First published on
By Jeremy Wilkinson, Open Justice multimedia journalist, Palmerston North
People at the party were considered serious fans of Swedish pop group ABBA. Photo: AFP
A woman who hired a band to play at her 70th birthday party fired them after they warned it was unlikely they would perform any ABBA songs for the "older guests" who were "serious" fans.
She then took the group to small claims court in the hope of a full refund of her deposit.
The woman had hired the musical group based on the recommendation from the venue she had leased, agreeing to pay $3000 for up to two-and-a-half hours of entertainment.
She later told the Disputes Tribunal she had been assured the music played would be "fitting for a gathering of older guests".
The woman entered into a contract with the band in April this year, paying a $500 deposit ahead of her August party.
In preparation for the milestone birthday celebration, she later emailed the band with a request that the music they play include ABBA.
She explained many of her guests were "serious" fans of the Swedish supergroup, the decision, published to the tribunal's website this week, detailed.
The band responded by saying they would see what they could do, "however, as the songs were written and sung by ladies, the all-male band would find that challenging".
In a further email, the woman requested she be able to create the playlist as she wanted to ensure the group played most of her chosen songs, the tribunal heard.
She was told to send through the playlist but warned the band would find it difficult to learn and rehearse new material to accommodate her specific needs.
However, the band said they would endeavour to accommodate her needs as much as possible, the decision said.
Shortly after, the woman cancelled the contract on the basis "she was not going to get the music of her choice" and requested her deposit back.
The band returned $250, but she wanted a full refund of the deposit and so later turned to the tribunal to recoup the further $250.
After hearing the facts of the dispute, the tribunal found the woman had signed a contract that stated the deposit was "non-refundable".
Tribunal referee Paulette Goddard was satisfied the woman had received and accepted the terms and conditions of the contract.
On whether it was reasonable for the woman to expect to have input into the playlist, Goddard said there was nothing in the contract stating she could have a say.
But there was an implied term that, should she have chosen to do so, she ought to have been given a reasonable opportunity to have her music preferences considered, Goddard said.
"She was paying $3000 for 2 to 2.5 hours of entertainment, which is a significant investment for which it would be fair and reasonable to have some input," the decision said.
"However, she did not raise the issue of her preferences until four weeks and again approximately eight weeks after the contract had been formed."
In dismissing the woman's claim for $250, Goddard was satisfied the band took the woman's requests into consideration, albeit they did not provide a playlist of the music they would be playing.
"I am satisfied that it was [their] intention to play music which was in keeping with [the woman's] wishes.
