am I being unreasonable?

[itchy trigger]

I broke the rules last time, so the topic was deleted, quite rightly, but I saw nothing after my reply to the second or third reply post as I was out. the topic having been removed when I next tried to view, so I do not know if there were more replies after that, so will try again, with this version-

 

so booked a 100 driven partridge day for 8 experienced guns, was to be over five drives, first drive they were coming through at shoulder and lower height, not shootable safely, second driven no better, third drive was better but badly pegged, (and beaten) in the main the birds all going over one gun in large flurries, the fourth drive we were placed at the end of the wrong wood? so nothing there, keeper ( I had to go and find him, don't forget total bag up to now was 5, with 1 pheasant pegged on the 1st drive) then told us to shoot pheasants if they were shootable, fifth drive was in a deep wooded valley, shooting up through narrow gaps in the leaved trees, had my gun unloaded for 50% of this drive as the beaters were above, right in front of me, total shot for the day, 21 partridge and 5 pheasant that I would say were shot mainly out of sheer frustration, nearly all on the last drive by 3 of the guns, at the end of this debacle of a day I had to go and look for the keeper who seemed to think there was nothing wrong, there was no apology forthcoming, I have asked for my deposit back, the keeper is wanting to charge me for the birds, even the birds that were not shot but pegged by the picker up’s dogs, I fired 2 shots, (missed, was more concerned with being safe)

 

so am I being unreasonable wanting my full deposit back?

 

itchy trigger

Edited October 5, 2013 by itchy trigger

[utectok]

Sounds like all guns need refund ?

[TIGHTCHOKE]

As I said before I think you should get a refund as the "contract" wasn't satisfied!

[kennett]

No not unreasonable at all, I would have been livid! I would want a full refund, it was obviously handled very badly by the management. Its a different matter if you had seen the birds but shot badly!

[pontbeck]

I made comment several times on the last thread, in which you asked for opinions. I don't suppose they have changed. I felt the keeper wasn't out of order to deduct the birds shot, so for me again a refund less the birds shot. The fact the day did not come up to expectations doesn't alter the fact that birds were shot and to be paid for.

[JDog]

'Flogging a dead horse' comes to mind with this thread.

[scimitar]

I made comment several times on the last thread, in which you asked for opinions. I don't suppose they have changed. I felt the keeper wasn't out of order to deduct the birds shot, so for me again a refund less the birds shot. The fact the day did not come up to expectations doesn't alter the fact that birds were shot and to be paid for.

That sounds to me like a fair compromise.

[pontbeck]

'Flogging a dead horse' comes to mind with this thread.

I agree, enough opinions were given on the first thread for the OP to make a considered decision.

[webber]

I've read this post somewhat differently.

 

I've deduced that IT has paid a deposit for a days driven shooting. He's not paid the balance and has no intention of doing so.

 

The shooting was poor and failed to achieve the stated bag, no where near the accepted + - 10% tolerance.

 

None the less, some birds were shot and need to be paid for.

 

If the deposit covers this sum then there may be a case for a partial refund which I think the keeper has offered.

 

If this is the case grab what money is offered, and don't go back to that shoot again.

 

Obviously if no bag limit was stated, you took a chance, you could have filled your boots, in which case the keeper should be chasing you for the full fee.

 

webber

[itchy trigger]

I agree, enough opinions were given on the first thread for the OP to make a considered decision.

 

but was out all day so saw no posts after my reply to about the second or third post, as the topic had been deleted when I tried to view it again, so I did not get what I considered 'enough opinions' just 2 or 3

if I remember correctly one of those was just asking to name and shame

itchy trigger

Edited October 5, 2013 by itchy trigger

[pontbeck]

The posts above give you a feeling of the general consensus of opinion.

The shoot was a disaster but birds were shot, it's unreasonable for the keeper to expect you to pay the full price , as it is for you to get the day free of charge.

You said on the other thread that fellow guns had taken birds you wouldn't have and shouldn't have,my advice is to choose who you shoot with more carefully.

[itchy trigger]

I made comment several times on the last thread, in which you asked for opinions. I don't suppose they have changed. I felt the keeper wasn't out of order to deduct the birds shot, so for me again a refund less the birds shot. The fact the day did not come up to expectations doesn't alter the fact that birds were shot and to be paid for.

did not see those

itchy trigger

[pontbeck]

The posts are on this thread above

[henry d]

If I may add a question; How many shots were fired by the party as a whole?

[Gordon R]

Webber - nicely summarised.

[njc110381]

Your total costs between you should cover the number of birds shot. Whether deposit or final bill, that is the amount you should pay and you should either add to the deposit or ask for some back depending on how much has already been paid.

[henry d]

I disagree, as there are so many things we do not know. Was the weather really wet before the shoot, and therefore the birds able to fly high? How many shots were taken? If there were 300 or more then the keeper would be well within his rights to keep the money, we really need a bit more info about it.

[njc110381]

If they fired 300 shots for 26 birds they need to take up golf! It sounds like the birds were there but badly presented. If the weather was so bad that they wouldn't fly the shoot shouldn't have taken place.

 

I appreciate there could be other factors but keeping it simple if there weren't any safe birds presented then this chap has had a raw deal.

[Mungler]

How much money is at stake?

[al4x]

If they fired 300 shots for 26 birds they need to take up golf! It sounds like the birds were there but badly presented. If the weather was so bad that they wouldn't fly the shoot shouldn't have taken place.

 

I appreciate there could be other factors but keeping it simple if there weren't any safe birds presented then this chap has had a raw deal.

At that shot count you are getting into the realms of being asked to pay. It's hard to comment other than that can be the issue with early days the birds aren't educated but I haven't heard anyone moaning birds won't fly this year unlike last

[itchy trigger]

I've read this post somewhat differently.

 

I've deduced that IT has paid a deposit for a days driven shooting. He's not paid the balance and has no intention of doing so.

 

The shooting was poor and failed to achieve the stated bag, no where near the accepted + - 10% tolerance.

 

None the less, some birds were shot and need to be paid for.

 

If the deposit covers this sum then there may be a case for a partial refund which I think the keeper has offered.

 

If this is the case grab what money is offered, and don't go back to that shoot again.

 

webber

 

thank you webber, good reasonable answer to my question, going to go with this responce,

 

unfortunately I am also in the 150 bird day syndicate at this place, keeper talks the talk, but does not appear to walk the walk,

 

two of the other guns that were on this day are also in it,

 

one runs a very good long established and well organised successful syndicate, he got bit as well,

 

so it looks like I will have to take the hit for this, I cannot charge people for a day that was this bad

 

oh and less than 100 shots