Missed Airport Transfer Causing us To Miss Flight

lisyloo

Pollycat wrote: »

The holiday company have already reimbursed the OP for the taxi fare.
I don't think they would have done that if the OP had been at fault.

You misunderstand. The OP is at fault for missing the flight by not getting a taxi soon enough.
Paying for a taxi confirms the OP was right to get a taxi.

Not many people would expect any problem on the return journey.

I never said the OP should have expected it. I think they should have reacted when it was obvious there was a problem.

Again - why are you talking about legal action?

It indicates their duties (to mitigate losses) and it guides companies in how they treat people.

Thomsons have a general duty not to forget to pick up their clients at the end of their holiday.

Of course they do.
And the OP has a duty to mitigate their losses.
If a taxi costs £20 and missing the flight costs £2000, then it's pretty obvious you should do the former.

lisyloo

Pollycat wrote: »

I agree - and am quite surprised that a couple of posters have the opposite view.

Personal views don't matter.
What the law says matters and that why I refer to it.

Sometimes companies should take responsibility for not fulfilling their part of the contract.
They should be the ones dealing with the consequences of failing.

True, but there are limits.
For example you can't put yourself up at the ritz.
You are meant to act reasonably and use common sense.
Getting a taxi before you'll miss your flight is blatantly sensible in this situation.

I think it's important that the OP understand the opposite point of view and the reasons for it.
Forewarned is forearmed.
An objective person would make attempts to understand the opposite point of view in order to successfully negotiate against it and that's why I'm presenting it.

peachyprice

Pollycat wrote: »

I agree - and am quite surprised that a couple of posters have the opposite view.

Sometimes companies should take responsibility for not fulfilling their part of the contract.
They should be the ones dealing with the consequences of failing.

And sitting there for waiting for a transfer that didn't turn up helped OP how?

There was nothing stopping OP getting a taxi once they realised that even if the transfer did turn up it would have been too late for the flight. They could have pursued the TO after they had got home on time.

They missed the flight because they sat back and let someone else be responsible for them even when they realised something was wrong.

Pollycat

lisyloo wrote: »

You misunderstand. The OP is at fault for missing the flight by not getting a taxi soon enough.
Paying for a taxi confirms the OP was right to get a taxi.

No. You misunderstand.
Thomson is at fault for not picking the OP and her family up.
It was part of the holiday contract.
Paying for the taxi confirms that the holiday company acknowledge they did not provide the transfer to the airport as per the contract they had with the OP.

If any fault can be attributed to the OP it's that she was too trusting that a major tour operator would not let her down.

lisyloo wrote: »

I never said the OP should have expected it. I think they should have reacted when it was obvious there was a problem.

Have you ever waited for a transfer coach to pick you up and it's been late?
I've have.
We waited for a long, long time. Luckily we were not the only people waiting.
It turned out that the dimwit rep had missed out a major pick-up point and had got halfway to the airport before he realised he'd only got a half full coach.

You tend to think 'It will be here in a minute'.
The OP did react and get a taxi.
Unfortunately it was too late.
Maybe if the helpline people had said 'Oh, just jump in a taxi' instead of telling the OP they were trying to contact the bus, things would have been different.

lisyloo wrote: »

It indicates their duties (to mitigate losses) and it guides companies in how they treat people.

Mitigate whose losses?

lisyloo wrote: »

Of course they do.
And the OP has a duty to mitigate their losses.
If a taxi costs £20 and missing the flight costs £2000, then it's pretty obvious you should do the former.

It's not about the OP mitigating their losses at all.
The OP was put on another flight without charge.

lisyloo wrote: »

Personal views don't matter.
What the law says matters and that why I refer to it.

So what does the law say about a major tour operator forgetting to pick up one of their clients?

lisyloo wrote: »

True, but there are limits.
For example you can't put yourself up at the ritz.
You are meant to act reasonably and use common sense.
Getting a taxi before you'll miss your flight is blatantly sensible in this situation.

The OP didn't want to be put up at the Ritz.
Or to use a better analogy, she didn't want to be flown back to Glasgow first class.

I believe the OP did act reasonably and did use common sense.
She waited for a transfer that did not turn up.
She didn't just sit in Reception, she chased it up.
She was then let down further by the helpline she rang.

The tour operator was meant to act reasonably by picking up clients.
All of them.

lisyloo wrote: »

I think it's important that the OP understand the opposite point of view and the reasons for it.
Forewarned is forearmed.
An objective person would make attempts to understand the opposite point of view in order to successfully negotiate against it and that's why I'm presenting it.

I can't see any reason for the opposite point of view.
The tour operator failed one of its clients.

peachyprice

Pollycat wrote: »

No. You misunderstand.
Thomson is at fault for not picking the OP and her family up.
It was part of the holiday contract.
Paying for the taxi confirms that the holiday company acknowledge they did not provide the transfer to the airport as per the contract they had with the OP.

If any fault can be attributed to the OP it's that she was too trusting that a major tour operator would not let her down.


Have you ever waited for a transfer coach to pick you up and it's been late?
I've have.
We waited for a long, long time. Luckily we were not the only people waiting.
It turned out that the dimwit rep had missed out a major pick-up point and had got halfway to the airport before he realised he'd only got a half full coach.

You tend to think 'It will be here in a minute'.
The OP did react and get a taxi.
Unfortunately it was too late.
Maybe if the helpline people had said 'Oh, just jump in a taxi' instead of telling the OP they were trying to contact the bus, things would have been different.


Mitigate whose losses?


It's not about the OP mitigating their losses at all.
The OP was put on another flight without charge.


So what does the law say about a major tour operator forgetting to pick up one of their clients?


The OP didn't want to be put up at the Ritz.
Or to use a better analogy, she didn't want to be flown back to Glasgow first class.

I believe the OP did act reasonably and did use common sense.
She waited for a transfer that did not turn up.
She didn't just sit in Reception, she chased it up.
She was then let down further by the helpline she rang.

The tour operator was meant to act reasonably by picking up clients.
All of them.


I can't see any reason for the opposite point of view.
The tour operator failed one of its clients.

I don't think anyone is saying that Thomson is not at fault, they were supposed to pick them up but they didn't. But sitting there waiting because 'they have a contract' did nothing to get OP to the airport on time, did it?

OP deserves to get the taxi fare back (which they did), a refund of the transfer element of the package, and perhaps a good will gesture of the inconvenience of having to wait 10 hours for the next flight.

What OP isn't entitled to is a claim under EU261. They missed the flight because they sat and waited rather than making a decision to get themselves to the airport on time.

Pollycat

peachyprice wrote: »

I don't think anyone is saying that Thomson is not at fault, they were supposed to pick them up but they didn't.

Hallelujah! :T

peachyprice wrote: »

But sitting there waiting because 'they have a contract' did nothing to get OP to the airport on time, did it?

No sitting there waiting didn't get the OP to the airport on time.
But then again, that was Thomson's job.

peachyprice wrote: »

OP deserves to get the taxi fare back (which they did), a refund of the transfer element of the package, and perhaps a good will gesture of the inconvenience of having to wait 10 hours for the next flight.

I agree.
And I'd add the cost of food & drink at the airport and the cost of telephone calls.

peachyprice wrote: »

What OP isn't entitled to is a claim under EU261. They missed the flight because they sat and waited rather than making a decision to get themselves to the airport on time.

I think the OP accepted this early on in the thread after a couple of posters explained that it wasn't actually a flight delay.

Kimby85 wrote: »

Thats what i feel like too.
I have the receipts for food. If it had been a delay i would have had a claim so why is this different? It wasn't my fault. I done all i could. I booked a package to take all the stresses out of my travel.

Frogletina

I sat waiting for a pick up at 3.00 am, which I had confirmed the day before, and when it didn't arrive after half an hour, and unable to contact the transfer company I managed to get the night porter to ring for a taxi - not easy as he spoke very little English.

It was clear to me that had I waited any longer I would have missed my flight.

I did get on to the flight which was my priority. I've always kept money for this sort of emergency.

Once home I was told that the company did go to the hotel at the right time but I disputed that - I have a feeling they went to the apartments with a similar name but will never know.

I was refunded my taxi fare in due course.

Andypandyboy

The OP used the Thompson helpline and did as she was told to do. At that point she has completed her obligation. The OP did all she could and I don't think any court would say otherwise. Thompson failed to complete their contract which included transfers.

interstellaflyer

Andypandyboy wrote: »

The OP used the Thompson helpline and did as she was told to do. At that point she has completed her obligation. The OP did all she could and I don't think any court would say otherwise. Thompson failed to complete their contract which included transfers.

Exactly, the OP doesn't say where but from my experience, our normal destination is Salou, the coach picks up around 07:30am for a 10am return flight, which is fine, however it doesn't leave much time for mistakes like the OP experienced, as quite a savvy traveller, I probably would've acted on my own initiative sooner but as you say, the OP had done everything correct and was quite right to assume Thomson were dealing with the problem.

Pollycat

interstellaflyer wrote: »

Exactly, the OP doesn't say where but from my experience, our normal destination is Salou, the coach picks up around 07:30am for a 10am return flight, which is fine, however it doesn't leave much time for mistakes like the OP experienced, as quite a savvy traveller, I probably would've acted on my own initiative sooner but as you say, the OP had done everything correct and was quite right to assume Thomson were dealing with the problem.

Exactly indeed.

A savvy traveller may have acted sooner but it may be that the OP is an inexperienced traveller.

I hope the OP comes back and lets us know what Thomson have said.