Wedding Venue Cancelled - Deposit & Other Costs

skinnylove

Issue resolved

Fire_Fox

Read your wedding insurance terms and conditions, that will tell you what is covered and what evidence you need to provide. And read your banks website regarding evidence for chargebacks but TBH I suspect you will need at least the receipt since a bank statement only shows who you paid not what for - you might have had a meal out or weekend stay (if hotel/ restaurant).

Yes if the chargeback is successful you *may* be able to claim other losses from the venue via a small claims action, two separate issues. You cannot claim the £500 twice, establish one will be unsuccessful before trying another avenue.

Small claims court does not exist, it is a small claims action/ track in the county court IIRC. Be careful how you word the letter since the venue have not yet informed you the wedding will not be going ahead, if you cancel it you create all sorts of problems.

bris

They have broke the contract so they are liable for any and all consequential losses. Although you have to mitigate your loss, by trying to find a new venue at the same price, if you can't you can also claim the difference between the old and new price if it costs you more.

Wedding insurance should cover this,(apart form the venue price difference) they will then sue the venue.

keithdc

bris wrote: »

They have broke the contract

Not yet they haven't... think the OP needs to be a bit careful and await the hotel owner's response.

axisofunity

This isn't from this article is it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-21505288

"On Saturday, the couples received an email from Adrian Roberts, which took over the organisation of weddings at the venue from another chef last year.

In it, he said he had "been unable to reach a satisfactory agreement" over a dispute with the venue and added it was "unlikely that your wedding will proceed there".

Names of inn removed to avoid Google Indexing to this in case not the same as the OP's issue. If it is, will add names.

ValHaller

axisofunity wrote: »

This isn't from this article is it?

Seems too similar to be coincidence. In particular "unlikely that your wedding will proceed there" from the caterer.

It does not look entirely professional for the caterer to say this and to some extent it lets the venue off the hook a little bit in that it is the caterer who does not appear to understand how to conduct a business realtionship. Although it may well be a fair warning.

ljonski

By another coincidence the OP lives in Worcestershire !

bris

ValHaller wrote: »

Seems too similar to be coincidence. In particular "unlikely that your wedding will proceed there" from the caterer.

It does not look entirely professional for the caterer to say this and to some extent it lets the venue off the hook a little bit in that it is the caterer who does not appear to understand how to conduct a business realtionship. Although it may well be a fair warning.

The caterer is of no concern to the op, the venue is responsible for the contract, who the caterer is, is not the op's problem.
This would be like John Lewis saying the salesman who sold you that faulty TV has now left, so we are not liable.

Who the venue employs or subcontracts the work out to is their problem, no one else's.

Looksguywalker

bris wrote: »

They have broke the contract so they are liable for any and all consequential losses. Although you have to mitigate your loss, by trying to find a new venue at the same price, if you can't you can also claim the difference between the old and new price if it costs you more.

Wedding insurance should cover this,(apart form the venue price difference) they will then sue the venue.

bris wrote: »

The caterer is of no concern to the op, the venue is responsible for the contract, who the caterer is, is not the op's problem.
This would be like John Lewis saying the salesman who sold you that faulty TV has now left, so we are not liable.

Who the venue employs or subcontracts the work out to is their problem, no one else's.

Something you are saying is not right?

jahlboy

I'd try for chargeback for £500 first as if done in Small Claims, even if you win, if they don't have the money to pay aren't liable to pay, I believe. I'd get the £500 first for certain then try for the £250 afterwards!

ValHaller

bris wrote: »

The caterer is of no concern to the op, the venue is responsible for the contract, who the caterer is, is not the op's problem.
This would be like John Lewis saying the salesman who sold you that faulty TV has now left, so we are not liable.

Who the venue employs or subcontracts the work out to is their problem, no one else's.

I think you have the wrong end of the stick on what I am saying here. The John Lewis example is not relevant.

The point is that the caterer pulling out brings OP closer to the point whereby they can cancel without penalty. But the caterer making the remark that the wedding is unlikely to go ahead at that venue leaves the venue able to point the finger back at the caterer as being in the wrong and say that they will get a new caterer appointed. Without that additional remark, the venue appears totally responsible for whatever transpires.