CASE STUDY
Fireworks VIP Ticket Dispute
Estimated read time: 12 minutes
Embedded Files
The Beginning
The Beginning
VIP tickets were purchased for a fireworks event after promotional material referred to a VIP Viewing Platform. At the event, the expected viewing platform was not provided, creating a dispute about whether the advertised VIP experience matched what was actually delivered.
Final Outcome
Final Outcome
After evidence was preserved, the matter was escalated through a formal complaint and legal action via Money Claim Online. The dispute was eventually resolved by settlement following personal service on a director and judgment/enforcement pressure.
Background - Why the VIP ticket mattered
In the summer of 2025, I saw an advert on Facebook for a fireworks event being promoted as one of the biggest fireworks displays in the UK. The event was due to take place at The National Bowl in Milton Keynes, a large outdoor venue which regularly hosts major events.
Having attended events at The National Bowl before, I was familiar with the layout and ground conditions. The venue is largely made up of open grass and mud, and poor weather can quickly make conditions difficult underfoot.
With my fiancée and young son also attending, the advertised VIP Viewing Platform was an important part of my decision to purchase VIP tickets. The wording suggested that VIP ticket holders would have access to an elevated or dedicated viewing area, which would provide a better viewing experience and avoid some of the difficulties associated with the general ground conditions.
That expectation later became central to the dispute.
The Problem
The Problem
The problem was not simply that the event was muddy or busy. The core issue was that the VIP ticket package had specifically referred to a VIP Viewing Platform, but no such viewing platform appeared to be provided at the event.
Instead, the VIP area appeared to consist of a ground-level tented/bar area. From what was available on the night, this did not match the expectation created by the ticket description or promotional material.
For a fireworks event, the viewing position was a key part of the experience. The wording "VIP Viewing Platform" suggested something more than general admission access or a standard ground-level VIP bar area. It suggested a dedicated viewing feature which formed a significant part of the reason for paying extra for the VIP package.
This distinction became central to the dispute.
The issue was therefore not based on general disappointment with the event. It was based on a specific feature that appeared not to have been provided.
Evidence Preserved
Evidence Preserved
A key part of this dispute was preserving the evidence before it could be changed, removed or forgotten.
The strongest evidence came from material available at the time the tickets were purchased. This included the ticket confirmation, screenshots of the VIP ticket description, promotional material referring to the VIP Viewing Platform, and photographs taken at the event showing what was actually provided.
The evidence gathered included:
-- the ticket purchase confirmation --
-- screenshots of the VIP ticket description --
-- promotional wording referring to a VIP Viewing Platform --
-- photographs taken at the event --
-- evidence of the VIP bar / ground-level VIP area --
-- correspondence with the organiser --
-- records relating to the Money Claim Online claim --
-- settlement correspondence --
-- proof of payment received at the end of the dispute --
This evidence was important because the dispute was not based on general dissatisfaction with the event. It was based on a specific advertised feature that appeared not to have been provided.
By keeping the screenshots, emails, photographs and payment records together, it became possible to show the full timeline clearly:
what was advertised, what was purchased, what was provided, how the organiser responded, and how the matter was eventually resolved.
This turned the complaint from a simple disagreement into a structured, evidence-led dispute.
Moving the Goalposts
Why This Evidence Mattered
Preserving the original wording was crucial. The VIP ticket description referred to a "VIP Viewing Platform" when the tickets were purchased, but later wording appeared to refer to a "VIP Zone" instead. That difference mattered because a viewing platform suggests a specific advertised feature, not just general access to a VIP space. This is why screenshots, archived pages and purchase confirmations can be so important in a dispute.
Complaint & Escalation
Initial Complaint
The initial complaint set out the core issue: the VIP tickets had referred to a "VIP Viewing Platform", but no such platform appeared to be available at the event. The complaint focused on the difference between what had been advertised and what was actually provided.
Refund Refused
The refund was refused on the basis that VIP areas were available around the site. However, this did not address the central point of the complaint: the ticket description had referred to a VIP Viewing Platform, not simply a general VIP area.
After the issue was identified and the evidence had been preserved, the matter was raised with the event organiser.
The complaint focused on the difference between what had been advertised and what appeared to have been provided at the event. The key point was not general disappointment with the night itself, but the specific reference to a VIP Viewing Platform and whether that advertised feature had actually been delivered.
In later correspondence, the event organiser stated that the "VIP Viewing Platform" was removed at the last minute due to adverse weather conditions (rain) and resulting safety concerns. However, that explanation did not resolve the central issue: the VIP tickets had been sold on the basis of a specific advertised feture which was not provided on the night. My position was that this was not simply an operational change, but a failure to provide the VIP ticket package as described.
I accepted that weather and safety may require an event organiser to make operational changes on the night. However, my position was that this did not remove the underlying consumer rights issue. If a specific VIP feature was advertised and paid for but was not provided, the question then became whether an appropriate refund, partial refund or other remedy should have been offered.
The event organiser did not agree with my assessment of the situation and refused to provide me with a refund.
Legal Action
Legal Action
Money Claim Online
Money Claim Online
After the complaint was rejected and no refund was offered, the matter was escalated further through the small claims process using Money Claim Online (MCOL).
Before legal action was started, the evidence had already been organised into a structured timeline. This included the original ticket wording, screenshots of the advertised VIP Viewing Platform, photographs from the event, complaint correspondence and records showing how the wording later appeared to change.
This preparation became important once the dispute moved beyond a standard customer complaint.
The claim focused on a straightforward question:
Had the VIP ticket package been provided as advertised?
My position was that the tickets had been sold on the basis of a specific advertised feature, a VIP Viewing Platform, and that this feature had not been provided at the event.
The matter then progressed through the formal court process, including judgment and later enforcement action. This significantly increased the pressure on the organiser to resolve the dispute.
One of the most important lessons from this stage was the value of preparation. By the time the claim was issued, the evidence had already been preserved and organised. This meant the case could be presented clearly, consistently and with supporting documentation throughout the escalation process.
Key Point
The small claims process is far easier to navigate when the evidence has already been structured beforehand. Screenshots, timelines, archived pages and organised correspondence can make a significant difference once a dispute moves beyond informal complaint handling.
Enforcement Pressure
Obtaining judgment (CCJ) did not immediately resolve the dispute. Further enforcement steps were considered and persued in order to increase pressure for payment and resolution. That included formal enforcement preparation and personal service on a company director as part of the escalation process.
At this stage, the dispute had moved well beyond a standard customer complaint. The matter had now become a formal legal and enforcement issue supported by a structured evidence trail.
The dispute was eventually resolved by settlement after enforcement pressure increased.
Once the event organiser had gone 'quiet' on the matter, I obtained the services of a 'Trace & Serve' company to locate the director and serve the court order. The director was personally served at his home address. Once this process had been completed, the event organiser was very keen to get in touch with me to discuss settlement.
Settlement
Settlement
Following the escalation of the dispute through complaint correspondence, legal action, judgment and enforcement pressure, the matter was eventually resolved by settlement.
All costs were recovered and the full ticket costs refunded.
One of the most significant pieces of correspondence during the dispute was an email offering payment in “full and final settlement” of the matter. This demonstrated how the dispute had progressed from an initial consumer complaint into a formally escalated legal dispute with real financial consequences.
The settlement marked the conclusion of a dispute which had originally centred on a single advertised feature, the VIP Viewing Platform, and whether that feature had been provided as described.
This stage of the case also highlighted the importance of understanding settlement wording carefully. In many disputes, accepting a payment described as “full and final settlement” may limit the ability to revisit the matter later.
A Surprisingly Accessible Process
One of the biggest misconceptions about consumer disputes and legal escalation is that the process is only manageable with solicitors, large costs or specialist legal knowledge. In reality, much of this dispute was handled from home using a standard laptop, organised evidence, screenshots, archived web pages, emails and a structured timeline.
From preserving the original ticket wording, to drafting complaint correspondence, issuing the claim through Money Claim Online and managing the enforcement process, the majority of the work was carried out personally and remotely.
That does not mean the process was instant or effortless. It required time, persistence, organisation and attention to detail. However, it demonstrated that many consumer disputes are far more accessible than people initially assume.
One of the central ideas behind The Claim Club is that ordinary people are often capable of handling far more of the process themselves once they understand how evidence, timelines and escalation actually work.
Key Point
Many people assume formal escalation is complicated or inaccessible. In reality, a large proportion of consumer disputes can be managed with patience, organisation and a clear evidence trail, often from nothing more than a laptop with an internet connection.
Final Thoughts
The strongest consumer disputes are often not the loudest ones. They are the ones supported by the clearest evidence trail.
This case demonstrated the importance of preserving screenshots early, archiving promotional material, keeping correspondence organised and maintaining a structured timeline throughout the dispute. It also showed how a complaint can evolve over time. What began as a dispute over an advertised VIP Viewing Platform eventually progressed through formal complaint correspondence, legal action, judgment, enforcement pressure and settlement.
Most importantly, the case reinforced a central principle behind The Claim Club:
structured evidence and calm escalation can place consumers in a far stronger position than they may initially realise.
Explore More
Explore More
Looking to improve the way you approach complaints, disputes and escalation?
Explore The Claim Club playbooks, case studies and practical consumer dispute resources.
Disclaimer
This case study is provided for general educational and informational purposes only. It is based on personal, real-world dispute experience and reflects the circumstances, evidence and correspondence specific to this particular matter.
Nothing on this website constitutes legal advice, financial advice or formal legal representation. The Claim Club is not a law firm and does not provide regulated legal services.
Consumer disputes and legal outcomes will vary depending on the facts, evidence and circumstances of each individual case. Anyone dealing with a complex or serious legal matter should consider seeking independent professional advice where appropriate.
All views expressed are personal opinions based on the evidence and correspondence available at the time. Certain information has been redacted or anonymised for privacy and evidential reasons.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse