StubHub stole $100k from a buyer who was sold speculative World Cup Finals tickets she never received. StubHub promised the refund in writing, reneged six days later, and has confiscated the buyer's $100k.
Has anyone ever come across a company that does all the following while simultaneously telling you that you're bound by an arbitration agreement and class-action waiver:
https://www.wsj.com/business/stubhub-tickets-resell-refund-de5ef8c3?mod=hp_lead_pos7
Location: USA and Canada
The moving-target, vacant, and undeliverable addresses for Notices of Disputes has been reported here for months. That is just the beginning of the story though. I wish the article had mentioned the numerous cases that StubHub fails to pay required arbitration fees, resulting in the cases getting kicked out of arbitration. Their bad faith extends to regularly violating signed settlement agreements -- not paying or refunding people on time, not reversing penalties. What did everyone think of the article?
https://www.wsj.com/business/stubhub-tickets-resell-refund-de5ef8c3?mod=hp_lead_pos7
This video is from A More Perfect Union. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DbzBjaRDpuZ/
The elderly George Strait woman had spent $1,500 on the George Strait tickets and driven 200 miles to enjoy the concert with her husband on his birthday. She purchased two tickets in Section X of Clemson Memorial Stadium, but StubHub provided her tickets in nonexistent Section TS. The defrauded buyer was denied entry, her trip wasted, and her husband's birthday ruined. She requested a refund, and StubHub falsely claimed she had received valid tickets. StubHub then threatened "criminal and civil" legal action against her. I hope everyone learns from this that you should not trust in ScamHub's BS "FanProtect Guarantee", and you never should buy from ScamHub.
This is not some seller's inaccurate listing. No, this is StubHub actively defrauding a large group of buyers by (a) reaching out directly to them to advertise The National indy rock band with a picture of lead singer Matt Berninger, (b) enticing the buyers to purchase tickets for The National, (c) then pulling a bait-and-switch by making the buyers take National Choir tickets, and (d) refusing the buyers' requests for refunds.
How is this company allowed to operate? Will the media and AGs still care after the World Cup?
Here is a real-life $20k example from the upcoming US Open showing that StubHub hasn't learned anything from the World Cup disaster. We have both fraudulent/nonexistent seats and speculative tickets, yet StubHub still refused any refund for the buyer until an attorney submitted a demand letter on July 14. StubHub then quickly provided the refund on July 29. No attorney involvement ever should have been required.
The $1.4M wasn't puffery, it's been "verified" by Bloomberg reviewing original payment documents. Imagine all the money that StubHub has confiscated from buyers and sellers that it has absolutely no right to.
I love seeing StubHub get directly called out in the article for intimidating, delaying, and denying consumers as their MO and not even be able to muster a comment.
I just want to correct the record on some very bad advice from a rushed, poorly thought-out article from the Guardian. This author is encouraging people to press StubHub to provide replacement tickets for high-demand World Cup games. Well, what kind of tickets do you think StubHub will provide? We all know how they operate: you'll go from the 100s level to the 400s, and for some reason the journalist thinks that's a good outcome. She then goes right into telling everyone how they can file a legal claim, but she fails to mention that if you accept StubHub's replacement tickets, they have language in their email that you are waiving any legal action against them, you are choosing those replacement tickets over a refund, and the provided tickets are satisfactory. As a result, you will have no right to damages in your legal action against StubHub, whether in arbitration or court. This journalist somehow never understood that the only folks who would want to accept 400s replacements when their originals were in the 100s, would be if they could receive some additional compensation at a later time. The advice was poor to begin with, but the failure to provide the legal ramifications of her poor advice is truly a disservice to all consumers.
Last week, an arbitrator blew up StubHub's convoluted arbitration agreement. STUB has failed to pay required AAA fees in at least four recent cases; it has moved it address for Notices of Dispute six times in one year; its addresses have oftentimes been vacant or undeliverable; it claims its liability in most cases is limited to $200 in damages (even if they failed to refund a consumer $8,000 for scam tickets); STUB requires consumers to contact them by certified mail at shifting, bogus addresses while STUB can email the consumer if it so chooses; and the list goes on and on. They wanted to hide all of this in arbitration, but that's not working out so well for them.
LOCATION: USA and Canada
Last week, an arbitrator blew up StubHub's convoluted arbitration agreement. STUB has failed to pay required AAA fees in four of my clients' cases; it has moved it address for Notices of Dispute six times in one year; its addresses have oftentimes been vacant or undeliverable; it claims its liability in most cases is limited to $200 in damages (even if they failed to refund a consumer $8,000 for scam tickets); STUB requires consumers to contact them by certified mail at shifting, bogus addresses while STUB can email the consumer if it so chooses; and the list goes on and on. They wanted to hide all of this in arbitration, but that's not working out so well for them.