When can a Booking Agent be considered responsible

Snowedunder

Hi


Have had a couple of occasions recently when 'Booking or other Agents' refute any liability when things go wrong. First one was an Agency for Car Insurance who would accept no responsibility for anything, so had to abandon that, but I am more sure on the second situation.


I booked, through an Agency for Car Parking at Gatwick Airport. So another company was with whom I had 'contract' for the actual parking.


However, I paid and received the details from the Agency. So far so good. A couple of months' prior to my trip I needed to extend the parking by 2 days so went through the Agency who quoted me and to whom I paid the extra amount and received a receipt with the correct details.


When I returned to Gatwick and telephoned the 'chauffeur' service as requested I was told I was 2 days late returning and would have to pay an extra £20 before they would release my car. They were extremely rude over the telephone telling me to e-mail them my receipt as they were not going to bring my car to the Airport.


So, to cut to the chase I eventually got my car after calling in the police because my receipt showed the car return date was the actual date. I eventually got an e mail from the parking company who apologised and said that the Agency had not sent them the change of date!


What I would like to know is where is the blame to be placed, I would surely assume the Agent but they are hiding behind their statement that they are just agents and their Terms and Conditions stipulate that any problems are not their concern!


Any help would be gratefully appreciated.

unholyangel

I don't understand, if you got your car back that day without paying out the additional £20, what exactly would you be trying to hold them liable for?

naedanger

Snowedunder wrote: »

Hi


Have had a couple of occasions recently when 'Booking or other Agents' refute any liability when things go wrong. First one was an Agency for Car Insurance who would accept no responsibility for anything, so had to abandon that, but I am more sure on the second situation.


I booked, through an Agency for Car Parking at Gatwick Airport. So another company was with whom I had 'contract' for the actual parking.


However, I paid and received the details from the Agency. So far so good. A couple of months' prior to my trip I needed to extend the parking by 2 days so went through the Agency who quoted me and to whom I paid the extra amount and received a receipt with the correct details.


When I returned to Gatwick and telephoned the 'chauffeur' service as requested I was told I was 2 days late returning and would have to pay an extra £20 before they would release my car. They were extremely rude over the telephone telling me to e-mail them my receipt as they were not going to bring my car to the Airport.


So, to cut to the chase I eventually got my car after calling in the police because my receipt showed the car return date was the actual date. I eventually got an e mail from the parking company who apologised and said that the Agency had not sent them the change of date!


What I would like to know is where is the blame to be placed, I would surely assume the Agent but they are hiding behind their statement that they are just agents and their Terms and Conditions stipulate that any problems are not their concern!


Any help would be gratefully appreciated.

My understanding is you should hold the car parking company liable for the actions of their agent. (I am assuming it was clear that the agent was acting for the car parking company.)

"If the agent has actual or apparent authority, the agent will not be liable for acts performed within the scope of such authority, so long as the relationship of the agency and the identity of the principal have been disclosed." [My emphasis.]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_agency

That said I agree with the previous post, that it is not clear you have any legal claim (although you clearly received very bad service it is not clear you suffered a financial loss).

powerful_Rogue

Why didnt you just email the receipt to the car park rather then getting the police involved?

Snowedunder

To answer the above, I am a 70 year old disabled female, so firstly I would have no idea as to how to e-mail a piece of paper in my hand with only a basic mobile phone whilst in the arrivals hall of Gatwick Airport.


I am disabled and when they eventually brought my car to the airport, 3 burly agents, with little English Language between them were literally taunting me with the keys and refused to accept my copy receipt and said they 'wanted the money' . They became very threatening and this is why at the suggestion of other car owners I telephoned the police. All this took time and caused me to become unwell. Upon eventually getting the car keys we had to load our luggage and by the time we exited the car park there was a charge of £10.70.


When I eventually arrived home, my sister was driving, I was sent to hospital by my GP as he suspected I had suffered a TIA - small stroke, which was later confirmed.


Hence I feel 'I suffered' as questioned above.

LilElvis

Did you pay the £20 again to get your vehicle back? If you made an additional payment to the "burly agents" did they issue you with a receipt?

unholyangel

Snowedunder wrote: »

To answer the above, I am a 70 year old disabled female, so firstly I would have no idea as to how to e-mail a piece of paper in my hand with only a basic mobile phone whilst in the arrivals hall of Gatwick Airport.


I am disabled and when they eventually brought my car to the airport, 3 burly agents, with little English Language between them were literally taunting me with the keys and refused to accept my copy receipt and said they 'wanted the money' . They became very threatening and this is why at the suggestion of other car owners I telephoned the police. All this took time and caused me to become unwell. Upon eventually getting the car keys we had to load our luggage and by the time we exited the car park there was a charge of £10.70.


When I eventually arrived home, my sister was driving, I was sent to hospital by my GP as he suspected I had suffered a TIA - small stroke, which was later confirmed.


Hence I feel 'I suffered' as questioned above.

The question was not whether you had suffered, it was whether you have suffered a loss due to their negligence. Generally even in a breach of contract, stress & inconvenience cannot be claimed for except in extremely limited circumstances (such as contract for a holiday, where the contract includes an element of enjoyment to be provided).

You may be able to lodge a complaint with trading standards about the car park operators for aggressive trading practices, but that would be for trading standards to take action rather than you.

Unless you can show any losses you incurred as a direct result of a breach on part of the agent or parking operator, there's no grounds for a claim against either of them.

bris

You would have had to pay the car park charge anyway, some things are just not worth worrying over.


Why would it take 3 burly agents to bring you the car? The labour involved alone would be well over the 20 pounds. Your age nor their broken English have anything to do with it.


A complaint to head office may bring a goodwill gesture but apart from that there is little else you can do.

bod1467

I don't use Gatwick so I'm not aware of the parking restrictions ... in other airports where I've used "meet and greet" style parking then any charges when returning to the vehicle have been covered.

Is it different at Gatwick?
Was it the fact that the returns process took so long that you were charged £10.70 parking? If the process had been as normal (probably less than 15 minutes for the vehicle on site) would there have been no charge?

Were the agent/parking company aware of your disability at the time of booking? If yes then you may have a claim under the Equality Act 2010.

Snowedunder

bod1467 Thank you for your empathy and understanding, hopefully none of the other more less understanding responders learn that empathy and understanding come with age.
(To answer your query apparently there is a non-disclosed fee to exit this car park and it has been complained about on line against the 2 companies involved, but it is around £3 - and yes it was the time taken by these aggressive , not allowed to describe them it seems, er representatives to be told by the police the hand me my keys that took nearly an hour).


I guess in this day and age aggressiveness is to be taken for granted and politeness in published writings rarely exists.


Yes, I am 'old' by most standards and yes, I am disabled by any standards but I do not use this as an excuse to get any 'bonuses' on anything I pay for. I try and pay for the best I can afford then my expectations are not too high, especially these days.


When I was at school we were taught how to use the English language correctly so that the meaning of our written word could not be misconstrued, so I apologise to anyone who though my query was deserving of such blunt and in some cases and in my OWN opinion rude and discourteous responses.


I will not trouble you or, in my opinion continue to give you ammunition to vent.


As you are indicative of this site and therefore approved by Martin Lewis, I take your comments to be accepted by him and his mantra and will certainly refrain from posting on here and taking any advise offered in the media by him and his mouthpieces.

naedanger

Snowedunder wrote: »

bod1467 Thank you for your empathy and understanding, hopefully none of the other more less understanding responders learn that empathy and understanding come with age.
(To answer your query apparently there is a non-disclosed fee to exit this car park and it has been complained about on line against the 2 companies involved, but it is around £3 - and yes it was the time taken by these aggressive , not allowed to describe them it seems, er representatives to be told by the police the hand me my keys that took nearly an hour).


I guess in this day and age aggressiveness is to be taken for granted and politeness in published writings rarely exists.


Yes, I am 'old' by most standards and yes, I am disabled by any standards but I do not use this as an excuse to get any 'bonuses' on anything I pay for. I try and pay for the best I can afford then my expectations are not too high, especially these days.


When I was at school we were taught how to use the English language correctly so that the meaning of our written word could not be misconstrued, so I apologise to anyone who though my query was deserving of such blunt and in some cases and in my OWN opinion rude and discourteous responses.


I will not trouble you or, in my opinion continue to give you ammunition to vent.


As you are indicative of this site and therefore approved by Martin Lewis, I take your comments to be accepted by him and his mantra and will certainly refrain from posting on here and taking any advise offered in the media by him and his mouthpieces.

In your first post you asked a specific question (who to hold liable the agent or the car park) and said any help would be gratefully appreciated.

I posted the answer to your specific question in post 3, along with a link that explained why the agent was not, as you thought, liable.

I also noted that it was not clear you had a legal claim because, as I said, although it was clear you had suffered very bad service, it was not clear you had suffered a financial loss.

Despite what you said, from your response, it does not seem that the help (i.e. the answer to your question) was gratefully received.

I would also point out I said nothing discourteous or rude, and acknowledged you had received bad service.

I consider it is you who has been discourteous and ungrateful to me. However it appears you prefer to consider yourself the victim and judge yourself by much less demanding standards than you judge others.

Finally the idea that MSE, or Martin Lewis, approves all the views of the posters on this forum is both wrong and frankly ridiculous.