Message from ABTA A disgrace.

Jones1309

Hi have booked a cottage with holiday cottages for Easter that has been cancelled due to coronavirus. They are only offering us to use the holiday at a later date and not offering a refund. It doesn't say anything on their terms regarding refund if they cancel. Am I entitled to a refund ?  as I don't want the holiday later in the year.

savermseman

peachyprice said:

harz99 said:

SmashedAvacado said:

askisavermseman said:

 stick it out. Insist on refund or maybe even consider small claims court.. No matter how much stress this puts on the travel industry, nobody seems to be caring what stress this puts on some households.  even when they keep using the new in word " unprecedented" , I don't think it will hold water in a court.. what a horrible thought of having to take such harsh action in these sad times, but if we don't stick up for ourselves, we will just end up with no food on our family tables, and a fist full of worthless vouchers.

I really think you are looking at this all wrong. You haven't lost money, you have lost a holiday. They are agreeing to give you one at a time when travelling will be allowed. These companies don't have the funds to repay you and masses of people demanding things that they can't reasonably expect to be given is just making it more difficult for them to operate. Take the deferral - you will get what you paid for and you will have helped some other faceless family that you will never meet keep bread on the table. The stress on your household is a deferral of your holiday. 

But are they, i haven't seen any company offering the same or a very similar future holiday at a protected price, just a voucher for the value of the cancelled booking. Which leaves people potentially out of pocket firstly because they didn't get the original booked holiday, and secondly because prices in future will almost certainly be higher resulting in additional payment to be made. A double whammy...

Exactly.  I would happily have re-booked our holiday.  But the only time we can now go is August or next April, both of which fall in school holidays and are £1.5k more.  I cannot commit to tying up that sort of money on top of the £3.5k I have already paid in these 'unprecendented' times. 

If they're going to make people accept vouchers the least they can do is allow us to re-book at the original price.  To do anything else is pure greed.

Good call, but we both know that they will never, and I mean never even think about giving cheap prices in school terms . This is where the captive audience comes in, and they will, and always have ripped off people during these times. Then they want our support during this unprecedented time .... Vote with your feet.....what's good for the goose and all that ......

V1m_Fuego

supposed to be travelling early may, booked a package with a high Street travel agent, paid in full, on a credit card an had valid travel insurance prior to booking (via nationwide), so there are 3 avenues for recompense.

What we do not want is a voucher for future travel, as it's been made clear new bookings are excluded from cornoavirus on the travel insurance, and a voucher would be booking for a new booking (I am assuming this, but as it's insurance, this is almost certainly a slimey loophole they will use).  If the company goes under, my voucher is presumably worthless.  What are my rights? Can I demand a refund? What is the best avenue to claim?

Pollycat

peachyprice said:

harz99 said:

SmashedAvacado said:

askisavermseman said:

 stick it out. Insist on refund or maybe even consider small claims court.. No matter how much stress this puts on the travel industry, nobody seems to be caring what stress this puts on some households.  even when they keep using the new in word " unprecedented" , I don't think it will hold water in a court.. what a horrible thought of having to take such harsh action in these sad times, but if we don't stick up for ourselves, we will just end up with no food on our family tables, and a fist full of worthless vouchers.

I really think you are looking at this all wrong. You haven't lost money, you have lost a holiday. They are agreeing to give you one at a time when travelling will be allowed. These companies don't have the funds to repay you and masses of people demanding things that they can't reasonably expect to be given is just making it more difficult for them to operate. Take the deferral - you will get what you paid for and you will have helped some other faceless family that you will never meet keep bread on the table. The stress on your household is a deferral of your holiday. 

But are they, i haven't seen any company offering the same or a very similar future holiday at a protected price, just a voucher for the value of the cancelled booking. Which leaves people potentially out of pocket firstly because they didn't get the original booked holiday, and secondly because prices in future will almost certainly be higher resulting in additional payment to be made. A double whammy...

Exactly.  I would happily have re-booked our holiday.  But the only time we can now go is August or next April, both of which fall in school holidays and are £1.5k more.  I cannot commit to tying up that sort of money on top of the £3.5k I have already paid in these 'unprecendented' times. 

If they're going to make people accept vouchers the least they can do is allow us to re-book at the original price.  To do anything else is pure greed.

I think that would be an acceptable solution for some people.

I'd be more than happy to accept that offer for my mid June holiday to Greece.

As it stands, the exact same holiday for 2021 is 20% more expensive than I've paid for this year.

I'm currently considering just transferring it anyway as we are in the fortunate position that we don't need that money back right now.

But I do appreciate that some people do need it as they don't even know if they'll have a job this time next year.

Of course, one thing to consider from the tour operators side - the hotels and accommodation owners will have lost out on (probably) a full season and will almost certainly put their prices up to recover some of that money and we holidaymakers are at the bottom of that particular chain.

happyandcontented

V1m_Fuego said:

supposed to be travelling early may, booked a package with a high Street travel agent, paid in full, on a credit card an had valid travel insurance prior to booking (via nationwide), so there are 3 avenues for recompense.

What we do not want is a voucher for future travel, as it's been made clear new bookings are excluded from cornoavirus on the travel insurance, and a voucher would be booking for a new booking (I am assuming this, but as it's insurance, this is almost certainly a slimey loophole they will use).  If the company goes under, my voucher is presumably worthless.  What are my rights? Can I demand a refund? What is the best avenue to claim?

That is exactly the position we are in and we are also insured by Nationwide. A date change is considered a new booking according to our travel agent.
I have insisted on a refund, but will then rebook for the same dates next year as the particular resort we should be going to is not that much more expensive next year. I am happy to rebook but I don't want to be in the position where they have all my money and not just the deposit so far ahead of the time just in case they go under. Currently, I have a full credit note from the company but they have said they will refund so I am watching this space.
You can only claim from your card if you have exhausted all avenues with the travel company and them offering vouchers or a credit note will muddy those waters too.

zagfles

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

I wonder how many people whining that they can't have their money back for a service that the airline/tour operator/hotel can no longer provide through no fault of theirs, at the same time have the hypocrisy to expect their employer, or the government, to carry on paying them for work they can no longer do, or no longer do as well, because of the same reason?

Many have already been made redundant by their employer. Many businesses (including mine) have provided refunds or changed terms of contracts to benefit the consumer rather than the financials of the business. Many business owners are getting next to no support from the Gov and are still doing the right thing. 

Oh I'm sure some are. But others will be taking the "furlough", the self employed support, the business support packages, will be working at home even though their employment contract states they must attend a workplace, expecting full pay even though they can't provide full service, or be not working at all yet expecting 80% pay.

People and companies through no fault of their own are unable to provide their usual service, in some cases any service. If you're expecting travel companies to give a full refund for service they're unable to provide, fine, as long as you're not expecting your employer or the govt to pay you if you can't fulfil your employment contract.  

Not sure employment law and consumer law can really be compared. Surely if you are still employed you expect to be paid regardless of where you work. It is up to the business to decide whether to maintain employment. It isn't acase of the employee being hypocritical. 

Further, I would say that no one is suggesting the travel companies shouldn't receive help/support. What people are saying is they shouldn't use their customers' funds to leverage Government into assistance and let's not forget these companies are UK limited companies. There are clear processes to go through when you can't pay your obligations. These companies will no doubt be furloughing their staff to save 80% of their wages but still not paying back customers monies. Surely that would be the mother of all hypocrisies. 

Only if you think staff costs are the only costs. Maybe they should furlough all their staff, who'd process the refunds then? 

It was a point of principle - if in this crisis you don't cut others some slack when they can't deliver on a contract through no fault of their own, don't expect others to cut you slack when you can't deliver on your contract (employment or otherwise). 

The only way I think of comparing it is if you were an employee who has been made redundant despite there being processes in place to help the business not do that. Would you cut you just say 'hey ho' and  cut your employer "slack"? 

The other issue is many/most of us purchase insurance which protects us against businesses who can't pay their bills. The move by Abta etc prevents us from using such insurance (at this time).

Also annoying is many of these companies are happily posting away on social media saying things like..."what a great season it was before it ended...can't wait to see you all next season" etc whilst sitting on customers monies. It's all a little tasteless imo. 

Anyway, the good companies will shine through in these times (as some already have) and the rest will rightly so get an absolute panning for how they have handled the crisis. 

You really have been whooshed.

I have an employment contract that specifies I must attend a workplace. I can't fulfill that, so my company cuts me some slack and allows me to work at home, even though I can't do some aspects of my job here. They pay me the full amount for doing a partial job. That's a reasonable reaction to the current crisis. They aren't saying "we're not paying you as you can't provide what it says in your contract". That would be a petty unreasonable reaction to a crisis that wasn't my fault.

In the same vein, I've booked 3 upcoming events that have been postponed. I booked them for particular dates which suited us. Those have now been cancelled/postponed. I have accepted either vouchers or postponements to as yet unknown future dates, as I thought that was fair and reasonable. I am not saying "you can't provide exactly what you promised so I'm not paying you". That would be a petty unreasonable reaction to a crisis that is not their fault.

I am not quite sure why you keep flipping it around but it really doesn't even come close to reasonable analogy. At the very least you are suggesting we should be happy paying the same, like your employer, but getting less. Ignoring again how odd a comparison that is....as of now we haven't got anything so we are paying the same and getting nothing. As other people have said we are not here to keep the company solvent. 

Oh I do apologise. I though you were being offered vouchers/future dates, rather than "nothing". I must be mistaken.

happyandcontented

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

I wonder how many people whining that they can't have their money back for a service that the airline/tour operator/hotel can no longer provide through no fault of theirs, at the same time have the hypocrisy to expect their employer, or the government, to carry on paying them for work they can no longer do, or no longer do as well, because of the same reason?

Many have already been made redundant by their employer. Many businesses (including mine) have provided refunds or changed terms of contracts to benefit the consumer rather than the financials of the business. Many business owners are getting next to no support from the Gov and are still doing the right thing. 

Oh I'm sure some are. But others will be taking the "furlough", the self employed support, the business support packages, will be working at home even though their employment contract states they must attend a workplace, expecting full pay even though they can't provide full service, or be not working at all yet expecting 80% pay.

People and companies through no fault of their own are unable to provide their usual service, in some cases any service. If you're expecting travel companies to give a full refund for service they're unable to provide, fine, as long as you're not expecting your employer or the govt to pay you if you can't fulfil your employment contract.  

Not sure employment law and consumer law can really be compared. Surely if you are still employed you expect to be paid regardless of where you work. It is up to the business to decide whether to maintain employment. It isn't acase of the employee being hypocritical. 

Further, I would say that no one is suggesting the travel companies shouldn't receive help/support. What people are saying is they shouldn't use their customers' funds to leverage Government into assistance and let's not forget these companies are UK limited companies. There are clear processes to go through when you can't pay your obligations. These companies will no doubt be furloughing their staff to save 80% of their wages but still not paying back customers monies. Surely that would be the mother of all hypocrisies. 

Only if you think staff costs are the only costs. Maybe they should furlough all their staff, who'd process the refunds then? 

It was a point of principle - if in this crisis you don't cut others some slack when they can't deliver on a contract through no fault of their own, don't expect others to cut you slack when you can't deliver on your contract (employment or otherwise). 

The only way I think of comparing it is if you were an employee who has been made redundant despite there being processes in place to help the business not do that. Would you cut you just say 'hey ho' and  cut your employer "slack"? 

The other issue is many/most of us purchase insurance which protects us against businesses who can't pay their bills. The move by Abta etc prevents us from using such insurance (at this time).

Also annoying is many of these companies are happily posting away on social media saying things like..."what a great season it was before it ended...can't wait to see you all next season" etc whilst sitting on customers monies. It's all a little tasteless imo. 

Anyway, the good companies will shine through in these times (as some already have) and the rest will rightly so get an absolute panning for how they have handled the crisis. 

You really have been whooshed.

I have an employment contract that specifies I must attend a workplace. I can't fulfill that, so my company cuts me some slack and allows me to work at home, even though I can't do some aspects of my job here. They pay me the full amount for doing a partial job. That's a reasonable reaction to the current crisis. They aren't saying "we're not paying you as you can't provide what it says in your contract". That would be a petty unreasonable reaction to a crisis that wasn't my fault.

In the same vein, I've booked 3 upcoming events that have been postponed. I booked them for particular dates which suited us. Those have now been cancelled/postponed. I have accepted either vouchers or postponements to as yet unknown future dates, as I thought that was fair and reasonable. I am not saying "you can't provide exactly what you promised so I'm not paying you". That would be a petty unreasonable reaction to a crisis that is not their fault.

I am not quite sure why you keep flipping it around but it really doesn't even come close to reasonable analogy. At the very least you are suggesting we should be happy paying the same, like your employer, but getting less. Ignoring again how odd a comparison that is....as of now we haven't got anything so we are paying the same and getting nothing. As other people have said we are not here to keep the company solvent. 

Oh I do apologise. I though you were being offered vouchers/future dates, rather than "nothing". I must be mistaken.

Our problem is that the insurance company have made that nearly impossible as they have moved the goalposts. What would you do?

zagfles

happyandcontented said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

JasonUK123 said:

zagfles said:

I wonder how many people whining that they can't have their money back for a service that the airline/tour operator/hotel can no longer provide through no fault of theirs, at the same time have the hypocrisy to expect their employer, or the government, to carry on paying them for work they can no longer do, or no longer do as well, because of the same reason?

Many have already been made redundant by their employer. Many businesses (including mine) have provided refunds or changed terms of contracts to benefit the consumer rather than the financials of the business. Many business owners are getting next to no support from the Gov and are still doing the right thing. 

Oh I'm sure some are. But others will be taking the "furlough", the self employed support, the business support packages, will be working at home even though their employment contract states they must attend a workplace, expecting full pay even though they can't provide full service, or be not working at all yet expecting 80% pay.

People and companies through no fault of their own are unable to provide their usual service, in some cases any service. If you're expecting travel companies to give a full refund for service they're unable to provide, fine, as long as you're not expecting your employer or the govt to pay you if you can't fulfil your employment contract.  

Not sure employment law and consumer law can really be compared. Surely if you are still employed you expect to be paid regardless of where you work. It is up to the business to decide whether to maintain employment. It isn't acase of the employee being hypocritical. 

Further, I would say that no one is suggesting the travel companies shouldn't receive help/support. What people are saying is they shouldn't use their customers' funds to leverage Government into assistance and let's not forget these companies are UK limited companies. There are clear processes to go through when you can't pay your obligations. These companies will no doubt be furloughing their staff to save 80% of their wages but still not paying back customers monies. Surely that would be the mother of all hypocrisies. 

Only if you think staff costs are the only costs. Maybe they should furlough all their staff, who'd process the refunds then? 

It was a point of principle - if in this crisis you don't cut others some slack when they can't deliver on a contract through no fault of their own, don't expect others to cut you slack when you can't deliver on your contract (employment or otherwise). 

The only way I think of comparing it is if you were an employee who has been made redundant despite there being processes in place to help the business not do that. Would you cut you just say 'hey ho' and  cut your employer "slack"? 

The other issue is many/most of us purchase insurance which protects us against businesses who can't pay their bills. The move by Abta etc prevents us from using such insurance (at this time).

Also annoying is many of these companies are happily posting away on social media saying things like..."what a great season it was before it ended...can't wait to see you all next season" etc whilst sitting on customers monies. It's all a little tasteless imo. 

Anyway, the good companies will shine through in these times (as some already have) and the rest will rightly so get an absolute panning for how they have handled the crisis. 

You really have been whooshed.

I have an employment contract that specifies I must attend a workplace. I can't fulfill that, so my company cuts me some slack and allows me to work at home, even though I can't do some aspects of my job here. They pay me the full amount for doing a partial job. That's a reasonable reaction to the current crisis. They aren't saying "we're not paying you as you can't provide what it says in your contract". That would be a petty unreasonable reaction to a crisis that wasn't my fault.

In the same vein, I've booked 3 upcoming events that have been postponed. I booked them for particular dates which suited us. Those have now been cancelled/postponed. I have accepted either vouchers or postponements to as yet unknown future dates, as I thought that was fair and reasonable. I am not saying "you can't provide exactly what you promised so I'm not paying you". That would be a petty unreasonable reaction to a crisis that is not their fault.

I am not quite sure why you keep flipping it around but it really doesn't even come close to reasonable analogy. At the very least you are suggesting we should be happy paying the same, like your employer, but getting less. Ignoring again how odd a comparison that is....as of now we haven't got anything so we are paying the same and getting nothing. As other people have said we are not here to keep the company solvent. 

Oh I do apologise. I though you were being offered vouchers/future dates, rather than "nothing". I must be mistaken.

Our problem is that the insurance company have made that nearly impossible as they have moved the goalposts. What would you do?

Can you not take vouchers and then book when all this is over?

MaebyJade

zagfles said:

Can you not take vouchers and then book when all this is over?

Some travel providers have already hiked their prices up, I assume the rest will follow suit. You're at their mercy, I suspect that a lot of people who accept vouchers will end up going on overpriced holidays that they don't particularly want. They alternative would be letting their voucher expire and lose their money.  

zagfles

MaebyJade said:

zagfles said:

Can you not take vouchers and then book when all this is over?

Some travel providers have already hiked their prices up, I assume the rest will follow suit. You're at their mercy, I suspect that a lot of people who accept vouchers will end up going on overpriced holidays that they don't particularly want. They alternative would be letting their voucher expire and lose their money.  

Some have reduced them, EasyJet are selling loads of flights in the autumn onwards for about £30