Cancelling a non- refundable hotel room

Undervalued

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

tightauldgit said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/15/schedule/2/enacted

4 A term which has the object or effect of permitting the trader to retain sums paid by the consumer where the consumer decides not to conclude or perform the contract, without providing for the consumer to receive compensation of an equivalent amount from the trader where the trader is the party cancelling the contract.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/450440/Unfair_Terms_Main_Guidance.pdf

Fairness is more likely to be achieved for such a term by ensuring that it does not go beyond the ordinary legal position. Generally, where the contract comes to an end because of the fault of the consumer, the business is entitled to hold back from any refund of prepayments what is likely to be reasonably needed to cover either its net costs or the net loss of profit resulting directly from the default (see paragraph 5.14.3 below on the need to avoid double counting). There is no entitlement to any sum that could reasonably be saved by, for example, finding another customer

No cancellation doesn't mean anything as they can't stop you cancelling, non-refundable is typically unfair due to the above. Generally speaking if a hotel is able to rebook your room then at best a small fee for admin could be retained. 

Central London is is a pretty big area, the name of the hotel would probably help in opinions on whether the advertising gives reason to seek a remedy, i.e a full price reduction.  

Just to add is it a debit card or credit card and if credit more than £100 per night?

Unless the hotel sells ALL its rooms for those dates and couldn't accommodate another guest then it would still have lost profit. Which I think is why hotels can and do get away with non-refundable rooms all the time. 

Possibly only rooms of that type, if you book the penthouse and they rebook, having a single room unbooked for the dates doesn't mean they haven't found another customer IMHO and I would take that view in reverse as well. 

Either way the retention of full payment would likely be unfair and thus void, if the consumer went to small claims the trader would need decide whether to seek their costs or the loss of profit and be able able to demonstrate that amount, if claiming loss of profit would at least have some basis of why they didn't find another customer.

That's my understanding of it based on the legislation and guidance.  

Indeed but how much hassle does the OP want in order to avoid a few stops on the tube if the hotel gets awkward about it?

Equally surely looking at Google Maps and a tube map would have been sensible before booking a "non refundable" room!

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

tightauldgit said:

I'd be interested to know if you have any case history or anything of that sort for people buying non-refundable hotel rooms but being able to recover money in court when they cancel? 

Advice given is based on the Consumer Rights Act and the CMA guidance on it, can't really say any more than that.

This from CMA is in a more "digestible" manner than the long guidance doc usually linked to:

https://competitionandmarkets.blog.gov.uk/2019/06/27/holiday-deposits-and-cancellation-fees-are-you-being-treated-fairly/

More from the CMA

https://fairterms.campaign.gov.uk/

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-to-write-fair-contracts#deposits-advance-payment-and-cancellation-charges

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/820541/UCT_04_Deposits.pdf

The CMA also touched on the subject during Covid

Plenty to read and you are welcome to search the case law to see if any cases in a higher court since 2015 have agreed or disagreed with the CMA's interpretation of the legislation  

tightauldgit said: It's such a pervasive practice that it's difficult to believe it would continue so blatantly if it were truly contrary to consumer law. 

Robert Dyas and The Range manage to blatantly break the law, is that difficult to believe? 




Two branded High Street retailers with terms on cancellation that don't comply with The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 and then we've had two threads on here from Hitch A Bike and Bed Kingdom doing the same, maybe they used these two as an example.... 

A lack of enforcement leads to such behaviour becoming normal. The difference with the hotels is that the legislation says "may be unfair" so there isn't direct wording but case by case basis with the CMA giving it's overall opinion on the matter and whilst that is only opinion they obviously have no bias to turn a profit, unlike a hotel company.

Emmia

DullGreyGuy said:

I assume you were happy with the place and price?

It's very close to Mile End tube station that is on the central line.  From there to Tottenham Court Road it's a 14 minute ride and not much of a walk to Covent Gardens. Alternatively you get off earlier at Holborn and switch to the Piccadilly line to get off at Covent Gardens which is the very next stop.

It's more east than I'd count as true central London but not far off. You could be in a truer central London location and have a much longer commute with more changes to get to Covent Gardens!

I'd not bother switching - Holborn Station is really close to Covent Garden (Probably closer than Tottenham Court Road Station) - also Covent Garden Station is a b***dy nightmare, too small, reliant on lifts...

tightauldgit

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Two branded High Street retailers with terms on cancellation that don't comply with The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 and then we've had two threads on here from Hitch A Bike and Bed Kingdom doing the same, maybe they used these two as an example.... 

A lack of enforcement leads to such behaviour becoming normal. The difference with the hotels is that the legislation says "may be unfair" so there isn't direct wording but case by case basis with the CMA giving it's overall opinion on the matter and whilst that is only opinion they obviously have no bias to turn a profit, unlike a hotel company.

Can I believe that a few individual high street chains have either deliberately or unknowingly published terms that don't meet the full requirements of the law? Yes

Can I believe that an entire industry has systematically flouted the law since its inception and yet there's no obvious evidence of a single case ever to have been brought against any hotel chain on the matter? A bit more of a stretch.

Just feels like there should be something a bit more definitive available than some guidance in a document with vague advice. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

tightauldgit said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Two branded High Street retailers with terms on cancellation that don't comply with The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 and then we've had two threads on here from Hitch A Bike and Bed Kingdom doing the same, maybe they used these two as an example.... 

A lack of enforcement leads to such behaviour becoming normal. The difference with the hotels is that the legislation says "may be unfair" so there isn't direct wording but case by case basis with the CMA giving it's overall opinion on the matter and whilst that is only opinion they obviously have no bias to turn a profit, unlike a hotel company.

Can I believe that an entire industry has systematically flouted the law since its inception and yet there's no obvious evidence of a single case ever to have been brought against any hotel chain on the matter? A bit more of a stretch.

Pointed to it before on such topics

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6442661/couriers-lost-parcels-and-unfair-terms

Case law is only set by the higher courts and you can search here

https://www.bailii.org/form/search_cases.html

I don't know of any way to look at small claims cases (which wouldn't set case law but would be interesting none-the-less).  

baser999

The Mile End Road wouldn’t be considered central London, however its location is pretty much bang on on their own website. Not sure why OP would just use the Trivago site and not check out the hotels own site? I’d have expected the hotels own site to have better gallery pictures and information. Ok, go ahead and book through Trivago if it’s cheaper but at least do the research. 

There’s a tube nearby which will get into the Covent Garden area within 30 minutes. When OP refers to Covent Garden, am assuming they’re meaning the area around the Opera House and piazza, not the site of the new flower market which is even further west  

user1977

Even the info on the Trivago site listing says "This hotel is 3 mi (4.8 km) from London Bridge and 4.7 mi (7.5 km) from Big Ben.In London (Tower Hamlets)", and has the hotel's full address.

RefluentBeans

Agree with comments above. Probably not central London. Guessing that Trivago acts as a comparison site (marketplace) so contract doesn’t lie with them. 

With regards to cancelling rooms - I agree that if the room is resold then I don’t really see how they can not refund you (less some admin fee). But equally so, the penthouse argument falls flat when there is a plethora of rooms of the same quality/type. If a hotel sells rooms based on general size and type of bed (single, twin or double) and that’s it; you can’t argue that just because you cancelled a double and they sold a twin, that it’s equivalent to selling your room. 

I agree with what others have said. This is such a common thing in hotels, and the tourism industry in general, that it isn’t legal. I would expect it’s to do with the fact you’re buying a room in a pool of other rooms, just because you cancel a room in that pool doesn’t mean that the room is automatically fulfilled, so unless that pool of rooms fills up, you’re probably not entitled to a refund. Think it’s different for ‘bespoke rooms’ like a penthouse, or a wedding suite, where you buy a specific room rather than a pooled room. Would imagine it’s the same thing when you go to some historic hotels and you buy the ‘King George Suite’ or something. If you cancel and they don’t fill it, you’re still on the hook for it. 

OP - personally I would chalk it to learning to check the website and maps before (especially if it’s a non-refundable room), and just catch the tube. Adds to the authenticity of London trips to catch the tubes anyway! 

SiliconChip

eskbanker said:

SheenaLouise said:

It's The Liquor Hotel- The Cherry & I went through the  Trivago site. 

I just had a quick look and think that this is a Trivago data/mapping issue - the entry for the Cherry doesn't seem to have any meaningful data attached and the location seems to suggest that it's in Trafalgar Square/Charing Cross, which is probably some sort of default, i.e. if its actual location hasn't been mapped properly it's assumed to be exactly in the centre.  The map on the Cherry's own site accurately places it in Mile End, so I don't think you'd be able to claim that the hotel had done anything wrong, and doubt that Trivago would accept liability either....

As I understand it distances "from London" are measured from Charing Cross, so your finding probably does make sense. I'd suggest that the error made by Trivago would give the OP grounds to cancel, but whether it makes sense to do so depends on whether an alternative hotel in the right location can be found at a price the OP deems reasonable. I'd be inclined to stick with the hotel and tube in option, on several occasions I've stayed at a Premier Inn in Ealing because it offered a good combination of easy travel to the places I needed to get to and a much cheaper price than I could get at more central hotels.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

RefluentBeans said:

With regards to cancelling rooms - I agree that if the room is resold then I don’t really see how they can not refund you (less some admin fee). But equally so, the penthouse argument falls flat when there is a plethora of rooms of the same quality/type. If a hotel sells rooms based on general size and type of bed (single, twin or double) and that’s it; you can’t argue that just because you cancelled a double and they sold a twin, that it’s equivalent to selling your room. 

I agree with what others have said. This is such a common thing in hotels, and the tourism industry in general, that it isn’t legal. I would expect it’s to do with the fact you’re buying a room in a pool of other rooms, just because you cancel a room in that pool doesn’t mean that the room is automatically fulfilled, so unless that pool of rooms fills up, you’re probably not entitled to a refund. Think it’s different for ‘bespoke rooms’ like a penthouse, or a wedding suite, where you buy a specific room rather than a pooled room. Would imagine it’s the same thing when you go to some historic hotels and you buy the ‘King George Suite’ or something. If you cancel and they don’t fill it, you’re still on the hook for it. 

That would be my thinking as well, you put it better than I did