Signed up at an event with no T&Cs shown? Here's what the law says.

The pitch was on the stage, then in the corridor, then in a private chat with a "success coach". You paid four or five figures on a card you happened to have on you. The terms and conditions were never shown. Months later, the experience falls short, you try to cancel, and the firm produces a contract you don't remember signing.

The story sounds messy. The legal position is clearer than it looks. There are three specific rules that often weren't followed, and each one is a route back.

This article is the sequel to Blog 1 (Bought an online course that never delivered?). It deals with the room-sales variant: the in-person, multi-tier, ladder-priced upsell that has become the dominant model in the property, business, and coaching training world.

The pattern, in one paragraph

You buy a "discovery" or "intro" event for £100 to £500. At the event, the speaker pivots from teaching to selling: an "elite" or "mastermind" tier at £5,000 to £25,000 is offered with limited spots, "today only" pricing, and a payment terminal at the back of the room. T&Cs are mentioned in passing or not at all. You pay. Sometimes a second product (a recurring monthly subscription, a "done with you" service) is upsold afterwards on a different card. You attend limited or zero subsequent events. When you ask to cancel or refund, the firm produces a contract you signed at the time, refers to a no-refund clause, and refuses. Your chargeback fails because the card issuer treats the two products as one and accepts the firm's documentation. The FOS investigator's preliminary view does the same.

If even half of that maps to your situation, the rest of this article is for you.

What rights do I have when I bought a high-priced mastermind at an event?

Three different bodies of law are usually engaged. They stack: any one of them can be the route back.

1. The Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013

If the sale was concluded away from the firm's business premises (a hotel ballroom counts; the firm's own office doesn't), the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 apply. These regulations give you:

• A 14-day cooling-off period from the date of purchase (or, for services, from the date the contract is concluded).
• A right to cancel without giving any reason and to receive a full refund.
• A requirement that the firm provide specific pre-contract information in a "durable medium" (paper or PDF, not just on screen).

If the firm did not give you pre-contract information in a durable medium, the cooling-off period extends to 12 months and 14 days. Most event sellers do not give pre-contract information in a durable medium. That extension is a substantial route in itself: a sale made up to 12 months ago can still be cancelled.

There are exceptions. Services already fully performed before the cooling-off period ends (with your express agreement) don't qualify. But most "mastermind" programs include events scheduled across several months; full performance is usually months away.

2. The Consumer Rights Act 2015

Even if the cooling-off period has lapsed, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 applies to the contract you signed. Key provisions:

• Services must be provided with reasonable care and skill (section 49). If the program promised but didn't deliver bespoke mentorship, structured curriculum, or live access to named experts, this is a breach.
• Pre-contract information forms part of the contract (section 50). Anything the seller said on stage or in the sales conversation, if specific, is part of the contract even if it's not in the written T&Cs.
• Unfair terms are not binding on the consumer (Part 2, sections 61 to 63). No-refund clauses, blanket disclaimers, and "you waive all rights" clauses are tested for fairness. Many do not survive the test.

3. Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

If you paid £100 to £30,000 of any single product on a credit card, Section 75 makes the issuer jointly liable for the merchant's misrepresentation or breach of contract. Critically, where there is a multi-product upsell ladder (a £7,500 mastermind + a £225 monthly subscription on a different card), each is a separate qualifying purchase. Each has its own Section 75 claim. Issuers and FOS investigators sometimes conflate them; they shouldn't.

How to use the rules in practice

Move 1: Cancel under the Consumer Contracts Regulations first

This is the strongest route if the timing fits. A short letter or email:

"Under regulation 29 of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, I cancel the contract entered into on [date] for [product]. The applicable cooling-off period [is / has not yet expired because] [the firm did not provide pre-contract information in a durable medium / the cooling-off period was extended by regulation 31]. I require a full refund of £[amount] within 14 days under regulation 34."

Most firms accept a cancellation under this route once it is invoked, because they know the cooling-off-period extension exists.

Move 2: If too late, run a Consumer Rights Act claim

Where cooling off has expired, focus on the Section 49 (reasonable care and skill) and Section 50 (pre-contract information binds) angles. The complaint letter should:

• Specifically identify what was represented before payment (cite the speaker's slides, recorded session, brochures)
• Specifically identify what was delivered
• Cite the gap as a breach of section 49 and / or section 50
• Cite section 62 if there is a contractual no-refund clause that you say is unfair

Move 3: Run Section 75 in parallel

If you paid by credit card, file a Section 75 claim with the issuer alongside the firm-side complaint. Use the structure in Blog 1b and treat each product on each card as a separate claim. If the issuer conflates them, write one sentence in response:

"These are two separate qualifying purchases of two separate products, paid on two separate cards. Each is the subject of its own Section 75 claim. Please respond to each separately."

Move 4: When the FOS preliminary view conflates products, push to an ombudsman

This pattern (investigator treats the two products as one and rejects on that basis) is exactly the kind of view that should be escalated. The escalation argument is in Blog 3c: the view didn't engage with the central point, which was that two separate products were sold and each should be analysed on its own facts.

Move 5: Document the high-pressure circumstances

Pressure tactics are not an automatic basis for unwinding the contract, but they are a relevant fact for the Consumer Rights Act fairness test, the Consumer Duty (where the firm is regulated), and any FOS analysis of "fair and reasonable". Write a short, factual chronology:

• Time of pitch and time of payment (often within 30 minutes; sometimes less)
• The "today only" pricing claim
• Limited or no T&Cs shown
• Any vulnerability the firm knew about (recent bereavement, financial pressure, health condition)

Keep this factual. The chronology helps the analysis; melodrama doesn't.

What about bereavement cancellation?

A surprising number of these cases involve a bereavement that triggered the consumer's attempt to cancel a year or more after purchase. Firms usually respond with the no-refund clause. Two things to know:

1. Bereavement is a recognised vulnerability under the FCA Consumer Duty (where the firm is regulated). A blanket refusal to engage with a bereaved consumer is a complaint point in itself.
2. Where the contract is for ongoing services not yet performed, refusal to refund the unperformed portion is often unfair under the Consumer Rights Act and may not be enforceable.

This is a place where Consumer Duty arguments and Consumer Rights Act arguments work together.

What usually happens next

A well-drafted cancellation under the Consumer Contracts Regulations resolves a meaningful share of cases at the merchant stage, particularly where the 12-month extension applies. Cases that proceed to Section 75 and FOS take 6 to 12 months and turn heavily on the documentary evidence of what was represented before payment.

The cases that lose tend to lose because the consumer cannot evidence the specific representations made on stage or in conversation. The cases that win usually have at least one of: a video recording of the pitch, slide decks, email confirmations referencing specific outcomes, or a contemporaneous note made shortly after the event.

When to escalate further

• If the firm targeted a vulnerable demographic (bereaved, ill, financially distressed, low literacy), report the conduct pattern to Trading Standards. They can investigate and prosecute under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.
• If the firm or its principals are FCA-regulated, escalate the conduct pattern to the FCA. Consumer Duty obligations on vulnerability are real.
• If multiple consumers have similar complaints, group action is sometimes possible. Consult a solicitor experienced in collective consumer claims.

The bottom line

Event upsell sales follow a recognisable pattern, and consumer law has specific tools for each part of the pattern. The Consumer Contracts Regulations cancellation, the Consumer Rights Act care-and-skill / unfair-terms claims, and Section 75 stack: any one is a route back. Multi-product ladders give you multiple Section 75 claims, not one. The most common reason these cases fail is that the consumer accepts the conflation rather than challenging it.

Frequently asked questions

I signed the contract at the event. Doesn't that mean I waived the cooling-off period? No. The cooling-off period under the Consumer Contracts Regulations is statutory and cannot be waived in advance. Even where you signed a contract that says you have, that waiver is usually unenforceable.

The firm says the program was "fully performed" once the first event was held. Is that right? Usually not. "Fully performed" means the entire service has been delivered. A 12-month mastermind isn't fully performed after one session; the consumer can typically cancel for the unperformed portion.

The FOS investigator put both products together and rejected. Is the case dead? No. The investigator's view is not a final decision. Ask for it to be passed to an ombudsman, framing the complaint as two separate products requiring two separate analyses (see Blog 3c).

Docketory publishes general information based on real disputes. Identifying details are changed and patterns from multiple cases may be combined. This is not legal advice. For advice on your specific situation, contact a solicitor or Citizens Advice.

Related on Docketory:

• Blog 1: Bought an online course that never delivered? Your chargeback isn't the only option.
• Blog 1b: How to write a Section 75 letter that actually works
• Blog 3a: The Consumer Duty, line by line
• Blog 3c: Investigator's view vs ombudsman's decision: when to push and when to settle
• Blog 6: Negligent misstatement: the legal weapon for "investment" promises that don't materialise
• (future) Blog 7a: Contracts formed under pressure: the misrepresentation lens
• (future) Blog 7b: Multi-product upsell ladders and Section 75