---

Ticket Touting

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman looks carefully at some of Mr. Goldsmith's evidence about eBay. The other resellers that the hon. Gentleman mentioned have refund mechanisms, but there is a practice within the industry—so that the policy can be underwritten—whereby the agreement that they make with sellers is tantamount to collusion to receiving tickets from sources that will breach terms and conditions. That is another area about which I am concerned, because the practices of the secondary sellers certainly encourage clubs and members to breach those terms and conditions. The hon. Member for Shipley mentioned one company. We heard from Seatwave—Mr. Joe Cohen, its chief executive gave evidence to the Committee—which denied that such a thing happened. Yet we had evidence that Seatwave was offering tickets for the rugby Six Nations championship in 2008 that were not yet designed or printed. His evidence was contrary to what we were seeing. Following the Committee's report, we received what I can only call an ill-advised letter from Seatwave making serious allegations and questioning the report. I shall read a relevant passage in which it justifies its practice of advertising allocations that clubs knew that they would get. Joe Cohen's letter stated:"““It was, however, perfectly valid for 'tickets' to be offered for sale as the seller's entitlement to the entrance to the event was secure. The entitlement to attend an event was legitimately being offered for sale on Seatwave, not the actual purchase of a paper ticket—a point that the RFU misled the committee on.””" That was a serious charge against the Rugby Football Union, so we invited the RFU to respond. Nick Bunting is its Government relations director, and Paul Vaughan, its business operations director, wrote to me stating:"““Seatwave make the point that it is perfectly valid for future tickets to be sold on the basis that the seller's entitlement to the entrance to the event is secure. This is not correct…Entrance to a major international at Twickenham is only secure if the ticket holder is entitled to that allocation. If a buyer purchases a ticket from the black market, or secondary market, as Seatwave refer to it, the RFU reserves the right to deny entry to the ground.””" He then cites some of eBay's practices, and states that individual tickets on Seatwave"““for the England v Ireland match on 15th March 2008 were being offered to buyers…at up to £1400 each.””" The highest face value was £70. Mr. Vaughan continued:"““In all cases of RFU tickets Seatwave are inducing a breach of the ticket terms and conditions.””" On the so-called robust consumer protection system to which the hon. Member for Shipley referred, Mr. Vaughan said:"““Seatwave have no right to purchase tickets for major internationals at Twickenham either through an allocation process or an entitlement…Seatwave purport to have a 'right to purchase alternative tickets' but this translates into the reality which is a contract between the seller and Seatwave allowing Seatwave to use the seller's money to acquire tickets in the black market. The RFU is obviously not party to this agreement…If Seatwave buy on the black market they are encouraging the seller to break the ticket terms and conditions…The RFU reserve the right to cancel””" those tickets. There are clear consumer protection issues here. The practice is unacceptable, and I want that to be included in the draft code. Seatwave's response was too clever by half. I shall come to a conclusion because I know that other hon. Members want to speak. Another consumer protection issue that we address in the report is that in trying to protect people against fraud and denial of entry, it would be helpful if tickets advertised on exchanges had block, row and seat numbers printed on them so that people could be sure that they existed and check them out. I welcome the sympathetic tone of the response, the direction of travel, and the Government's approach to the crown jewels list, but I would like to hear a little more detail in the Minister's response about some of the issues that we raised in the report.