Thomas Cook / Condor Claims - Section 75

Hellikopta

I've read Martin's detailed article about the collapse of Thomas Cook and the rights of passengers to claim back the cost of flights depending on how it was booked and whether ATOL protection was available. I am still unclear on one point though.

I booked a Thomas Cook flight back from the US to the UK online and this flight was due to be provided by Condor on behalf of Thomas Cook. The flight number therefore started with MT rather than the DE code than Condor GmbH used. This booking was not ATOL protected.

I claimed back the cost of the flight and consequential losses (2 extra nights in a hotel) from my Credit Card company and all was settled relatively quickly.

Some 2 weeks later I received an invoice from Condor GmbH asking me to pay for the flight? This has the same reference number as the flight I booked with Thomas Cook which never departed due to TC's collapse and which I paid for online at point of booking?

Anyone else had a similar invoice from Condor. I have checked with them directly and it is not a scam. I have no idea why they are involved and why I have to pay for a flight that was never provided?

Thanks

Alan_Bowen

Condor have been debited the amount you reclaimed from your card issuer. It seems they are under the impression they can claim this back from the original customer, which they cannot, so please ignore.

MT was the code being used by TC Airlines but it appears, possibly because their own bank was reluctant to release funds paid for flights before they took place, that TC decided to process bookings, from both customers and travel agents through Condor who could then supposedly pass the money back to them

bagand96

As Alan said your booking was with Condor.

Are you sure your credit card company processed a Section 75 claim, and not just a chargeback? There is a difference. A chargeback simply reverses the transaction so the card company would recover the funds from Condor.

A Section 75 claim makes your credit card provider jointly liable for the transaction with the retailer. So the credit card company must refund you . Once they have done so it is for them and the retailer to argue it out - and even if the credit card does recover the funds to mitigate their loss then that has nothing to do with you, and the retailer has no recourse with you.

One crucial difference is Section 75 is enshrined in UK Law, whereas chargeback isn't.

Personally I wouldn't ignore. Just in case Condor feel the need to persue further (even though the chance might be very small). Talk to your card issuer and ask their advice. If it definitely was a Section 75 claim, then write back informing them of the UK legislation, that you are definitely not liable, and to take it up with your bank.

Hellikopta

Thank you both for your detailed replies.

I have contacted the credit card company who confirmed that it was processed under Section 75. I'm therefore going to drop Condor an email to clarify that I am not going to be paying the invoice and they should take this matter up with the credit card company.

Hopefully this will sort it all out.

Ganga

Is it possible that the Condor flight was still available long after TC went bust,the German goverment lent them money to try to continue.

Hellikopta

At the time of the Thomas Cook collapse, the Condor website had a ticker tape running along the top of their website which clarified that Condor flights with a flight code starting DE were unaffected. My own flight had a code starting with MT so it was affected.