Consumer Law, Warranties Athletic Club Membership Access Restrictions

[bennettair193]

I am a new member of an athletic club that includes access to open gym times on their basketball courts. My son receives coaching from a friend who is also a member of the same club, so they were using the open gym access to practice. While there are no restrictions provided to us at the time or orientation or signup and no documentation can be provided when requested, the facility refused our access to the court on the basis that only their employees can engage in training unless they are direct family members. We contacted them later to discuss it further, but they held to the position that we could not engage in training, yet when asked to define what training entailed, they could not provide the activities that constituted training. My son's coach does not engage in solicitation at their facility, money does not exchange hands at the location, and he does not train anyone but his son and mine, and when asked for evidence to the contrary, the club could not provide it. I filed a Better Business Bureau complaint regarding the situation. Their response to the complaint was to site liability concerns with member to member interactions that can cause injury, yet they do not restrict similar activities, such as pick up games. They claim that all training activities are limited to their staff, yet their trainers are from an outside company and they also allow organized practice at their facility through AAU basketball. I received a call from the owner today re-stating their position. When I challenged him on the legality of the liability argument he said he contracts these services with the outside company and he would not allow any activity that would hinder their trainers, getting to the real issue; they want to eliminate all other avenues of training and funnel all business to Hoosier Premier through this policy. In summary, our membership allows for access to the basketball courts and our activities are being restricted even though they have no official policy documented that shows we have violated any club rules. They are offering to cancel our membership, but my family uses their other services and that does not correct the hardship they have created by removing our only access to an indoor basketball facility we have. In your opinion, do we have legal justification, and can we pursue a remedy that forces the club to allow us to utilize the facility for practice?

 

[army judge]

I am a new member of an athletic club that includes access to open gym times on their basketball courts. My son receives coaching from a friend who is also a member of the same club, so they were using the open gym access to practice. While there are no restrictions provided to us at the time or orientation or signup and no documentation can be provided when requested, the facility refused our access to the court on the basis that only their employees can engage in training unless they are direct family members. We contacted them later to discuss it further, but they held to the position that we could not engage in training, yet when asked to define what training entailed, they could not provide the activities that constituted training. My son's coach does not engage in solicitation at their facility, money does not exchange hands at the location, and he does not train anyone but his son and mine, and when asked for evidence to the contrary, the club could not provide it. I filed a Better Business Bureau complaint regarding the situation. Their response to the complaint was to site liability concerns with member to member interactions that can cause injury, yet they do not restrict similar activities, such as pick up games. They claim that all training activities are limited to their staff, yet their trainers are from an outside company and they also allow organized practice at their facility through AAU basketball. I received a call from the owner today re-stating their position. When I challenged him on the legality of the liability argument he said he contracts these services with the outside company and he would not allow any activity that would hinder their trainers, getting to the real issue; they want to eliminate all other avenues of training and funnel all business to Hoosier Premier through this policy. In summary, our membership allows for access to the basketball courts and our activities are being restricted even though they have no official policy documented that shows we have violated any club rules. They are offering to cancel our membership, but my family uses their other services and that does not correct the hardship they have created by removing our only access to an indoor basketball facility we have. In your opinion, do we have legal justification, and can we pursue a remedy that forces the club to allow us to utilize the facility for practice?

A property owner can restrict access to his or her facility.
You can accept the refund offer, and seek another facility.
If I were you, and were as disappointed as you appear to be, I'd take the money and run.
Otherwise, you obey their rules.
If you flaunt their rules, you're likely to be banned from using the facility and will receive no refund.