lost deposit on holidays

bod1467

Sorry but I don't understand your reply. It seems like you have taken offence where no criticism was made - the previous post simply looked for clarification, and I'm still not sure it has been provided. :?

visidigi

ignore the deposit aspect for a second, the OP has entered into a payment plan by paying in installments they paid the deposit in the first payment, but any subsequent payments are NOT a deposit but a payment - the travel agent is not a bank, so why should the travel agent refund all monies when the op 'cancelled' the holiday - I really don't follow the logic.

This is why people are told to take out travel insurance!

if the OP had only paid the deposit then provable loses apply, but a payment plan? No I don't think its the same way as I understand it. (although Im willing to be proved wrong).

Reggie_Rebel

The lead passenger will have signed booking form which indicates the deposit due per person. That amount will be lost. If the retailer has taken a commercial decision to offer a low deposit scheme then the lead passenger will, in all likelihood have given a credit card number, post dated cheque or signed a separate form agreeing to repay the remainder of the deposit on the due date or in the event of cancellation.

If the lead passenger has paid more than the stipulated deposit then this will be refunded.

big_all

no i haven't taken offence lol just trying to clarify i know the score and will try to give all information as i can get it i am trying to encourage her to post herself but her computer is playing up a bit
thanks for the help so far
i will give further information as i get it once again thank you

somethingcorporate

visidigi wrote: »

ignore the deposit aspect for a second, the OP has entered into a payment plan by paying in installments they paid the deposit in the first payment, but any subsequent payments are NOT a deposit but a payment - the travel agent is not a bank, so why should the travel agent refund all monies when the op 'cancelled' the holiday - I really don't follow the logic.

This is why people are told to take out travel insurance!

if the OP had only paid the deposit then provable loses apply, but a payment plan? No I don't think its the same way as I understand it. (although Im willing to be proved wrong).

But the damages for breaching a contract is not complete forfeiture of any and all payments made to date. Read up on remedy for breach of contract and you will see what kind of damages are available.

visidigi

theres no breach of contract, its a cancellation of contract. The op is voluntarily cancelling the holiday they booked. The company is still running and hasn't in anyway modified the terms of sale or provision of the service - the OP has chosen not to complete the service they contracted the company to provide.

Thats like saying, if I cancel my holiday now, which i just paid in full they have to give me all my money back because I changed my mind - that won't happen, indeed the terms Im looking at now state as much.

If this is allowed then why bother having insurance? Really curious now, as I really can't see why a cancellation above and beyond a deposit comes under the same rules as a deposit?!

Confused, honestly!

big_all

ok people thanks for taking the time and trouble to answer and give help
she has decided after weighing up all the options she will leave things open and find which option will allow her to "transfer the most money into a trip or holiday
once again thank you

somethingcorporate

visidigi wrote: »

theres no breach of contract, its a cancellation of contract. The op is voluntarily cancelling the holiday they booked. The company is still running and hasn't in anyway modified the terms of sale or provision of the service - the OP has chosen not to complete the service they contracted the company to provide.

It's called anticipatory breach.

Have a look on wikipedia under breach of contract.

visidigi

somethingcorporate wrote: »

It's called anticipatory breach.

Have a look on wikipedia under breach of contract.

I just did.

An anticipatory breach gives the non-breaching party the option to treat such a breach as immediate, and, if repudiatory, to terminate the contract and sue for damages (without waiting for the breach to actually take place).

so the non breaching party is the travel company - that says they could sue (or by the same indication retain) monies paid.

No where does it say payment beyond dsposit is entitled to refund.

Seriously, I really dont understand how you can say a buyer voluntarily cancelling a holiday is entitled to a full refund of monies paid in excess of provable deposit loss.

It simply doesn't add up.