Holiday money incorrectly charged

TakeThis

stephb34 wrote: »

So you expect me to put in every post i am a travel agent, i would expect at least 50% of the people posting on here are involved with travel in some way.
I think you need to read peoples posts more carefully before commenting, the poster has said its £160 which is not a small amount in my opinion. Which had it been less than £20 the travel shop probably would have stood the loss but £160 is a lot of money and in my first post i think you'll find i said its a request to return with the money i don't know if legally they can be pursued for the money.
Finally it still boils down to morals and it would be interesting to hear from the poster again for more clarification on what happened and if they did return to the shop.

Perhaps you can underline the passage where the OP writes that it was £160....

Nowhere is it written by the OP. What they do write it that they were asked to pay the difference.

Perhaps it is you who needs to read the posts more carefully.

I maintain that your lot should not bothering their customers for such a small amount.

TakeThis

ferf1223 wrote: »

i don't see how it's relevant to this topic that steph works for a travel agent either...in some cases yes, i would think that she should (and regularly does) make such a declaration...but I guess I don't see the distinction here...how the question is really any different than 'I bought a stereo in an electronics shop and turns out they accidentally refunded instead of charged my card, do I really have to go back and pay for it?!'.

I also really hope the OP comes back to clarify.

Seems that you too need to learn to read. Nowhere does it state that the card was credited.

Otherwise the OP would not have mentioned about being asked to pay the difference.

It's a simple rate mistake which the high street travel agent should take on the chin, for the sake of a few pounds.

stephb34 has been caught a few times pushing her employer's brand of Prepaid Mastercard on this forum, even though it offers poor value against the recommended cards.
So yes, I think that she should mention that she works for the travel agent in question.

photome

TakeThis wrote: »

Seems that you too need to learn to read. Nowhere does it state that the card was credited.

Otherwise the OP would not have mentioned about being asked to pay the difference.

It's a simple rate mistake which the high street travel agent should take on the chin, for the sake of a few pounds.

stephb34 has been caught a few times pushing her employer's brand of Prepaid Mastercard on this forum, even though it offers poor value against the recommended cards.
So yes, I think that she should mention that she works for the travel agent in question.

Why are you on a your high horse.

I suggest you reread the OP nowhere does it say they have been asked to pay the difference

it does say they have been asked to go and sort the error out

The OP does imply that the card was credited though

TakeThis

photome wrote: »

Why are you on a your high horse.

I suggest you reread the OP nowhere does it say they have been asked to pay the difference

it does say they have been asked to go and sort the error out

The OP does imply that the card was credited though

Whilst I agree that there is an error and he hasn't been charged enough, does he have to go back to pay the extra? I'm just thinking that if I purchased something from a shop and they charged the incorrect price, it would be there error and they couldn't ask me to pay the difference.

Those statements do not suggest that he has to give money back, but to pay the difference/extra.

Please don't join the queue of dunderheads lining up to embarrass themselves.
It's likely a simple rate mistake.

photome

TakeThis wrote: »

Those statements do not suggest that he has to give money back, but to pay the difference/extra.

Please don't join the queue of dunderheads lining up to embarrass themselves.
It's likely a simple rate mistake.

I dont know exactly what the OP means just as you dont.

Your interpretation is different to mine, that doesnt make ne a dunderhead, well it might because I dont know what one is.

But why do you feel the need to throw insults around

TakeThis

photome wrote: »

I dont know exactly what the OP means just as you dont.

Your interpretation is different to mine, that doesnt make ne a dunderhead, well it might because I dont know what one is.

But why do you feel the need to throw insults around

I'm taking an educated guess and have illustrated as to how I reached my conclusion. On which passages have you based your guess?

This will decide as to whether you are a 'dunderhead' or not.

photome

TakeThis wrote: »

I'm taking an educated guess and have illustrated as to how I reached my conclusion. On which passages have you based your guess?

This will decide as to whether you are a 'dunderhead' or not.

From this line of the OP

looking on his receipt they have bought the additional 100 euros from him instead of selling them to him,

My guess is this is all a waste of time as the OP is unlikely to return

ferf1223

TakeThis - I did say, as many others have, that it is not clear what happened...I even said that I read the post as selling at the buy rate initially too...and that I hoped that the OP came back to clarify...pot kettle, much?

I agree that if recommending a TC product steph should probably state that she works for them...but that doesn't apply here, does it?

jonesMUFCforever

Did the OP sign a document with terms and conditions?
If so the travel agent has card details (presumably)and with a chip and pin authority can debit his card legitimately with the difference.

If OP then complains to his bank the agency will be able to show clearly what has happened and any chargeback will fail.

The moral is here - sort it out amicably!

TakeThis

photome wrote: »

From this line of the OP

looking on his receipt they have bought the additional 100 euros from him instead of selling them to him,

My guess is this is all a waste of time as the OP is unlikely to return

That implies to me that they have used the BUY rate instead of the sell rate.
I did say an educated guess, rather than 'jumping the gun'.

Put all of the statements together and you'll see which is more likely.

This is no more than a few colleagues debating, so don't take it to heart.

Off to the beach....