Re cineworld : IS THIS LEGAL

They have no legal right to search you, and no legal right to seize property (possibly except recording equipment if seized during an attempt to breach copyright, but they'd also call the police and would not be entitled to keep your equipment).

What they can do is refuse you entry. It's private property, and they can implement whatever restrictions they'd like (barring any kind of discrimination on the grounRAB of disability etc). This means that they could, if they wanted, only allow people into their cinema if they were wearing no makeup. It's how bowling alleys will only let you bowl if you're wearing the correct footwear. Some art galleries won't allow you to carry a camera in their building.

This means that they can request to see the contents of your bag. You are free to refuse this, and they have no right to demand it. They are also free to refuse you entry into their premises if you don't allow them to look in your bag. They are free to stipulate a no-bags policy, and require you to leave your bag at reception.

If I were the OP, I'd be writing to their head office to complain about the way you were treated, and how humiliated you felt by the way it was carried out. I'd make it clear to them that you won't be visiting their cinemas again, and you will be telling all your frienRAB what happened and that they shouldn't go there either. I then wouldn't go to any of that company's branches again for love nor money.
 
Oh dear, why can't you just say, "sorry, I made a mistake, what I should have said was.....," instead of launching into some insane rant and trying to (badly) justify your post?

You can't use excuses, such as, "I was elaborating," when you are trying to explain that the cinema has a legal right to impose any term they wish. It is a rather black or white point, with little room for "elaboration." That said, of course, I think you may be confused with the term "ELABORATE." I am pretty sure you meant "confound."
 
In this case the way the employee behaved was terrible and I personally could never speak to someone like that. In fact I've actually just complained about staff at a retail outlet who behaved in a similar fashion. There is no need for rudeness whether you are staff, a customer or just someone on the street.

However the point I was making was related to a post complaining about customer service on a whole in this country. I'm a naturally polite person and I can see both sides of the coin having received a bit of both. But in my job the customer is always right and despite because called names such as B****, C*** and W**** by customers because things haven't gone their way I never get any backup from the store. Not all service staff are lazy and rude and not all customers are horrible. Generalisations are exactly that, general assumptions about people without any research or base.
 
We live in a capitalist world. Name an organisation that DOESNT want to rid you of cash:rolleyes:
Anyway, plenty of places have signs saying you can only eat food on their premises that you have purchased from them. We think we can get away with it in cinemas because it is dark.
 
If they want to stop people pirating films they need to walk into the auditorium and stop them. Searching bags or confiscating property is unreasonable behaviour in a cinema - our local Vue is above a Morrisons and I've taken in bags of shopping without being harassed.
 
You might not want to eat it afterwarRAB, though!

BTW, floopy, I hope you understood what I said. Some poeple seem to be having trouble with it, but seeing as I was responding to your post, I just wanted to check that it made sense to you.
 
Sorry, but any Company can impose reasonable conditions of entry, and then enforce them by denying entry to anyone who won't comply.

Anyone with a previously arranged contractual relationship e.g. Unlimited card might then have a reasonable case that they had not agreed to what they perceived as unreasonable condition(s) of entry, and could therefore sue CW for consequential damages.

It would then be a matter for the court to decide whether the search/threatened confiscation/whatever was reasonable.
 
And my bus route has had an increased number of Inspectors getting on and checking tickets when before they were very rare. It's a non-argument.

Did you grant them permission to check your bag or did you refuse?

From just having a quick Google, I've found they can and are entitled to search your bag, "however" if you were to refuse, then they would need a Police Officer there in person to search it. So if you gave them your bag and not said a word you've inadvertantly given them permission and you don't have a leg to stand on.

The argument of Police Stop & Search is a different kettle-of-fish as I beleive that only aplies to public areas not in private businesses.
 
I don't object to paying the cinema for food or drink if it's food or drink that I actually want. We went to the local Vue recently and wanted a small bottle of water and a small soft drink to take in. They don't sell either, just very large bottles of water and very large cardboard cups of very fizzy drinks. They don't sell any small packets of biscuits or crisps or other snacks either.

Contrast that with cinemas such as the Gate or the Screen on Baker Street, where you can buy a fresh cup of coffee and a muffin or cookie, or even a glass of wine to take in. Sure, it costs about the same as buying some popcorn and a massive cup of cola at a Vue, but it's actually worth the money. And I wouldn't try to smuggle a glass of wine in from Tesco; I'd buy it in the cinema - if they sold it.
 
the staff at cineworld dont seem to wanna search people bags and i think it why it stopped when upper management tell them to do and dont then i guess it why there are anomalies. but after bieng searched last year it not happened agian and I have been freely taking in food and not hiding it
 
Back
Top