South holds
Scoring: MP
The bidding goes:
East...South...West...North
1NT....2♣(1)...2♣(2).....x(3)
2♥......2♠.......pass.....3♣
pass....3♠....all pass
(1) Unalerted, shows a single-suited hand by partnership agreement.
(2) Did not see the 2♣ bid. As director was called to the table, and North chose to accept the bid.
(3) shows clubs.
South admitted that she knew that partner did not remember their agreement, but claimed that they would always want to play in the major fit instead of the minor fit.
Four players of comparable level were consulted, and all would pass 3♣ with the South hand, so I concluded that:
1. There was UI (knowing partner didn't understand your initial bid that you DON'T have clubs necessarily), and
2. Pass was a Logical Alternative and
3. The non-offending side was damaged
So I decided to adjust the score to 3♣ - 2 (after consulting an expert about the play).
This happened in a 299er (for nonACBL people, that's basically code for Beginner/Intermediate) club game, and so the people were not that cognizant of the laws, and I had a very hard time explaining to south (after the end of the session) what had happened.
1) Do you agree with my ruling (did I miss something?)
2) What would you have done if you were the director?
3) How would you have explained it to South?

Help
