reclaiming site fees for unused caravan plot

Topher

Thanks to all the people who've taken time to answer my query. I'm very grateful. The site fees we paid were from April to April, there was also the option to pay in two parts (half of the year's fees plus a little rounding up). We chose in April to pay in full. We moved the van around the middle of July and I haven't yet checked if the owner has made the manager put anyone else on our pitch. The owner has done a few unpleasant things to a few people on the site, and is rude and aggressive on the phone although I've remained polite, and always termed my requests as if I'm asking for a refund as a goodwill gesture. This is not going to be forthcoming... he's clear about that.
They don't have to advertise, it was until recently a popular site with a waiting list for pitches.

unholyangel

Hintza wrote: »

I don't see why there is much incentive to refill it especially if as I said before there are other vacant pitches, the owner would fill them first.

That would effectively lead to them being compensated twice over though. It would be the same with a gym. Why would they refund any membership if they could just sell a new membership and keep charging the existing customer?

Effectively, it is a disguised penalty. Any term which allows the retailer to retain all prepayments is likely to be found unfair and thus unenforceable.

From OFT's Unfair Contract Terms Guidance:

Where customers cancel without any such justification, and the supplier suffers loss as a result, they cannot expect a full refund of all prepayments. But a term under which they always lose everything they have paid in advance, regardless of the amount of any costs and losses caused by the cancellation, is at clear risk of being considered an unfair penalty – see Group 5.

A way to improve the fairness of such a term is to ensure that it does not go beyond the ordinary legal position. Where cancellation is the fault of the consumer, the business is entitled to hold back from any refund of prepayments what is likely to be reasonably needed to cover his net costs or the net loss of profit resulting directly from the default. There is no entitlement to any sum that could reasonably be saved by, for example, finding another customer

unholyangel

Topher wrote: »

Thanks to all the people who've taken time to answer my query. I'm very grateful. The site fees we paid were from April to April, there was also the option to pay in two parts (half of the year's fees plus a little rounding up). We chose in April to pay in full. We moved the van around the middle of July and I haven't yet checked if the owner has made the manager put anyone else on our pitch. The owner has done a few unpleasant things to a few people on the site, and is rude and aggressive on the phone although I've remained polite, and always termed my requests as if I'm asking for a refund as a goodwill gesture. This is not going to be forthcoming... he's clear about that.
They don't have to advertise, it was until recently a popular site with a waiting list for pitches.

OP have you actually written to the owner? You could write to them stating that on x date you paid 1 years fees upfront, on x date you informed them you would need to cancel and several requests for a refund of prepayments made have been ignored. While law entitles them to be compensated for costs reasonably (key word) incurred as a result of your breach, they are not entitled to keep all your money unless they can prove that a) they tried to mitigate their loss and b) they can prove that the costs they incurred are genuine.........and any provision which allows them to do so is open to objection under the Unfair Contract Terms Act. Inform them that if they do not respond to your request in 14 days, you will be filing in the small claims court.


Out of interest, how much money are we talking here?

rock-on_2

I had a similar problem, site owner refused to refund overpaid site fees. Paid site fees from Jan to Dec 2010 in advance, sold van in July - refused refund. I went through the complaining channels with the BH & HPA who were pretty useless on that so sent a letter before action and gave them 14 days. They still refused so I lodged the small claims documents. The site issued a pretty feeble defence and then offered a miserly refund which I refused.

Went to court and within 15 minutes of the case starting and the judge hearing the outline of the case, the judge asked the site owner if they thought this was unfair. Site owner waffled and then the judge said it was against the Unfair Terms of Consumer Contracts Regulations section 5 (1) and I got my fees, court fees and all expenses back. When you put the claim in don't forget to add interest for the delay in being refunded.

My case was in Canterbury County Court on 22nd September 2011 so you can quote that another site has been sued for the same thing and lost. There are plenty of other cases around but now the National Caravan Council have assured me after a further claim against this site, that sites are not allowed to retain fees unfairly and they are certainly not allowed to double charge which is what happened in my case.

Don't be afraid to take these sharks to court. The more people who do then the more someone somewhere will take note and sort these site owners out, stopping them from ripping people off. There is no need for them to adopt rip off measures, there is plenty of scope for them to make more than adequate profits, they're just downright greedy.

If you need any help for the court case please get in touch I'll be only to pleased to see another site getting its come-uppance.