Thomas cook seat reservation

zico766

I had pre paid for reserved ex leg room seats on return journey of flight ,but when we turned up we were issued with diffferent seats not as requested , now ive been offered a refund for seat cost ,but feel dissappointed as they have failed to address this experience blunder ,can i expect anything else .
Regards
dj

marliepanda

zico766 wrote: »

I had pre paid for reserved ex leg room seats on return journey of flight ,but when we turned up we were issued with diffferent seats not as requested , now ive been offered a refund for seat cost ,but feel dissappointed as they have failed to address this experience blunder ,can i expect anything else .
Regards
dj

No.

What would fix your 'disappointment?'

[Deleted User]

zico766 wrote: »

now ive been offered a refund for seat cost ,but feel dissappointed

You want a refund PLUS extra compensation?

It's not going to happen, I'm afraid, and you have no legal rights to anything more.

photome

OP why do you want compensation?

in fact why does nearly everyone want compensation these days?

peachyprice

Go read the T&C's you agreed to when you booked the extra legroom seats, all will be explained.

HiToAll

marliepanda wrote: »

No.

What would fix your 'disappointment?'

a shed load of cash I am assuming.

ThumbRemote

photome wrote: »

OP why do you want compensation?

in fact why does nearly everyone want compensation these days?

Because otherwise the retailers end up holding all the cards.

In the OPs case, was the OP entitled to cancel those seat reservations at all? Or even cancel them with a financial loss? If not, why should Thomas Cook be able to do the same?

As it stands now, too many retailers can take your money on the basis that they may provide what you've paid for. There's nothing to make them actually provide it, and no penalty on them if they don't.

An airline takes money for extra legroom seats. As it stands, a few weeks later they can sell those again to someone else at an inflated price. There's no penalty on them, they just refund the first customer. They could then repeat this, increasing their profits each time at the expense of the customer who thinks they've paid. Not saying this has happened to the OP, but what is to stop an airline doing it?

Or take an electronics retailer. They can sell a washing machine with the claim of delivery in 4 days. If they don't have it in stock and can't deliver in that timeframe, then they've got the customers money anyway. Just offer the customer another product or keep them waiting longer. The customer knows they'll have to wait for a refund, it's probably more hassle than it's worth getting it out of the retailer. Hey presto, they've made a sale that they wouldn't have done being honest. And the worst that can happen is that the retailer has to refund, there's no financial loss to them.

The fact that retailers can just get away with poor service, false claims and broken transactions, with no comeback whatsoever, really does annoy many people. Doubly so when the customer is tied up in numerous terms and conditions that restrict what they can do.

macman

There will doubtless be a perfectly good operational reason as to why those seats were no longer available-the most obvious being that they changed the type of plane after booking, and the replacement had fewer emergency exit seats.
The OP could have asked at the time for an explanation, which might have produced a goodwill gesture (free onboard sandwich maybe)? But to complain after the event is completely pointless, as the seats will not have been guaranteed-so a refund is all they are entitled to.

daytona0

ThumbRemote wrote: »

An airline takes money for extra legroom seats. As it stands, a few weeks later they can sell those again to someone else at an inflated price. There's no penalty on them, they just refund the first customer. They could then repeat this, increasing their profits each time at the expense of the customer who thinks they've paid. Not saying this has happened to the OP, but what is to stop an airline doing it?

Not much stopping them in fairness and you make a good point.

But we don't know the circumstances here. Could be anything as macman said! Could even be some poorly person who needs the legroom for a medical reason (would it be classed as discrimination if they were turned away because the extra legroom seats were "sold")?

Could even be that the plane with extra legroom failed a safety check and so a replacement was used, which makes the extra legroom issue pale in comparison to what could have happened..

I'm just speculating too though! We'd need to hear from the horse's mouth on this one.

Also important to note that the outward journey seemed fine, so not fancying it being too common a practice for this airliner.

All about reading the Ts and Cs here.

ThumbRemote

I quite agree that in this case there is probably a good reason. In most cases there's probably a good reason.

It would equally be a good reason if the OP had been ill and unable to travel. They wouldn't be entitled to a refund, no matter how good the reason.

So my point was purely relating to photome's comment about compensation. Because I suspect that if those good reasons were to hurt a company financially, there would suddenly be fewer of them.