Thomson Sensatori Deposit Trauma!

Seanbythesea

Hello All,

This is my first post and more than anything I would like to use this as a sounding board to track my logic through this situation.

Essentially my fianc! and I have booked our honeymoon to (the soon to be built) Sensatori resort in the Dominican Republic. We are saving like mad this year to afford the thing and have really been looking forward to it.

However, Charlotte, my fianc!, found an image of the resort online showing that a Nickelodeon hotel is being built directly next door, not even 10 meters away from the Sensatori hotel. Furthermore this hotel will share a number of the facilities with the Sensatori. This is a fact that is completely withheld on the Sensatori website but displayed as a feature on the Nickelodeon site. If we had known this previously we would have booked another location as we didn’t plan on spending our honeymoon with Sponge-Bob-Squarepants.

So below is the email I have sent to Thomson stating my understanding of their t&c's as well the Travel Package Regulations that relate to changes. My argument is that as this information relating to the shared facilities with a neighbouring hotel marketed towards children was withheld, we purchased our holiday based on incomplete information. Information that would have resulted in us not purchasing this holiday.


"Thank-you for taking my call and for listening to my objections. I can only say that I am disappointed with the fact that Thomson do not see how this holiday has been miss sold and believe that your advertisement should be altered to ensure that others are not misled as we were.

As I stated on the phone, we placed the order for the holiday based on the description on your website which can be found in the following link - thomson.co.uk/destinations/caribbean/dominican-republic/dominican-rep-punta-cana/uvero-alto/hotels/sensatori-resort-punta-cana/facilities

Within this description there is no mention of shared facilities or even the fact that the Nickelodeon hotel is situated next door.

However the Nickelodeon website clearly states that facilities are shared, stating “Nickelodeon™ guests also have access to amenities and entertainment programs offered by the neighbouring Azul Sensatori Hotel by Karisma”, see
nickresortpuntacana.com/gourmet-inclusive/

You have stated that this alteration does not constitute a “Major Change” under your terms & conditions and that no compensation or refund is due. However your terms state that “a change in accommodation to that of a lower category” constitutes a “Major Change”. In sharing the facilities of this 5 star hotel with a 4 star hotel you are diluting its value. I would not expect to pay as much for a shared facility as I know that in sharing you have reduced your costs and diminished my experience through the loss of exclusivity, it is no longer a luxury resort as advertised.

From a marketing perspective the Sensatori resort is much more alluring so it is a benefit for the Nickelodeon hotel to advertise sharing in their facilities. On the other hand, the Sensatori customer seeing guests from a 4 star hotel share in their facilities is a detriment and reduces the value of their experience.

In closing, it is our stance that we have been sold this holiday based on your advertisement that neglects to mention the shared facilities. There is no mention of shared facilities, which is a loss of exclusivity and therefore a reduction in the luxury and value of the experience. This is a clear breach of your terms and conditions as stated above.

Furthermore “The Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992” states that:

“Descriptive matter relating to packages must not be misleading

4.—(1) No organiser or retailer shall supply to a consumer any descriptive matter concerning a package, the price of a package or any other conditions applying to the contract which contains any misleading information.

(2) If an organiser or retailer is in breach of paragraph (1) he shall be liable to compensate the consumer for any loss which the consumer suffers in consequence.”
legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1992/3288/regulation/4/made

In reference to clause 4.-(1) of the above stated regulations we stand by the fact that Thomson have produced a misleading advertisement. In no part of this advertisement does it state that facilities will be shared with the adjacent hotel, nor does it state that this neighbouring hotel is marketed towards children and is no way in keeping with the luxury “designed to fuel the senses” experience that we had been sold on. This is a clear misrepresentation of the holiday.

I urge you to reconsider your decision as if we do not receive our deposit we will be forced to seek satisfaction through the ATBA and CTSI. Can you please let us know your decision as soon as possible.

Best Regards

Sean "[/COLOR]


Thank-you for reading and I would really appreciate any experiences or guidance that can be offered.

Sean

richardw

I agree they are being mis-leading.

If you paid the deposit using a credit card consider a section 75 claim.

btw https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/ShowTopic-g147293-i28-k8430071-o30-Sensatori_Resort_Punta_Cana-Punta_Cana_La_Altagracia_Province_Dominican_Republic.html