SIG Insulation Sheffield Half Marathon

101 to 115 of 115 messages
09/04/2014 at 13:19

or on the other hand why didnt the race organisors just pay the bill upfront as the contract they signed stated.  its they who shafted the runners not the water company.

09/04/2014 at 13:44
S3200H wrote (see)

so Water direct had supplied the water for the last 2 years, so you could say that Sheffield Half Marathon are good customers   if it does turn out that for what ever reason the bill was unpaid, then they should have still delivered the water.

The MD of that company is at fault here, knowing the job he undertook and knowing that his decision not to deliver would mean that 5000 runners would be affected, is IMO disgraceful he then tries to hide behind "payment triggers delivery" as though it is the computers fault  

the offer of free water next year, not only do I find strange, but also to be an admission go guilt 

 

And what if they had delivered the water only t be told on the morning that an alternative source was found and that is why patment wasn't made...

The supplier sets the terms and conditions, I fail to see how the supplier can be at fault if the custome doesn't meet them.

09/04/2014 at 13:58

yes they should have paid it if that was the terms of the contract,      how it keeps happening in this perfect world I don't know,     but something went wrong.   

09/04/2014 at 18:44

If you ran a company that supplied an essential part of a mass participation event, (and had supplied this a number of times), then the event asked you to supply again. You send a invoice and terms to the event- is that it would you leave it there if the event did not reply/pay??

Surely the company would make enquires as to why the event organisers have not paid, Mistakes do happen the invoice could have been overlooked.

If Water direct did not make any attempt to chase payment or reinforce to the organisers that no water will be supplied then they must share some of the blame.

We the runners (the customers) deserve to know the facts.

As far as a refund goes, the organisers can not expect to make a profit from this, I understand they paid a lot of fixed costs- the gross profit from this should be made public and that amount should be split between local charities anything else is just plain wrong and there will be a large number of runners -me included who will not race an event organised by this company

09/04/2014 at 18:59

in one of the news reports it said the water company contacted the race organisors many times to chase payment up front.  i guess they just ignored it.

What if in previous yrs the race organisors delayed payment and left it months to pay the bill after the event.  so this yr demanded they pay upfront.   i dont have any extra insight but that would seem to explain why this could have happened.

Loz
09/04/2014 at 20:21
I fail to see how the water company can be to blame. How where they to know whether or not the organisers had made alternative arrangements. The company wouldn't be in business long if after every enquiry but non payment they turned up on the off chance. There is still the question to be answered as to why this wasn't checked before the morning of the race.
09/04/2014 at 22:01
I'm with DeanR7. We have customers who don't pay, delay payment or fail to send us purchase orders. In the end it's a business and there's no point in supplying goods if they never get paid for. Some of our customers we will do the work for without purchase orders, some we won't do work without a purchase order, some we ask for payment up front, some we won't work for at all.

I don't think it's any business of the runners why it went wrong. Just that it did and everyone who entered should be given a refund even if it's only a part refund. There must be some money - there's a chunk they didn't spend on water for a start.
Edited: 09/04/2014 at 22:03
10/04/2014 at 09:54
greavsie at schoolchildren can be cruel wrote (see)

Estimated entrants on starting line 4100 x £25 (average entry fee) = £102,500.Would love to know whose pocketing that money now they are not giving any refunds.Its a scam and maybe refund policies should be looked at for cancelled sporting events by government.Hope the organisers sleep well.

It`d be more than that. There were more entrants than that and the entry fee would be a bit higher as the vast majority are not UKA affiliated.

13 - good luck with that challenge. Great work so far. Sounds very tough to me and needs quick courses. Don`t do Eyam!

10/04/2014 at 10:04
I assume that ?? 2 would still have to be paid to UKA in advance for the race licence.
Edited: 10/04/2014 at 10:10
10/04/2014 at 10:34

The water company have to share some of the blame for this unless they had made it very clear to the organizers they were not going to deliver the water, It would appear they were making a point no pay no delivery.

That's fair enough BUT if you are in business you do what ever you can to firstly maximize profit and equally get positive PR. They failed on both accounts here.

The water company now said that they will supply next year for free, a move to improve PR- So they will supply for no charge next year, but was not prepared to supply and be paid late this year- Really does not make any sense.

And of cause TimR the runners have a right to know what went wrong, yes its a race but its also from the organizers point of view a commercial project, if they can not be open and honest to the original problem and the subsequent measures put in place to make sure this will not happen again a lot of runners will choose to spend there entry fees elsewhere. This is not a local low key event organized by a few keen runners for there friends its a major event ran by up to 10,000 people who all invest in a high entry fee and other costs involved to actually get on the starting line. 

10/04/2014 at 11:07
You know what went wrong. The water wasn't delivered. You have no legal right to be told why it wasn't delivered if it is a private company and you're not a shareholder.

It would be a good idea for them to explain why it wasn't delivered, which they have done.

It would also be a good idea for them to state that they have put measures in place to assure it doesn't happen again and maybe to tell you what they are. Most people seem to agree that the water or bowsers should have been delivered 24hours beforehand.

Other than that no one has a right to know the details of any legal dispute between the organisers and the water company.
10/04/2014 at 17:49

If the race organiser will not or cannot return the entry fee paid for this event then runners should consider a claim against the credit card company behind the online entry system.

11/04/2014 at 09:13

Thanks The Egyptian Toe May is Edinburgh, although I've always wanted to do Eyam

17/04/2014 at 15:31
http://m.thestar.co.uk/news/runners-get-discount-at-different-marathon-1-6566391

Chesterfield Marathon and Half Marathon are offering discounts. Has anyone done this race and is it any good?
17/04/2014 at 22:27
My bad, it's the first year of Chezzy Marathon!

We'd love you to add a comment! Please login or take half a minute to register as a free member
101 to 115 of 115 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums