. Not long ago, the Beijing Dongcheng District Court accepted a similar case.
In February 2023, Zheng Xi spent 1,700 yuan on a ticketing platform to buy tickets for a well-known singer’s concert in Haikou. On June 20, the ticketing platform released the concert seating map, which showed that Zheng Xi’s seat was unobstructed, and there was no other reminder that his line of sight might be blocked.
However, on the day of the concert, Zheng Xi discovered that his seat was close to a large scaffolding, which blocked at least half of the view of the stage, resulting in a very poor viewing experience.
Although he had been looking forward to the concert for a long time, due to the poor viewing experience, Zheng Xi returned home in frustration after the concert.
For ordinary consumers, the ticket price of 1,700 yuan is not cheap, but Zheng Xi finds it unacceptable to spend so much money but not enjoy treatment of equal value.
After much consideration, Zheng Xi sued the ticketing platform to the Beijing Dongcheng District Court for a refund. In the end, under the mediation of the court, the ticketing platform refunded 1,700 yuan.
In fact, what Zheng Xi encountered is not an exception. Nowadays, among the various types of concert tickets sold on the market, in addition to "pillar tickets", there are also many similar "weird tickets", such as "step tickets", where the seats are facing the steps and the audience comes in and out; such as "step tickets" "Wall tickets", the seats are distributed in the corners of the venue, and you can only "watch lonely"; and "rail tickets", there is a railing in front of you, cutting the field of view into two halves...
Pay attention to preserving evidence, and protect the rights of fans Youdao
How should consumers protect their rights if they purchase "weird tickets"? What legal liability should the concert organizer bear for "weird tickets"? In response to these questions, Dongcheng District Court Judge Wan Hongyu answered.
q: When consumers purchase concert tickets on ticketing platforms, the relevant pages usually display the clause "Once sold, no returns or exchanges". Is this format clause valid?
a: The Civil Code stipulates the relevant content of format clauses. Standard clauses are clauses that are drawn up in advance by the parties for repeated use and are not negotiated with the other party when entering into the contract. The party providing the standard terms is obliged to follow the principle of fairness to determine the rights and obligations between the parties, and to use reasonable means to draw the other party's attention to those terms that exempt or reduce its liability.
If the party providing the format clause fails to fulfill its obligation to provide reminders or explanations, the other party may claim that the clause does not become part of the contract. For example, common expressions such as "no returns or exchanges" and "no compensation" are used. If the ticketing platform serves as the seller of concert tickets and fails to fulfill its obligation to prompt or explain the format terms, consumers can request that the terms not become part of the contract. .
The Civil Code also stipulates the circumstances in which format clauses are invalid. For example, the party providing the format clauses unreasonably exempts or reduces its responsibilities, increases the liability of the other party, and restricts the other party's main rights; the party providing the format clauses excludes the other party's major rights.
Therefore, even if the seller fulfills its obligation to provide reminders or explanations, should be considered invalid because the format clause excludes the consumer's right to carry out after-sales rights protection.
q: Many consumers are confused about the fact that they purchased concert tickets through an online trading platform, and the corresponding tickets were also paid to the platform. In the event of a breach of contract by the organizer, can consumers separately require the online trading platform to bear the responsibility? Liability for breach of contract? Or require the organizer and the platform to jointly bear legal responsibility?
a: If the concert organizer entrusts the ticketing platform to sell tickets, the organizer is the principal and the ticketing platform is the trustee.
The Civil Code stipulates that a contract entered into by a trustee in his own name and within the scope of authorization of the principal with a third party. If the third party is aware of the agency relationship between the trustee and the principal at the time of conclusion of the contract, the contract shall be deemed to be directly binding. Binding the principal and the third party; except where there is definite evidence proving that the contract only binds the trustee and the third party.
Then, consumers should carefully browse the content of the ticket purchase page when purchasing tickets on the ticketing platform . If the organizer explicitly entrusts the ticketing platform to sell tickets, the service contract between the ticketing platform and the consumer will directly bind the organizer and the consumer .
If there is no explicit statement on the ticket purchase page, a service contract relationship will be established between the ticketing platform and the consumer. The Civil Code stipulates the rights and obligations of the principal and third parties, as well as the trustee's disclosure obligations. If the trustee fails to perform its obligations to a third party due to the principal's fault, the trustee shall disclose the principal to the third party. At this time, the third party can choose the trustee or the principal as the counterparty to claim its rights. Once the counterparty is selected, it cannot be changed.
It can be seen that without an express entrustment relationship on the ticket purchase page, the ticketing platform does not perform its obligations to consumers due to the organizer. The ticketing platform should disclose the organizer to consumers, and consumers can choose to request it from the organizer or the ticketing platform. rights, but once selected, cannot be changed.
If consumers purchase "weird tickets", causing the on-site experience to plummet and unable to achieve the contractual purpose of meeting spiritual needs, the behavior of the organizer or the ticketing platform constitutes a breach of contract, and they should be liable for payment of liquidated damages or compensation for losses and other corresponding breach of contract Responsible .
q: If the purchase of "weird tickets" causes consumers' on-site experience to plummet, in addition to requiring compensation for the ticket price, what other compensation can consumers request?
a: If there is no clear agreement on how to bear liability for breach of contract when purchasing tickets, consumers can not only ask for compensation for the purchase price of tickets, can also ask for reasonable expenditures on accommodation, transportation, etc. .
In addition, if the description of the seat in the external publicity does not match the actual consumption situation, it constitutes fraud. Consumers can request "refund one for three" in accordance with the provisions of the Consumer Rights Protection Law .
q: If a consumer buys a "wonder ticket" in , what channels can he choose to protect his rights?
a: If consumers buy a "weird ticket", they can first try to communicate and negotiate with the on-site staff to see if they can change to a seat with a normal view.
If the negotiation fails, you should maintain a good attitude and secure on-site evidence by taking photos, videos, etc., and also keep relevant evidence such as tickets and payment records, and supervise and manage the market through online platforms such as 12315 WeChat applet, or directly to the local market You can make complaints and reports to the bureau, or seek help from the local people's mediation committee and consumer association..
If none of the above methods can solve the problem, you can also consider protecting your legitimate rights and interests through litigation.
q: Excluding the "strange ticket" situation in , if the consumer requires the platform to refund the ticket due to his own reasons, does the "seven-day unreasonable return" of the Consumer Rights Protection Law apply?
a: According to the provisions of the Consumer Rights Protection Law, operators use the Internet, TV, telephone, mail order and other methods to sell goods. Consumers have the right to return goods within seven days from the date of receipt without giving a reason. However, the following goods Exceptions include: (1) Custom-made items by consumers; (2) Fresh and perishable items; (3) Digital products such as audio-visual products and computer software that are downloaded online or unpacked by consumers; (4) delivered newspapers and periodicals.In addition to the products listed above, other products that are not suitable for return due to the nature of the product and confirmed by the consumer at the time of purchase are not eligible for return without reason.
Therefore, 's "seven-day no-reason return" is mainly aimed at products sold online. In
judicial practice, it is more inclined to believe that holding a concert is the provision of services, so the "seven days no reason return" clause does not apply.
q: In order to avoid problems such as "weird votes" and better protect the rights and interests of consumers, please give some suggestions for ?
a: For the organizers, needs to take a long-term view, put an end to the wrong ideas of "one-shot deal" and making "quick money", and put protecting consumer rights and improving consumer experience first. , When designing seats, try to avoid blocking the view. For seats with obstructed vision, consumers should be reminded in a sufficiently eye-catching manner when selling tickets that the ticket price will be adjusted accordingly according to the degree of visual obstruction.
For consumers, they must also enhance their awareness of rights protection, dare to protect their rights, and be good at protecting their rights. When purchasing "wonder tickets", you should pay attention to preserving relevant evidence to ensure "correct" rights protection.
Editor: Liu Zhengyu
Reviewer: Yang Xuejuan
Reviewer: Liu Ping
