Sports Class Cancellation Due to Weather Policy

Hi all,

I have a friend who signed up for a sports class of 20 classes in the past few months. Due to weather, half the classes were cancelled. Unfortunately, this is a court sport, so can't really be played/practised without the court.

When my friend signed up, the company website had a list of points regarding the course, one of which is that they will only provide a limited number of make up classes for weather cancellations. So despite 10 classes being cancelled, only 4 classes' worth of make up class time was offered.

Is this a reasonable/enforceable policy? Is a company allowed to say they'll provide whatever compensation they'd like if there is bad weather? I've never heard of a company not refunding tickets for things for bad weather, and this is what I told my friend. What does OzB think?

I advised the friend to ask the ACCC since I don't know what the legality of such rainout/raincheck contract terms is.

Cheers, and thanks for any advice you can provide.

Poll Options expired

  • 42
    Yes, a company can set whatever wet weather policy they like.
  • 7
    No, it is not valid for a contract to say that rain-outs won't be compensated.
  • 1
    Depends.

Comments

  • -4

    Bad weather isn't unforeseen this time of year, so they should probably refund you. Then again you should probably have known it'd rain a lot and not joined up in the first place.

    • This year has been unusually wet. It wouldn’t be unusual to have 4 events postponed due to weather, but 10 is pushing it.

      My kids have had about 3 training sessions on grass since start March when training weekly. Normally we might have missed that many due to wet fields.

  • +2

    I've never heard of a company not refunding tickets for things for bad weather

    Whatever the T&C says…

    When my friend signed up

    Your 'friend' didn't read it eh…

    • +1

      They did read it, they just didn't think this many classes would be cancelled.

      That's not the issue - the issue is whether that's a resonable/valid contract term given NSW consumer law.

      • +1

        Lesson?

        Don't sign up on "contracts" that would screw you over, despite how unlikely you/friend 'thinks' it wouldn't happen.

        Could your 'friend' speak to those people, so see what else they can do, as it is an "1/100 year event."

        • Don't worry I agree - I wouldn't have signed up to the lessons myself. But I feel bad as they're my friend obviously.

        • One in a 100 year events happen every other year these days.

  • -2

    I'm not a lawyer. but if it says so in the contract he signed, then it sounds pretty cut and dry. did it say anything about what constitutes a weather cancellation? unless there's a specific law around it, its really what the contract tells you.

  • +3

    I guess the question you need to consider is whether the terms and conditions of the contract are fair and enforceable under applicable consumer/contract law?
    https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/contracts-agreements/enter…
    https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/contracts-agreements/unfai…

    And maybe also if the contract be considered frustrated by bad weather (though that seems less likely?)
    https://legalvision.com.au/know-contract-becomes-frustrated/

    • +2

      This isn't an example of frustration.

      Mentally maybe, contractually - no.

  • Good luck with the ACCC as you will need it for them to help you.

  • +1

    Dunno what the sport is (maybe tennis?), but let's say "your friend" paid $50 per class.
    That's $1000 for the course.
    10 out of 20 were cancelled, but there were 4 make-up time classes.
    So "your friend" missed out on 6 classes at say $50 each, so $300.
    And you want to take this to the ACCC?

    • Sorry if it was unclear - I suggested to them to ask the ACCC about whether it's a fair contract term. Not to start an investigation.

  • When my friend signed up, the company website had a list of points regarding the course, one of which is that they will only provide a limited number of make up classes for weather cancellations. So despite 10 classes being cancelled, only 4 classes' worth of make up class time was offered.

    So your friend was entirely aware of these terms and signed up anyway? And then when "she'll be right" didn't actually work out, your friend wants change the terms after the fact?

    • Not what I was asking. All I suggested to them is that a term allowing them not to provide make up classes seems unfair to me, since the original service isn't provided.

      • In what way is it unfair? Was it not revealed prior to agreeing to purchase the service? Was the service supposed to be provided in a venue not dependent on weather? Is it being interpreted as "the weather's no good" but actually the facilities are entirely fine?

        I would argue the service has been provided in line with the terms under which it was disclosed, offered, and accepted. The fact that creates an "unfavourable" outcome is an entirely separate matter … one of not truly understanding the risks being accepting when agreeing to the terms and then having one of those risks materialise.

        The fact that something "sucks" or is otherwise disappointing does not make it inherently "unfair".

  • +1

    Seems pretty standard. It would still be costing the company if it is rained out as they probably still have to pay their staff and the venue - not their fault.
    And that is the risk you take when you sign up for an outdoor sport

    Could be worse, my kid was once doing group tennis lessons, and if it was wet they would just run it in the clubhouse and do "fitness exercises" in a tiny area, with no option of a refund or make-up.

    • Yeah that's fair. Since I've never signed up for sports classes like this I wasn't really sure so my advice to them was just based on intuition.

      But I can see how it would be a standard term.

  • +1

    They are lucky to at least have 4.
    About 17 years ago, in a 'Pub Cricket' Competition, most of the whole 1st round of the finals games were unable to be played, and as a result, the lowest ranking team in a each grade forfeited, without having a last chance of winning the Grand Final. This was because the scheduling was tight, and the grounds were handed over to 'Winter codes' (Soccer, AFL, League, Rugby) for preparation straight away. There were a lot of unhappy clubs and players that year.

  • +8

    I disagree with all the comments here.

    If you pay for a class, then you pay for a class. if it said 4-10 classes depending on weather, thats reasonable, if it said 10 classes but then hidden in the terms and conditions that its not actually 10 classes if it rains then no thats not reasonable in my opinion.

    The lack of court access due to losing the bookings due to weather is reasonable, however in my opinion they are responsible for setting up an alternative to provide those lessons, even if its something silly like via video call.

    What if I sold 10 classes but put in the terms of conditions that all classes are cancelled without refund if I don't feel like going?

    I shouldn't have to say this but terms and conditions are only valid when its reasonable and all the important information about what you are paying for needs to be visible during paying and checkout.

Login or Join to leave a comment