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

CKhalvashi

michael1234 said:

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

stoem said:

Am I able to cross examine or ask questions of the witness in court?

Isn't that a question for the solicitor you engaged, rather than random anonymous internet strangers whose experiences may or may not actually be relevant to your case?

Isn't this a forum to ask questions and get answers rather than responding with useless noise?

I'm representing myself, do you really think I keep paying a solicitor to handle a £300 claim? 

I was basing my comment on your earlier remarks about engaging with 'my solicitor' who was "paid for by my household legal insurance", but yes, if you'd need to be paying for this yourself then it wouldn't make any sense to do so for a £300 claim.

And yes, of course the forum is for questions and answers, but my point was that, in the context of legal action, it would be risky to rely on such answers unless able to satisfy yourself that they were credible and relevant - if you don't have access to (cost-effective) legal advice then you might find more qualified input on legally-oriented forums such as Legal Beagles....

I just wanted to know if I am likely able to ask a question of a witness in a small claims court case or not. There's no more to it than that. 

Since your question requires a degree of legal expertise, my advice would be to ask your question here. There are quite a few legally minded folk including fully trained solicitirs (and a fair amount of law students!). https://legalbeagles.info/

Most of all, you are far less likely to be patronised by those with little better to do. (They even had to create a rule to "be friendly" on this forum but sadly as you can see it doesn't work very well).

If you find it possible to report back it would be great to know how you get on.

Sorry, I object to that. I have answered the question OP has asked (which is that it's effectively up to the judge) and offered further advice on how to potentially gather further evidence that may or may not help.

What I personally feel is irrelevant (and has already been explained), but that does not mean I won't accept what OP has been told at face value and assist where possible.

I am also interested in the outcome.

michael1234

CKhalvashi said:

michael1234 said:

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

stoem said:

Am I able to cross examine or ask questions of the witness in court?

Isn't that a question for the solicitor you engaged, rather than random anonymous internet strangers whose experiences may or may not actually be relevant to your case?

Isn't this a forum to ask questions and get answers rather than responding with useless noise?

I'm representing myself, do you really think I keep paying a solicitor to handle a £300 claim? 

I was basing my comment on your earlier remarks about engaging with 'my solicitor' who was "paid for by my household legal insurance", but yes, if you'd need to be paying for this yourself then it wouldn't make any sense to do so for a £300 claim.

And yes, of course the forum is for questions and answers, but my point was that, in the context of legal action, it would be risky to rely on such answers unless able to satisfy yourself that they were credible and relevant - if you don't have access to (cost-effective) legal advice then you might find more qualified input on legally-oriented forums such as Legal Beagles....

I just wanted to know if I am likely able to ask a question of a witness in a small claims court case or not. There's no more to it than that. 

Since your question requires a degree of legal expertise, my advice would be to ask your question here. There are quite a few legally minded folk including fully trained solicitirs (and a fair amount of law students!). https://legalbeagles.info/

Most of all, you are far less likely to be patronised by those with little better to do. (They even had to create a rule to "be friendly" on this forum but sadly as you can see it doesn't work very well).

If you find it possible to report back it would be great to know how you get on.

Sorry, I object to that. I have answered the question OP has asked (which is that it's effectively up to the judge) and offered further advice on how to potentially gather further evidence that may or may not help.

What I personally feel is irrelevant (and has already been explained), but that does not mean I won't accept what OP has been told at face value and assist where possible.

I am also interested in the outcome.

Not sure what you object to - I wasn't aiming my comments at you. But while we're objecting, perhaps you might want to declare your interest in the industry and why you might be keen on seeing claims like these fail?

[Deleted User]

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

stoem said:

Am I able to cross examine or ask questions of the witness in court?

Isn't that a question for the solicitor you engaged, rather than random anonymous internet strangers whose experiences may or may not actually be relevant to your case?

Isn't this a forum to ask questions and get answers rather than responding with useless noise?

I'm representing myself, do you really think I keep paying a solicitor to handle a £300 claim? 

I was basing my comment on your earlier remarks about engaging with 'my solicitor' who was "paid for by my household legal insurance", but yes, if you'd need to be paying for this yourself then it wouldn't make any sense to do so for a £300 claim.

And yes, of course the forum is for questions and answers, but my point was that, in the context of legal action, it would be risky to rely on such answers unless able to satisfy yourself that they were credible and relevant - if you don't have access to (cost-effective) legal advice then you might find more qualified input on legally-oriented forums such as Legal Beagles....

I just wanted to know if I am likely able to ask a question of a witness in a small claims court case or not. There's no more to it than that. 

Well you have to get the witness to turn up first. There is no obligation and Jet2 will only send a local lawyer they paid to mount their defence. Nobody who actually works for Jet2 will be there.

You really just need to focus on your legal arguments. Cite the relevant laws and rules, make sure you have your timeline and all the documents you need.

The judge will ask you some questions, won't expect you to be a legal eagle.

CKhalvashi

michael1234 said:

CKhalvashi said:

michael1234 said:

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

stoem said:

eskbanker said:

stoem said:

Am I able to cross examine or ask questions of the witness in court?

Isn't that a question for the solicitor you engaged, rather than random anonymous internet strangers whose experiences may or may not actually be relevant to your case?

Isn't this a forum to ask questions and get answers rather than responding with useless noise?

I'm representing myself, do you really think I keep paying a solicitor to handle a £300 claim? 

I was basing my comment on your earlier remarks about engaging with 'my solicitor' who was "paid for by my household legal insurance", but yes, if you'd need to be paying for this yourself then it wouldn't make any sense to do so for a £300 claim.

And yes, of course the forum is for questions and answers, but my point was that, in the context of legal action, it would be risky to rely on such answers unless able to satisfy yourself that they were credible and relevant - if you don't have access to (cost-effective) legal advice then you might find more qualified input on legally-oriented forums such as Legal Beagles....

I just wanted to know if I am likely able to ask a question of a witness in a small claims court case or not. There's no more to it than that. 

Since your question requires a degree of legal expertise, my advice would be to ask your question here. There are quite a few legally minded folk including fully trained solicitirs (and a fair amount of law students!). https://legalbeagles.info/

Most of all, you are far less likely to be patronised by those with little better to do. (They even had to create a rule to "be friendly" on this forum but sadly as you can see it doesn't work very well).

If you find it possible to report back it would be great to know how you get on.

Sorry, I object to that. I have answered the question OP has asked (which is that it's effectively up to the judge) and offered further advice on how to potentially gather further evidence that may or may not help.

What I personally feel is irrelevant (and has already been explained), but that does not mean I won't accept what OP has been told at face value and assist where possible.

I am also interested in the outcome.

Not sure what you object to - I wasn't aiming my comments at you. But while we're objecting, perhaps you might want to declare your interest in the industry and why you might be keen on seeing claims like these fail?

I wish OP the best of luck.

Yes, I have an interest in the industry, but that interest doesn't touch packages with flights and has very little overlap with the countries Jet2 works in, which for the avoidance of doubt doesn't include Greece. Also for the avoidance of doubt it has never supplied Jet2.

I'd have thought some expertise on the matter would be helpful, but it appears you feel not.

stoem

Hi all,
the court date is edging closer. 

I've received correspondence from Jet2 to the court stating:
"I write in relation to the above matter to put the Court on notice of the Defendant’s intention to rely on hearsay evidence of B.W.. This evidence is contained within the witness statement of B.W. dated 21 September 2021 and served on 27 September 2021. Mr W is unable to attend the trial due to reasons of proportionality.
This Notice is filed and served in accordance with the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and Civil Procedure Rule 33.2."

In their witness statement, the witness stated that "I was not party to the correspondence exchanged between the Claimant and the hotel and cannot confirm on the content of it, nor am I able to confirm whether or not these changes would have been in place at the time of the Claimant’s scheduled stay".

I do not believe that this witness is in fact anyone I ever spoken to when I called Jet2 twice before cancelling. The witness is male and I only recall speaking to females. 
In fact I have kept a note of the person I spoke to on my final call (the cancellation call) and this call was with someone else, not the witness.

My question is, should I point out that this is the ONLY witness they proposed to present but now will no longer call forward and should I challenge them on the fact that I do not believe this witness was in fact a witness to any of the calls and has never dealt nor communicated with me? 

Do I understand it correctly that I can request for this witness to attend? See this link
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part33#33.4

(1) Where a party –
(a) proposes to rely on hearsay evidence; and
(b) does not propose to call the person who made the original statement to give oral evidence,
the court may, on the application of any other party, permit that party to call the maker of the statement to be cross-examined on the contents of the statement.

and

(1) Where a party –
(a) proposes to rely on hearsay evidence; but
(b) does not propose to call the person who made the original statement to give oral evidence; and
(c) another party wishes to call evidence to attack the credibility of the person who made the statement,
the party who so wishes must give notice of his intention to the party who proposes to give the hearsay statement in evidence.

In a nutshell, Jet2 are not bringing forward any witnesses who can confirm the events that occurred. All email correspondence were with people other than the witness and I am convinced to never have spoken to this witness either.

I feel I should challenge the testimony of this witness altogether as they were not, as far as I can see, part of any of the conversations that took place. If they were then they will be unable to confirm this as they will not attend.

Any suggestions on how this could help my case would be appreciated. If you just want to leave a snarky comment instead then be my guest.

Cheers to those who are genuinely trying to help.

 

CKhalvashi

stoem said:

Hi all,
the court date is edging closer. 

I've received correspondence from Jet2 to the court stating:
"I write in relation to the above matter to put the Court on notice of the Defendant’s intention to rely on hearsay evidence of B.W.. This evidence is contained within the witness statement of B.W. dated 21 September 2021 and served on 27 September 2021. Mr W is unable to attend the trial due to reasons of proportionality.
This Notice is filed and served in accordance with the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and Civil Procedure Rule 33.2."

In their witness statement, the witness stated that "I was not party to the correspondence exchanged between the Claimant and the hotel and cannot confirm on the content of it, nor am I able to confirm whether or not these changes would have been in place at the time of the Claimant’s scheduled stay".

I do not believe that this witness is in fact anyone I ever spoken to when I called Jet2 twice before cancelling. The witness is male and I only recall speaking to females. 
In fact I have kept a note of the person I spoke to on my final call (the cancellation call) and this call was with someone else, not the witness.

My question is, should I point out that this is the ONLY witness they proposed to present but now will no longer call forward and should I challenge them on the fact that I do not believe this witness was in fact a witness to any of the calls and has never dealt nor communicated with me? 

Do I understand it correctly that I can request for this witness to attend? See this link
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part33#33.4

(1) Where a party –
(a) proposes to rely on hearsay evidence; and
(b) does not propose to call the person who made the original statement to give oral evidence,
the court may, on the application of any other party, permit that party to call the maker of the statement to be cross-examined on the contents of the statement.

and

(1) Where a party –
(a) proposes to rely on hearsay evidence; but
(b) does not propose to call the person who made the original statement to give oral evidence; and
(c) another party wishes to call evidence to attack the credibility of the person who made the statement,
the party who so wishes must give notice of his intention to the party who proposes to give the hearsay statement in evidence.

In a nutshell, Jet2 are not bringing forward any witnesses who can confirm the events that occurred. All email correspondence were with people other than the witness and I am convinced to never have spoken to this witness either.

I feel I should challenge the testimony of this witness altogether as they were not, as far as I can see, part of any of the conversations that took place. If they were then they will be unable to confirm this as they will not attend.

Any suggestions on how this could help my case would be appreciated. If you just want to leave a snarky comment instead then be my guest.

Cheers to those who are genuinely trying to help.

 

Good morning,

It may be a manager/supervisor who have the authority of the company to act, and it may also be someone in Jet2's legal department.

I have acted on behalf of a Limited Company before (which Jet2 PLC is, as are its subsidiaries) when I've never personally spoken to the person involved before arriving at court, this is quite normal. I had seen all e-mail correspondence and heard a copy of any relevant call recordings (and made notes) and therefore was in a position to act reasonably.

You can ask for the person to be called, but if this person has listened to anything relevant and seen all correspondence (and even better has a copy of both with them in written form) then I'm not sure what this will achieve, as it will throw the 'hearsay' part away here.

What may go in your favour here would be that the hotel is unable to confirm the measures to their own client, despite these measures being at some time in the past. With Mr W not being present, it makes it difficult for a judge to question them regarding this statement, as to me it'd be a case of picking up the phone and asking what measures were in place on x date.

It may be worth contacting the hotel and local tourist association directly and asking (very nicely) what was in place at that hotel and what the general Covid restrictions were at this time regarding the facilities you require, as if you take the time to do this it should in any case look good on you for achieving what Jet2 supposedly couldn't. Keep all correspondence in writing to both, preferably by e-mail.

Did you get around to SAR'ing Jet2? This likely would have given you evidence of who you'd spoken to in either the call recordings/transcripts.

eskbanker

CKhalvashi said:

What may go in your favour here would be that the hotel is unable to confirm the measures to their own client, despite these measures being at some time in the past. With Mr W not being present, it makes it difficult for a judge to question them regarding this statement, as to me it'd be a case of picking up the phone and asking what measures were in place on x date.

It may be worth contacting the hotel and local tourist association directly and asking (very nicely) what was in place at that hotel and what the general Covid restrictions were at this time regarding the facilities you require, as if you take the time to do this it should in any case look good on you for achieving what Jet2 supposedly couldn't. Keep all correspondence in writing to both, preferably by e-mail.

I could be wrong but understood that Jet2 had effectively already accepted that the hotel facilities were unavailable at the time, based on their initial rebuttal last year, quoted by OP on page 1?

Jet2 then claimed it could have not been known at the time that these closures would still be in place, thereby ignoring our evidence which we submitted (a brochure from the hotel) that stated that these facilities would be closed for the entire season. Jet2 claimed that only in hindsight were we proven right, however we submitted this evidence to them in July before we cancelled and after we (rather than Jet2) found out about the changes to the services at the hotel.

My interpretation of the witness statement was that Jet2 are effectively distancing themselves from the info passed directly from the hotel to OP, to support their stance that they (as package organiser) didn't change the package features, or at least hadn't done so at the time of OP's cancellation.

CKhalvashi

eskbanker said:

CKhalvashi said:

What may go in your favour here would be that the hotel is unable to confirm the measures to their own client, despite these measures being at some time in the past. With Mr W not being present, it makes it difficult for a judge to question them regarding this statement, as to me it'd be a case of picking up the phone and asking what measures were in place on x date.

It may be worth contacting the hotel and local tourist association directly and asking (very nicely) what was in place at that hotel and what the general Covid restrictions were at this time regarding the facilities you require, as if you take the time to do this it should in any case look good on you for achieving what Jet2 supposedly couldn't. Keep all correspondence in writing to both, preferably by e-mail.

I could be wrong but understood that Jet2 had effectively already accepted that the hotel facilities were unavailable at the time, based on their initial rebuttal last year, quoted by OP on page 1?

Jet2 then claimed it could have not been known at the time that these closures would still be in place, thereby ignoring our evidence which we submitted (a brochure from the hotel) that stated that these facilities would be closed for the entire season. Jet2 claimed that only in hindsight were we proven right, however we submitted this evidence to them in July before we cancelled and after we (rather than Jet2) found out about the changes to the services at the hotel.

My interpretation of the witness statement was that Jet2 are effectively distancing themselves from the info passed directly from the hotel to OP, to support their stance that they (as package organiser) didn't change the package features, or at least hadn't done so at the time of OP's cancellation.

I'd missed that part on the reply, but actually it may actually make the situation more complicated (again, despite personally still feeling OP possibly cancelled a little early).

J2 may not have changed anything themselves, but it does raise the question regarding whether facilities OP wanted were actually available at all due to legal restrictions.

I get that most of my travel is either for business or VFR so I'm not typically a 'traditional' tourist (about once since my last passport was issued in 2015), but if I want (for example) a pool, sauna and gym when travelling, I'm often able to find local public facilities (off the normal tourist districts and in areas where normal people live, the last one I used cost about £3 for 2 hours). In OP's situation, it could be that such facilities weren't available at all in Greece, or that region of Greece under Covid legislation.

If OP had booked that hotel because they wanted the facilities on site it may have been impossible for Jet2 to rectify that breach, however the overall situation with this would depend on the legislation in place locally at the time, which I'm not qualified to answer.

There is no clear answer to this, as although J2 are the seller of the package and therefore shouldn't be able to distance themselves from services not performing to contractual specifications, ultimately I personally feel that 3 months was too soon to cancel as nobody knew what the situation would be.

stoem

Thanks everyone.
I do not think I cancelled too early - the full balance was due and I needed to decide whether to pay it and risk a spat with Jet2 afterwards (which as it transpires I would no doubt have had) or to cancel and argue about the deposit. 

Fact is that

• The hotel published changes to facilities on their website with the note that these changes would remain in place for the rest of the season. We knew that the buffet, indoor pool, gym and spa would all be closed.
• I pointed this out to Jet2 BEFORE I cancelled. I called them 3 times before cancelling. They didn't feel it necessary to check with the hotel even at that point. 
• They could have offered a reduction in price but didn't. They could have transferred my deposit to another holiday for free but wanted to charge me £250 (the deposit was £300).
• In essence, they asked me to pay in full for a package that would evidently not be delivered in full. 
  
  

I would compare this to ordering a car with a bunch of features of which several are missing and not getting a reduction in price or the possibility to order a different car that has all the features. 

Jet2 always argued that it was 'only with the benefit of hindsight' that I could have known about these closures. Evidently untrue as I told them about all this before cancelling - it was our foresight that caused us to check. 

They later changed their tune slightly and argued that because the flight was scheduled to go ahead and the hotel was open the holiday could have gone ahead exactly as planned. I will argue that significant changes were known ahead of time. 

Thanks again. 

eskbanker

CKhalvashi said:
...although J2 are the seller of the package and therefore shouldn't be able to distance themselves from services not performing to contractual specifications...

Yes, as package organiser (I think that's their role under the PTRs here, rather than seller), they can't distance themselves from the actual performance of the services, but I think they're trying to distance themselves from the advance info published by the hotel, i.e. asserting that this didn't in itself grant OP cancellation/refund rights - in the context of how the PTRs anticipate changes being handled, it's only when the package organiser notifies the traveller of changes that the relevant rights and remedies apply, and the hotel isn't a party to the contract.