Should I involve the ombudsman - can't get a refund

AVFC4life_2

We booked a package holiday in Spain with On the Beach. We booked in Jan 2020 to depart Oct 2020. We also took out separate Travel Insurance with Direct Line on 12th March 2020 and were told we were covered for FCO guidance if it changed. Travel was permitted when we took the policy. We cancelled our holiday on 4th Oct 2020 as current FCDO guidance stated ' FCDO continues to advise against all non essential travel to Spain, based on current assessment of Covid-19 risks in the country'. We have since approached ATOL, On the beach and our VISA for a section 75 and have been refused a refund. Our insurer has now also refused a refund but has offered a voucher (cost of flights) to be used by April 2022. This is based on the flights and hotel still being available, however FCO advised not to travel. This seems to be contrary to CMA advise. Can anyone offer any advice on next steps? Thank you

JGB1955

You cancelled the holiday as you were disinclined to travel. The flight and hotel were available. It was not illegal to travel. AIUI claiming on your insurance is the only option left to you. I think the voucher is the best you can expect.

sheramber

If On the Beach had cancelled you would be due a refund.
But you cancelled so are not entitled to a refund from On the Beach
Your only claim is from your insurance company.
If you are not happy with their response then follow the complaints procedure which will be detailed on your policy document.

mattyprice4004

CMA guidance was just that - guidance. On The Beach and many others chose not to follow it, and thus if you didn't want to go (regardless of FCO guidance) then that's on you, and is a job for insurance. 
Why have insurance refused your claim? If you're not covered for disinclination to travel (which this is) then you'll likely get nowhere unfortunately. 

eskbanker

mattyprice4004 said:

CMA guidance was just that - guidance. On The Beach and many others chose not to follow it

While you're right about their initial generic response, they have subsequently taken much more proactive action in pursuing travel companies, securing legally-binding undertakings from some and continuing to pressurise others.  This has mainly been about compliance with refund obligations for holidays cancelled by package providers (rather than customers) but in their most recent open letter to the industry they've made it clear that they expect adverse FCDO advice to warrant refunds, so it should be expected that they'll be prepared to take enforcement action where necessary:

22. Accordingly, the CMA considers that where consumers terminate their package because around their departure date there is FCDO advice against travel to their holiday destination or its immediate vicinity based on health risks and general consequences resulting from the presence of COVID-19 there, they are likely to be entitled to a full refund under regulation 12(7)-(8) of the PTRs. In particular, in the CMA’s view, the mere fact that the flight is still operating, and the accommodation is open is not, in and of itself, a sufficient basis to deny a consumer a full refund. This is because the CMA considers that organisers need to take into account the consumer’s reasonable expectations of the package taken as a whole when determining whether a right to a full refund has arisen, including expectations as to safety, enjoyment and freedom from anxiety.

23. We would therefore expect any package travel operator seeking to refuse consumers a full refund, notwithstanding FCDO advice against travel, to explain fully the basis upon which they disagree that the FCDO advice reflects circumstances significantly affecting the consumer’s package or travel to the destination, and to provide detailed information about the evidence on which they have relied in reaching that assessment. The organiser would also need to be ready to defend their stance in a court, in the event of consumers bringing court proceedings to obtain a full refund.

mattyprice4004

eskbanker said:

mattyprice4004 said:

CMA guidance was just that - guidance. On The Beach and many others chose not to follow it

While you're right about their initial generic response, they have subsequently taken much more proactive action in pursuing travel companies, securing legally-binding undertakings from some and continuing to pressurise others.  This has mainly been about compliance with refund obligations for holidays cancelled by package providers (rather than customers) but in their most recent open letter to the industry they've made it clear that they expect adverse FCDO advice to warrant refunds, so it should be expected that they'll be prepared to take enforcement action where necessary:

22. Accordingly, the CMA considers that where consumers terminate their package because around their departure date there is FCDO advice against travel to their holiday destination or its immediate vicinity based on health risks and general consequences resulting from the presence of COVID-19 there, they are likely to be entitled to a full refund under regulation 12(7)-(8) of the PTRs. In particular, in the CMA’s view, the mere fact that the flight is still operating, and the accommodation is open is not, in and of itself, a sufficient basis to deny a consumer a full refund. This is because the CMA considers that organisers need to take into account the consumer’s reasonable expectations of the package taken as a whole when determining whether a right to a full refund has arisen, including expectations as to safety, enjoyment and freedom from anxiety.

23. We would therefore expect any package travel operator seeking to refuse consumers a full refund, notwithstanding FCDO advice against travel, to explain fully the basis upon which they disagree that the FCDO advice reflects circumstances significantly affecting the consumer’s package or travel to the destination, and to provide detailed information about the evidence on which they have relied in reaching that assessment. The organiser would also need to be ready to defend their stance in a court, in the event of consumers bringing court proceedings to obtain a full refund.

Ah, that's very interesting! Thank you - I'll have a read. 
Very useful and I'm sure welcome by many, given we're probably nowhere near the end of the disruption yet. 

AVFC4life_2

Thank you for this advice. I had found some of this information from the CMA already, but there’s a bit more on your reply so I have added this to my response for the insurer. I actually secured the insurance before the FCO guidance and I have found a section in there terms which confirm that we are covered if FCO guidance advises against all but essential travel (which they had also verbally confirmed when we purchased it) so not sure why they are still not wanting to pay out (seems to be based on the flights and hotel being available), but I’ve included all the evidence now and paperwork. Many thanks for all the replies.