Beware low cost deposits!

allensoflongcot

We recently booked a holiday with Cottages 4 You. They had a deal on that let you book with a deposit of only £25. As we weren't sure if we'd be able to go or not we thought this would be great for us as all we would lose would be the £25. As it turns out we have had to cancel (with 88 days notice). When we informed the company that we were cancelling they landed us with a bill for £390 which is apparently the normal deposit price. On the site that we used to book the holiday there was no mention of this, nothing to flag it up. You had to click on a separate link hidden amongst all the other details to find out this rather important information. If we had any idea at all that this was the case we would never have booked the holiday as we knew it was questionable whether we could go or not. They must be making a fortune out of people on this basis. Has anyone else had this experience and if so, what was the outcome? Thanks.

geoffken

Posting 3 times may make you happy but does not alter terms and conditions that you signed up to!!!!!!


For new readers this is third identical post regarding HIS failure to read T & C

bod1467

OP has 3 posts ... a thread start in the Holiday Bargains board, a reply to thank people for advising him that he'd be better posting this in Praise, Vents, and this thread in Praise, Vents (where he was advised to post). So why the vitriol? Completely unnecessary.

OP - the T&Cs (even if you had read them) don't automatically entitle them to the full deposit. If they are able to rebook the stay then all they're entitled to are provable costs/losses caused by your breach of contract. For example ...

Your stay was priced at £2500
They resold the stay for £2300
They are entitled to claim £200 difference plus admin costs (maybe £50 or so)

Ultimately, they've sent you an invoice. You don't have to pay it - they'd have to initiate a civil claim to try and make you pay it. I'd suggest making them a counter-offer of, say, £100 in full and final settlement. If they don't accept then you'll use their potential breach* of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations and/or Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations as part of your defence any against any claim they may bring.

* "Hiding" the full deposit conditions in small print may be a breach. Unless of course the link you mention was called Deposit Conditions or similar.

Azari

bod1467 wrote: »

OP has 3 posts ... a thread start in the Holiday Bargains board, a reply to thank people for advising him that he'd be better posting this in Praise, Vents, and this thread in Praise, Vents (where he was advised to post). So why the vitriol? Completely unnecessary.

Well said.

... If they don't accept then you'll use their potential breach* of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations and/or Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations as part of your defence any against any claim they may bring.

* "Hiding" the full deposit conditions in small print may be a breach. Unless of course the link you mention was called Deposit Conditions or similar.

This is very much the case.

I think any judge will view with extreme disfavour a case brought by a company who has induced you to form a contract based on a very clearly stated term that is then contradicted by another term buried 'in the small print', or behind a link.