Sunset Boulevard (ENO)

Sorry Matthew, I've seen numerous understudies over the year and understood the whole "you bought tickets to a show" concept, but I honestly think this might be one time that can be legally challenged. The producers plainly weren't simply selling tickets to a production of Sunset Boulevard, they were selling tickets tickets to see Glenn Close in Sunset Boulevard.

As I posted earlier there is a legal concept that it doesn't matter what you state in a contract, if it's plainly something else, that's what matters (a five-pronged implement will always before a fork, even if you call it a spade).

Theatreboard bringing people together! Group hugz! 

I would have thought that any legal challenge possibility is lost if you use the ticket to see the show. The producers could argue that despite being informed of the cast change, you still got a full performance of the show and by implication have given your consent to the changes. The lack of refund is well covered in the small print of the ticket.

im not saying this is right, in fact given the way this has been marketed I think there should be a refund policy, but only if you choose not to see the performance. If GC is off in two weeks I shall be mightily disappointed as she was my main reason for booking, but it wouldn't occur to me not to go and see Ria Jones and the rest of the cast and orchestra.

The fact that everybody buying tickets was aware that it's possible for the star to be ill means those people cannot have formed a legitimate expectation that the star would certainly perform. That matters. You can't just say "Oh, but they were pushing the presence of the star name really hard, so that removes the need for the audience to understand what was actually on sale".

I'm not saying that they shouldn't have had some plan in place to deal with the possibility of illness. If I'd been running the show I would have had one. But they didn't, and the audience can't just invent one because they want it.

There is the concept of an unfair contract, and there is the concept of unfair trading, but the conditions under which a contract or practice is considered to be unfair are strictly defined. If they'd only scheduled Glenn Close to perform on certain days but given the impression she'd be performing eight times a week, that would have been unfair as defined in law because they would have misled the audience into buying tickets that they might otherwise not have bought. But they haven't misled anyone. They intended for her to perform at every performance, but they never offered any guarantee that she'd be able to appear at every performance, the terms and conditions make it clear that there's no guarantee, and most importantly of all, the audience knew that was a possibility. Nobody can claim they were misled. A contract doesn't become unfair just because people don't like the fact that it has to deal with what's possible rather than what's ideal.

If she has to pull out from the rest of the run then it's a different matter. If it was sold on her name and she's no longer in the cast at all then you could argue that the show on offer is materially different from the show as originally sold. When you buy a ticket in hope of seeing a particular person then you can rightly argue that although you know there are no guarantees you must have at least some chance of seeing that person, and if the chance has dropped to zero then the conditions have changed sufficiently to void the contract. But right now that's not the situation.

Can anyone give a bit of advice on the balcony? I'm finally considering this, but am broke so can't really justify more than the £12 seats. What's better - the ones nearer the front (sides of Row A and B) that say 'partially restricted view and legroom' or the ones at the back corners, which are further away but don't state a restricted view or legroom?

The adverts clearly state Glenn Close in Sunset Boulevard and the ENO have priced it accordingly, if they charged £67.50 top price and the understudy has to come on, then people haven't got much to complain about, except give a sigh. Conversely if people paid a lot of money and then Glenn got terrible reviews, then that is tough.

For the record I have seen Sunset Boulevard with Glenn Close and didn't pay the top price, but feel for people who have and wanted to see Glenn, with travel, accommodation and food people may easily paid over a £1000 to see this.

What about if you hire a car and you pay a lot of money for a Mercedes for example and you get to to customer service desk and they say "we only have Fiat Punto left", which is about 20% of the Mercedes price you stumped up, then for the agent says to say you, you haven't got a leg to stand on because in the T&C it say 'or similar'?

I have seen a theatre make alternative arrangements (cannot confirm if it was a refund or exchange) when I passed it, when the star was out, this was Joseph at the Adelphi with Lee Mead. So it does happen.

What if you bought your ticket from the box office, where you haven't physically agreed T&C.

I've seen the show twice and sat in A14 (£25) and B38 (£12) so can't advise other than from those experiences. I'd definitely go for a row A or B rather than further back though. I'm pretty short so I had ample leg room in both rows, about 1.55m I think (yes, I don't know how tall I am). In row A I saw straight under the bar, the vertical bar was easy to see past. From row B I had to slouch in my seat to be able to see under the bar, the person next to me seemed to be sitting up straight to see over it. However having an aisle seat was great because I could look past the person in front of me. From 38 I could see the whole stage, not sure how much further over you are before you start loosing the sides though. Hope that's of some help.

I don't at all.

Lack of prior rehearsal was nothing to do with it. Take it from someone who sits onstage! The delay was because of grumbling at the box office....

I think you're misunderstanding what people are saying. No one is arguing that it's wrong, unacceptable or unheard of for people to get ill. That would be ridiculous. They're saying that the situation should have been dealt with correctly by the producers. Had they offered exchanges or refunds, then people may have been disappointed, but would have had no choice but to accept that what has happened, as you can't argue against genuine illness.

In my previous post, I drew a comparison with a Madonna concert. The same applies here - if Madonna cancels a show due to genuine illness and audience members get a refund, then there would be disappointment but not uproar. But if they were to get an alternative act without the possibility of a refund, it's another matter altogether. And that's exactly what has happened for people who thought they'd paid to see Glenn Close in Sunset Boulevard...