Villa Owner threatening action over reclaimed deposit

markbramhall

Hi
A villa owner is threatening action against us for claiming a refund of our deposit through our credit card company, can the credit card company reverse its decision or can the villa owner pursue us for the deposit in another way?

Background - We booked a holiday (flights and Villa separately) which was due to take place in June last year.

Flights were cancelled and we were under government advice not to travel.  Consequently our insurance policy did not cover the cancellation (specific clause on traveling against government advice). The airline and all other associated holiday rentals refunded the monies pretty quickly.

We spoke to the villa owner regularly and although they wanted us to transfer the rest of the funds for the holiday we agreed we could delay. Once the flights were cancelled we agreed we had to cancel the villa let as we had no way of getting there and travelling would have been illegal at any rate.  The villa owner was disappointed as the ‘resort was open’. We cancelled the Villa but as the deposit was non refundable they said I needed to progress a refund through the insurance policy.  The insurance policy had a clause to say that we couldn’t claim as the government advice was not to travel.

As a last resort, as I had booked on my credit card I put a claim in with them, provided all relevant details and the claim was successful.

The villa owner has now sent a particularly threatening message to say this is unacceptable and that they are considering their options.  Does anyone know where we stand on this? Can the credit card company reverse the decision or can the Villa owner take us to a small claims court or similar?
 Thanks  

J_B

markbramhall said:

The villa owner has now sent a particularly threatening message to say this is unacceptable and that they are considering their options.

Presumably, they've sent the 'threatening message' to you? But, maybe they ought to take it up with the CC company?

As they are considering their options, then let them .... one of their options may be to do nothing!

Aylesbury_Duck

Let them consider their options and come back for advice if they communicate further.  To be honest, I'm surprised the credit card action was successful since the villa owner was able to offer the service you booked.  Whether or not you could get there was not their problem.

davidmcn

J_B said:

markbramhall said:

The villa owner has now sent a particularly threatening message to say this is unacceptable and that they are considering their options.

Presumably, they've sent the 'threatening message' to you? But, maybe they ought to take it up with the CC company?

As I understand it, if there's a dispute after a chargeback then the CC company steps out of it, so it would be a claim by the merchant against the customer. I suspect there is a valid claim there if the property was available for use, though the OP hasn't given us any clues about the amounts or jurisdiction(s) involved.

pbartlett

in general, the fact that the flights were cancelled does not mean you can go ahead and get your deposit back - the villa is there available for you.

i suspect the villa owner is in the right and will contest the chargeback with the card company

as above though i- we do not have the full facts atm

born_again

markbramhall said:

Hi
A villa owner is threatening action against us for claiming a refund of our deposit through our credit card company, can the credit card company reverse its decision or can the villa owner pursue us for the deposit in another way?

Background - We booked a holiday (flights and Villa separately) which was due to take place in June last year.

Flights were cancelled and we were under government advice not to travel.  Consequently our insurance policy did not cover the cancellation (specific clause on traveling against government advice). The airline and all other associated holiday rentals refunded the monies pretty quickly.

We spoke to the villa owner regularly and although they wanted us to transfer the rest of the funds for the holiday we agreed we could delay. Once the flights were cancelled we agreed we had to cancel the villa let as we had no way of getting there and travelling would have been illegal at any rate.  The villa owner was disappointed as the ‘resort was open’. We cancelled the Villa but as the deposit was non refundable they said I needed to progress a refund through the insurance policy.  The insurance policy had a clause to say that we couldn’t claim as the government advice was not to travel.

As a last resort, as I had booked on my credit card I put a claim in with them, provided all relevant details and the claim was successful.

The villa owner has now sent a particularly threatening message to say this is unacceptable and that they are considering their options.  Does anyone know where we stand on this? Can the credit card company reverse the decision or can the Villa owner take us to a small claims court or similar?
 Thanks  

Credit Card co got your money back. So it has nothing further to do with them. 

So YES the Villa owner can chase you through the courts for their money. 
That is part of our script. "While we can claim the money  back for you, if the retailer fails to contest the chargeback. They have the right to pursue you via any means that is available to them, if they feel they have a valid claim on the funds"

Villa owner should have contested the chargeback as they would have won, as the villa was available to use.

wesleyad

born_again said:

Credit Card co got your money back. So it has nothing further to do with them. 

So YES the Villa owner can chase you through the courts for their money. 
That is part of our script. "While we can claim the money  back for you, if the retailer fails to contest the chargeback. They have the right to pursue you via any means that is available to them, if they feel they have a valid claim on the funds"

Villa owner should have contested the chargeback as they would have won, as the villa was available to use.

Sounds like a s75 rather than a chargeback, which I think would mean the company still has time to contest? At least the last time I did it (last year) the money is returned straight away, but the company then has 45 days to contest and reverse if they have evidence. In this case I'd say they would be successful in overturning.

gettingtheresometime

Is there a chance you've misinterpreted the clause re travel against govt advice?
I only ask as I would have thought that not travelling when the govt telling you not to was more valid for an insurance payout than travelling when the govt told you not to (if that makes sense)

mattyprice4004

There's nothing stopping them taking action - you weren't entitled to it back. 
The fact you couldn't get there legally is a 'you' problem - not their loss to take. 

born_again

wesleyad said:

born_again said:

Credit Card co got your money back. So it has nothing further to do with them. 

So YES the Villa owner can chase you through the courts for their money. 
That is part of our script. "While we can claim the money  back for you, if the retailer fails to contest the chargeback. They have the right to pursue you via any means that is available to them, if they feel they have a valid claim on the funds"

Villa owner should have contested the chargeback as they would have won, as the villa was available to use.

Sounds like a s75 rather than a chargeback, which I think would mean the company still has time to contest? At least the last time I did it (last year) the money is returned straight away, but the company then has 45 days to contest and reverse if they have evidence. In this case I'd say they would be successful in overturning.

S75 would not involve the villa owner Credit Card co pay these out. It is simply not cost effective to chase the other party through the courts.
Also S75 would have failed as it was the OP that Breached the contract by not going. 

You have got it wrong way round. Chargeback has a 45 day timescale for a retailer to contest. 
As I said S75 would not involve them. Also S75 would require OP to have signed a letter stating this is a full and final settlement.

Undervalued

markbramhall said:

Hi
A villa owner is threatening action against us for claiming a refund of our deposit through our credit card company, can the credit card company reverse its decision or can the villa owner pursue us for the deposit in another way?

Background - We booked a holiday (flights and Villa separately) which was due to take place in June last year.

Flights were cancelled and we were under government advice not to travel.  Consequently our insurance policy did not cover the cancellation (specific clause on traveling against government advice). The airline and all other associated holiday rentals refunded the monies pretty quickly.

We spoke to the villa owner regularly and although they wanted us to transfer the rest of the funds for the holiday we agreed we could delay. Once the flights were cancelled we agreed we had to cancel the villa let as we had no way of getting there and travelling would have been illegal at any rate.  The villa owner was disappointed as the ‘resort was open’. We cancelled the Villa but as the deposit was non refundable they said I needed to progress a refund through the insurance policy.  The insurance policy had a clause to say that we couldn’t claim as the government advice was not to travel.

As a last resort, as I had booked on my credit card I put a claim in with them, provided all relevant details and the claim was successful.

The villa owner has now sent a particularly threatening message to say this is unacceptable and that they are considering their options.  Does anyone know where we stand on this? Can the credit card company reverse the decision or can the Villa owner take us to a small claims court or similar?
 Thanks  

Like several others who have responded, I don't think you had a valid claim. Yes the villa owner can pursue you though the courts and based on what you have said here they will most likely win.

If it was legal at the time for you to have stayed in the villa then nothing else is their problem. Government advice is just that - advice. A prudent person may well choose to follow it for their own safety but there is no reason why another party should have to meet the cost of you doing so. You were not, as I understand, legally prevented from travelling there and staying in the villa?

The insurance you mention seems to have excluded this risk, as they are entitled to do providing it is clearly set out in the policy terms. If you wanted more comprehensive cover you should have bought a different and no doubt more expensive policy. You didn't and therefore chose to accept some risks yourself. Sadly on this occasion you lost out.