We have taken Jet2 to court over refusing refund of holiday deposit - and won

stoem

Hi @fred246 yes the claim is for £300. However it is also a matter of right or wrong - in my opinion it's my £300 to keep not theirs. I didn't breach the contract, they did.
I am confident that they will not send someone to court or spend more time on this than they have already. I on the other hand have plenty of time. They have until the end of May after which time I will proceed with the claim. My solicitor thinks I have very good grounds to bring the claim and a good chance of winning it even if it goes to court. 

stoem

Michael_Bear said:

@Browntoa regarding your 2nd post, is that relevant and easy jet accepted liability in that event from 2015. I dont think that comment added any value.

@stoem good luck! As @Browntoa well stated in their first comment my only concern is you didn't give Jet2 chance to rectify, or did you give them opportunity first before cancelling?

Late reply I know but this is slow moving. 
Yes I gave them opportunity to rectify by offering that they could keep my deposit indefinitely and I use it on another holiday with them. They refused and only offered to transfer the deposit to another holiday with a £50pp admin charge (there's 5 of us...).
I didn't have another holiday booked to transfer the deposit to nor did it make sense to book a new holiday in the middle of a pandemic nor did it make sense to lose £250 over it. I would have been happy for them to keep my deposit until holidays were possible again and then let me use it but they said no. 

CKhalvashi

eskbanker said:

The relevant legal case will be based on Regulation 12 of the Package Travel Regulations 2018, and will rely on being able to argue that the changes were significant enough to trigger cancellation rights:

(7) Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) to (6), in the event of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances occurring at the place of destination or its immediate vicinity and which significantly affect—

(a) the performance of the package, or

(b) the carriage of passengers to the destination,

the traveller may terminate the package travel contract before the start of the package without paying any termination fee.

(8) Where the package travel contract is terminated under paragraph (7), the traveller is entitled to a full refund of any payments made for the package but is not entitled to additional compensation.

I'd argue that 3 months before is not a reasonable time to cancel due to the fast moving events.

There was not (at that time) a significant danger that the clauses under paragraphs 7a or 7b would not be complied with, there likely would have been 4 weeks before.

Even at the 4 week mark, subject to FCO advice, there would contractually have been chances for Jet2 to remedy under Section 11, before the actions that OP took under Section 12 would have even come close to being invoked.

I would therefore consider Section 12, paragraphs 2-4 to be more appropriate than paragraph 7, and it seems that this is what Jet2 are relying on.

eskbanker

CKhalvashi said:

eskbanker said:

The relevant legal case will be based on Regulation 12 of the Package Travel Regulations 2018, and will rely on being able to argue that the changes were significant enough to trigger cancellation rights:

(7) Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) to (6), in the event of unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances occurring at the place of destination or its immediate vicinity and which significantly affect—

(a) the performance of the package, or

(b) the carriage of passengers to the destination,

the traveller may terminate the package travel contract before the start of the package without paying any termination fee.

(8) Where the package travel contract is terminated under paragraph (7), the traveller is entitled to a full refund of any payments made for the package but is not entitled to additional compensation.

I'd argue that 3 months before is not a reasonable time to cancel due to the fast moving events.

There was not (at that time) a significant danger that the clauses under paragraphs 7a or 7b would not be complied with, there likely would have been 4 weeks before.

Even at the 4 week mark, subject to FCO advice, there would contractually have been chances for Jet2 to remedy under Section 11, before the actions that OP took under Section 12 would have even come close to being invoked.

I would therefore consider Section 12, paragraphs 2-4 to be more appropriate than paragraph 7, and it seems that this is what Jet2 are relying on.

Agreed - I hadn't picked up on how far in advance OP chose to cancel, which, as you say, weakens his case.  To me it still boils down to whether or not the likely unavailability of certain facilities at that hotel constituted a significant change (in the context of the PTR definitions), so time will tell if a court sees it that way, or indeed if it gets that far....

JJC1956

Am I missing something here, usually holiday companies will book you into another hotel with like for like facilities to meet their obligations to the passengers. Did this not happen in this case? Or is the OP holding back some of the information.
I talked to Jet2 last summer whilst my friend was sitting next to me, and asked them why on 2 occasions they had told him that everything was OK with his holiday when I knew that his hotel was closed, they were going to tell him at the airport on arrival, that there was a change of hotel, which in this case wasn’t going to suit him. If Jet2 were aware of building issues at the OP’s hotel surely they would offer alternative accommodation. Keeping everybody happy (well almost everybody).

CKhalvashi

JJC1956 said:

Am I missing something here, usually holiday companies will book you into another hotel with like for like facilities to meet their obligations to the passengers. Did this not happen in this case? Or is the OP holding back some of the information.
I talked to Jet2 last summer whilst my friend was sitting next to me, and asked them why on 2 occasions they had told him that everything was OK with his holiday when I knew that his hotel was closed, they were going to tell him at the airport on arrival, that there was a change of hotel, which in this case wasn’t going to suit him. If Jet2 were aware of building issues at the OP’s hotel surely they would offer alternative accommodation. Keeping everybody happy (well almost everybody).

This would have been one of the available remedies under Section 11 available to Jet2.

The full legislation is here, apologies, I should have linked it when mentioning specific legislation without going into further details.

eskbanker

JJC1956 said:

Am I missing something here, usually holiday companies will book you into another hotel with like for like facilities to meet their obligations to the passengers. Did this not happen in this case? Or is the OP holding back some of the information.
I talked to Jet2 last summer whilst my friend was sitting next to me, and asked them why on 2 occasions they had told him that everything was OK with his holiday when I knew that his hotel was closed, they were going to tell him at the airport on arrival, that there was a change of hotel, which in this case wasn’t going to suit him. If Jet2 were aware of building issues at the OP’s hotel surely they would offer alternative accommodation. Keeping everybody happy (well almost everybody).

You seem to have missed the situation that it wasn't anything to do with 'building issues' but Covid-related unavailability of certain facilities.  Therefore, the chances are that other hotels in the vicinity would also have been in the same position, but the point is that, by unilaterally pulling the plug three months in advance, OP is unlikely to have given Jet2 the opportunity to offer alternatives and so Jet2 are regarding it as a customer-initiated cancellation.

CKhalvashi said:

The full legislation is here, apologies, I should have linked it when mentioning specific legislation without going into further details.

Perhaps a bit pedantic and there's unlikely to be any significant difference (if any at all), but that link goes to a draft, the enacted legislation itself is at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/634/contents/made

stoem

eskbanker said:

You seem to have missed the situation that it wasn't anything to do with 'building issues' but Covid-related unavailability of certain facilities.  Therefore, the chances are that other hotels in the vicinity would also have been in the same position, but the point is that, by unilaterally pulling the plug three months in advance, OP is unlikely to have given Jet2 the opportunity to offer alternatives and so Jet2 are regarding it as a customer-initiated cancellation.

The reason I cancelled at that time (having phoned them once before already enquiring about our options) was that the full balance for the holiday was due. Given the stance they took during the call it was clear that it would be wise for me to argue with them over the deposit than over the entire £3.5k.  
No alternative accommodation or holiday was offered, nor was a free transfer of the deposit to another holiday. 

For the sake of £300 they would apparently rather lose a return customer then to hold onto my money for the next holiday which we would inevitably would have taken with them. As a business owner myself I find that insane but there you go.

eskbanker

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

You seem to have missed the situation that it wasn't anything to do with 'building issues' but Covid-related unavailability of certain facilities.  Therefore, the chances are that other hotels in the vicinity would also have been in the same position, but the point is that, by unilaterally pulling the plug three months in advance, OP is unlikely to have given Jet2 the opportunity to offer alternatives and so Jet2 are regarding it as a customer-initiated cancellation.

The reason I cancelled at that time (having phoned them once before already enquiring about our options) was that the full balance for the holiday was due. Given the stance they took during the call it was clear that it would be wise for me to argue with them over the deposit than over the entire £3.5k.  
No alternative accommodation or holiday was offered, nor was a free transfer of the deposit to another holiday.

Yes, I understand why you did what you did but was just highlighting that there are two sides to every story, so it doesn't do any harm to recognise the strengths and weaknesses of the other one when you're looking at going legal, rather than believing that you have a completely watertight case that can't fail.

As I said right at the start, the crux of the debate is likely to be whether or not the unavailability of some facilities constitutes a significant change in terms of the PTRs - you obviously contend that this is the case and that it would still be so several months later, so assert that Jet2 should have told you about them and given you the option of a refund of what you'd paid.

Their case would seem to be that the change wasn't significant (in the context of the primary characteristics listed in schedule 1 of the PTRs) and/or that it was too early to have that conversation - bear in mind that most holiday companies were only planning a week or two ahead last summer when reviewing bookings in a fast-changing environment, so there was no chance they'd be offering alternative arrangements in July for an October booking for a hotel that was still due to be open (but they'd reserve the right to do so if applicable closer to departure).

It sounds like they probably advised you of this line of thinking when you discussed the situation with them on the phone, so it should have been clear that they wouldn't (willingly) agree that you were entitled to a refund of your deposit, so it'll come down to a court's interpretation of PTRs schedule 1, and in particular the 'main features' of the accommodation as per paragraph 5....

CKhalvashi

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

You seem to have missed the situation that it wasn't anything to do with 'building issues' but Covid-related unavailability of certain facilities.  Therefore, the chances are that other hotels in the vicinity would also have been in the same position, but the point is that, by unilaterally pulling the plug three months in advance, OP is unlikely to have given Jet2 the opportunity to offer alternatives and so Jet2 are regarding it as a customer-initiated cancellation.

The reason I cancelled at that time (having phoned them once before already enquiring about our options) was that the full balance for the holiday was due. Given the stance they took during the call it was clear that it would be wise for me to argue with them over the deposit than over the entire £3.5k. 
No alternative accommodation or holiday was offered, nor was a free transfer of the deposit to another holiday. 

For the sake of £300 they would apparently rather lose a return customer then to hold onto my money for the next holiday which we would inevitably would have taken with them. As a business owner myself I find that insane but there you go.

The issue with this logic is that the net margins in the travel industry are generally razor thin. You're looking in the region of a 10% margin on the accommodation part, and this is before marketing, staff, currency conversion etc.

Jet2 should have been given the chance to rectify the situation, which may have included a change of hotel before the balance was due, or an outright cancellation nearer the time (under the abovementioned legislation). You did not give Jet2 the ability to rectify and potential breach of contract, instead choosing completely freely to cancel.

In my personal opinion (and I have to stress this is a personal not professional opinion to stop michael1234 from suing me) as you have freely terminated your side of a binding contract with no legitimate breach of contract at that time, the loss is yours and not someone elses.