ex-boyfriend demanding holiday money back

pigpen

I'd tell him to sing for it.. He had the option to still go and declined ergo his payment is forfeit. He could have gone with someone else or by himself and chose not to.

If it was the other way round my reply would be the same.

Chalk it up to experience and move on with your life!

Padstow

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

She's £200 more out of pocket than he is, so I'd say she gets to keep all of that paltry refund. And he can go and boil his head. Petty doesn't quite cover it for me.

I do wish you'd say it as it is B&T, can't stand it when people sit on the fence.

Dunroamin

Cherry_Bomb wrote: »

But thenhe didn't pay her his half of the £200 charge so she could counter with that.

But we don't know how the £200 charge was incurred (although I did ask). If she wanted the dates changed, I don't really see that he's responsible for this money and vice versa.

phill99

Th bloke sounds like a complete anus. She's better off without him. I would be telling where to get off

DS4215

SandC wrote: »

Was the split a mutual agreement or did one finish with the other? My take is that if she finished things when he didn't want to then she should give him some money back. If he finished with her then he should go whistle for the money.

I had paid for a break for an ex and me and he ditched me shortly before, I couldn't get rid of the hol and he didn't want it. There was no way I could get the money out of him so I ended up out of pocket and just had to chalk it down to experience.

It's happened again since then, paid deposits on a hol and boyf has let me down (twice!).

If I was ever to arrange a hol with a fella again I wouldn't book anything until I had his half of what is owed.

An old workmate of mine booked an holiday with his ex and split up with her, but both were on friendly terms so still went together.... about six weeks after he started seeing the girl who became his wife!

martinsurrey

ValHaller wrote: »

Post 5. Neither of them actually wanted to take the booking.

actually post 5 said he didn’t want to take anyone else in HER place.

Nothing about him not wanting to go, or, get what he had paid for.

He has paid for one place on a holiday that she has cancelled, if she hadn’t, he would have got to go (with or without her).

as for the £200 date change, we know nothing about who was responsible.

I'm on his side of this one, based on the facts we know.

edit,

but getting the police is ridiculous, this is a small claims court at best

the OP is also the sister of the woman so shes hardly going to give us a fair account of things, she is clearly on one side here.

duchy

Actually the OP said the need to change the date was HIS fault in an earlier post.

If you split the deposit and the date change fee equally (which is what the intention would most likely have been had they not split and had proceeded with the holiday) and then look at what each has actually paid /received as refund then HE still owes her money.

I too knew a couple who decided to go on a holiday after they split -as friends. It was actually their honeymoon !! He got off with a girl the second day and moved into her room -and everyone else was so embarassed about the situation that they didn't know what to say to the ex-fiancee and she had a miserable week pretty much alone. As she was the one who called off the wedding I always wondered if it was "just one of those things" or if he went on holiday with the intention of doing what he did.

ValHaller

martinsurrey wrote: »

actually post 5 said he didn’t want to take anyone else in HER place.

Nothing about him not wanting to go, or, get what he had paid for.

He has paid for one place on a holiday that she has cancelled, if she hadn’t, he would have got to go (with or without her).

as for the £200 date change, we know nothing about who was responsible.

I'm on his side of this one, based on the facts we know.

edit,

but getting the police is ridiculous, this is a small claims court at best

the OP is also the sister of the woman so shes hardly going to give us a fair account of things, she is clearly on one side here.

Unless there is clear evidence of the OP not telling it how it is, we can only answer as she presents it - so all of the responses bear the implied caveat "subject to the truth being told".

The options are:

• Both go. It is implied that neither would go with the other
• One go alone. I would assume that neither wanted this - the ex does not seem to be complaining that he was denied this
• She take someone else. Which she did not want to do.
• He take someone else. Which he did not want to do.
• Neither go. Which is where this problem seems firmly based.