Missold Holiday - Thomas Cook Nile Cruise

kksweety

Hi,

Hopefully this is the right place to post.

We booked a holiday before xmas last year for a "Jewels of the Nile" cruise with Thomas Cook.

At the time we went all inclusive, top outside deck etc and chose that particular cruise as "everything was included" including the excursions.

So at the time of booking we were told excursions were included.
We took the brochure home and it said for that cruise excersions not included. So we went back and spoke to the lady who booked it for us and she again confirmed yes they are included.

Again, when paying off the final balance my partner asked (just to be sure) and we were told that that store cannot see as it had been booked at the one down the road. Fair enough.

We are now due to go next week, and my partner went into store on Monday to check I will be ok foodwise as I have recently had to go gluten free. At this point they have told us that NO excursions are included, and they could not tell us how much they will be!

I'm fuming!

Apparently no trips apart from one to India they do include excursions!?

Not only were we lied to on booking and just after, the staff were unhelpful and it was a case of "oh well" when we complained instore!

As it is, we hadn't budgeted for the extra costs of excursions so it's looking like we are going to have to use credit card to be able to actually do something while on holiday.

I do feel that we were missold this holiday, any advice on what to do or if we can even complain to anyone would be fab.

Thanks
KK

ThumbRemote

Yes, you were missold the holiday.

Unfortunately however you seem to have no way to prove it. It is simply their word against yours, unless you have anything in writing to say the excursions were included. They will point to the brochure where it says they aren't included. So if it comes down to it, they can just refuse any recompense and you're stuck.

I don't know how you could go about getting any proof they said they were included.

Pollycat

kksweety wrote: »

At this point they have told us that NO excursions are included, and they could not tell us how much they will be!

I can't believe that they can't tell you how much excursions will be - I'm not disputing what you say - just gobsmacked at TC's response.

Surely they have clients there now who are booking (and presumably paying for) excursions?

I've been on a couple of Nile cruises and all excursions except Abu Simbel were included, that was a few years ago though.

Which boat are you on?

Do you have nothing at all in writing about excursions being included in the price?

timberflake

You haven't been mis-sold a holiday unless you can prove you've been mis-sold a holiday.

If the brocure said excursions not included but the travel agent said they were, why didn't you get the travel agent to write in on TC headed paper, then sign and print their namw?

People make mistakes, so the TC rep could have thought excursions were included, but if there was any doubt in your mind you should have got them to put it in writing as proving it now is going to be impossible.

Lesson learned for next time though.

yangptangkipperbang

Would suggest that you double check this with someone a lot further up the "chain of command" - this sounds like a breakdown in communications/poor staff rather than you being "lied to", as you so delicately put it.

I have not come across a Nile cruise that doesn't include excursions - except some VERY expensive individual ones. There are always some extra excursions which are optional which you have to pay for: usually, Abu Simbel, Balloon flight, Son et Lumiere.

ThumbRemote

timberflake wrote: »

You haven't been mis-sold a holiday unless you can prove you've been mis-sold a holiday.

What utter rubbish.

The OP HAS been mis-sold a holiday. Just because they can't prove it in a court of law doesn't mean it's not the case.

timberflake

ThumbRemote wrote: »

What utter rubbish.

The OP HAS been mis-sold a holiday. Just because they can't prove it in a court of law doesn't mean it's not the case.

Prove it in a court of law? They can't prove it in any way shape or form.

Just because you choose to believe the course of events does not suddenly make them fact. Without proof, it's one persons word against another so my comment stands.

biscit

yangptangkipperbang wrote: »

Would suggest that you double check this with someone a lot further up the "chain of command" - this sounds like a breakdown in communications/poor staff rather than you being "lied to", as you so delicately put it.

Indeed. A lie isn't just something that turns out not to be true, it is a deliberate deception. If the member of staff knew excursions weren't included and said otherwise to get the OP to book, then that's a lie. If they thought they were or didn't know it's a mistake.

Strong language aside, the assistant saying the wrong thing has put the OP out. Yes it is hearsay, and the OP should be prepared to not succeed, but a strongly worded letter to head office or the appropriate regulator might get results. It may not but they won't know unless they try.

ThumbRemote

timberflake wrote: »

Prove it in a court of law? They can't prove it in any way shape or form.

Just because you choose to believe the course of events does not suddenly make them fact. Without proof, it's one persons word against another so my comment stands.

You seem to have trouble with basic logic.

You have come on a message board and posted a direct refutation of what the OP said. You've not questioned it, you have outright stated that they are wrong.
OP said "at the time of booking we were told excursions were included."
You said "You haven't been mis-sold a holiday unless you can prove you've been mis-sold a holiday."

So we have a statement from the OP who has knowledge of the situation, was present at the booking, and is clearly bothered enough about events to start a thread asking for advice.

On the other hand we have a statement from you, who was not present, but states that without proof the events described by the OP did not occur. Not that they would find it difficult to seek redress (as I mentioned) but you outright state they did not happen. Essentially you are accusing the OP of lying.

Choosing to disbelieve something in that way is probably an indication of paranoia or underlying mental health issues. Seek advice.

Azari

ThumbRemote wrote: »

Choosing to disbelieve something in that way is probably an indication of paranoia or underlying mental health issues. Seek advice.

There may be a good reason why the name of the poster to whom you are responding is made up they way it is.

timberflake

ThumbRemote wrote: »

You seem to have trouble with basic logic.

You have come on a message board and posted a direct refutation of what the OP said. You've not questioned it, you have outright stated that they are wrong.
OP said "at the time of booking we were told excursions were included."
You said "You haven't been mis-sold a holiday unless you can prove you've been mis-sold a holiday."

So we have a statement from the OP who has knowledge of the situation, was present at the booking, and is clearly bothered enough about events to start a thread asking for advice.

On the other hand we have a statement from you, who was not present, but states that without proof the events described by the OP did not occur. Not that they would find it difficult to seek redress (as I mentioned) but you outright state they did not happen. Essentially you are accusing the OP of lying.

Choosing to disbelieve something in that way is probably an indication of paranoia or underlying mental health issues. Seek advice.

I have never said that it didn't occur, I've merely stated a fact that unless the OP can prove the holiday was mis-sold, it's really just one persons word against another.

My girlfriend is a travel agent and gets this all the time, customers don't listen, or choose to change what they want & use the old mis-selling excuse thinking they can get out of the holiday.

Now I'm not saying the OP has done this, but unless one party can disprove the other, how can you take either parties version of events as fact?