B.C. woman who thought Coldplay concert 'was a date' must pay ex for ticket, tribunal rules

The band Coldplay performs in Vancouver, B.C., in September 2017. (Anil Sharma)

A B.C. woman has been ordered to repay her ex for a ticket to Coldplay's 2023 concert in Vancouver – in a small claims decision that highlights the distinction between gifts and loans under Canadian law.

The Civil Resolution Tribunal heard Alyssa Randles and Michael Stolfi visited Vancouver for the show last September, but later had a falling out over their $450 tickets.

Stolfi ultimately took Randles to the tribunal asking for $600 in reimbursement – including money for their hotel stay, meals and taxis.

"Ms. Randles says she thought the concert was a date and Mr. Stolfi only asked if she would share the cost after the concert," tribunal member Mark Henderson wrote in a July 15 decision.

While Randles claimed her Coldplay ticket was given to her as a gift, the decision notes that proving as much can be difficult.

"Under the law of gifts, the person who received the alleged gift must establish it was intended to be a gift, and that they accepted the gift when the giver transferred it to them," Henderson said.

"The evidence should show the giver’s intention to make a gift was inconsistent with any other intention."

Randles was ultimately unable to meet that bar.

The tribunal heard she purchased the tickets on her own Ticketmaster account, but that Stolfi e-transferred her $900 to cover the costs shortly after.

Stolfi said Randles had promised to repay her half on her next payday – and Randles did not present compelling evidence to the contrary, according to the decision.

"Ms. Randles did not describe any specific conduct by Mr. Stolfi that establishes Mr. Stolfi intended the trip or the concert to be a gift," Henderson wrote.

"Ms. Randles did not say how long she and Mr. Stolfi had been dating or if Mr. Stolfi typically gave Ms. Randles concert tickets as gifts during their relationship. So, I find that Ms. Randles has not proven the Coldplay ticket was a gift. I find it was a loan."

Ex on the hook for other costs

The tribunal did not order Randles to repay her ex for additional costs, however – including breakfast at a Smitty's restaurant, dinner at Brown's Social House, and a night at a Best Western.

Stolfi claimed they had agreed to split all expenses for the weekend, but Henderson found he, too, lacked sufficient evidence to support that claim.

"The parties had no written contract. A verbal contract is enforceable like a written contract, but it can be harder to prove," the tribunal member wrote.

"For a valid contract to exist, the parties must have a 'meeting of the minds.' This means that both parties must agree on all essential terms and those terms must be clear enough to give a reasonable degree of certainty."

Text message exchanges between Randles and Stolfi did not reflect a "meeting of the minds," Henderson noted.

They showed Stolfi at one point demanded $1,000 from Randles, and that she refused to pay – leading Stolfi to become "increasingly aggressive," according to the decision.

Stolfi at one point gave Randles one week to repay the $1,000, then in the same conversation shortened the deadline to two days, then shortened it again to 5 p.m. that day.

"Mr. Stolfi threatened to contact Ms. Randles’ landlord, employer and family to get payment. As a result of these threats, Ms. Randles contacted the Vancouver Police," Henderson wrote. "Ms. Randles says the police advised her not to pay and to cease contact with Mr. Stolfi."

While the texts showed Randles acknowledging "an undated discussion in which she had agreed to repay" Stolfi, there was no proof she had agreed to particular terms, Henderson added.

The tribunal member refused that part of Stolfi's claim, but ordered Randles to repay $450 for her ticket, plus approximately $81 in pre-judgement interest and CRT fees.