Business imposes additional costs after price is agreed

DullGreyGuy

sheramber said:

Is it likely  that they would not get another booking, at the new price, if you cancelled?

presumably, you booked early in case they became  fully booked if you waited later.

They're offering a full refund so no need to argue if they will get a new booking or not. 

ArbitraryRandom

DullGreyGuy said:

sheramber said:

Is it likely  that they would not get another booking, at the new price, if you cancelled?

presumably, you booked early in case they became  fully booked if you waited later.

They're offering a full refund so no need to argue if they will get a new booking or not. 

I think that post was in response to the suggestion they'd rather risk not having a booking for that slot (if they refund the OP) than honour the price - Sheramber is suggesting it might not be much of a risk if they are popular/normally busy as they have some months to take a booking at the new price. 

RefluentBeans

I’m fairly sure that companies can raise the price of service - consider that TV providers like Sky can do so mid-contract. But they have to offer an exit to the contract. 

You can, and legally could, have a full refund and then find somewhere else. If you sue them that’ll be what you end up with - you wouldn’t get specific performance to have the dogs in the kennels. 

You can try and appeal to them, but I’m not sure it would work. Saying that - £30 is such a small amount of money for a business it’s surprising that they care that much. I would hazard a guess to say they’ve put the price up more for new bookings but still need more money to be sure they’d be able to provide the service and that £30 was a lesser amount than they’ve put the price up for new customers. Not great, but if you really want to show your displeasure then take the refund. Of course, double check elsewhere first to ensure you’re not going to get charge more than you’d have to pay with the increase. 

ArbitraryRandom

RefluentBeans said:

I’m fairly sure that companies can raise the price of service - consider that TV providers like Sky can do so mid-contract. But they have to offer an exit to the contract. 

They can only do that if it says in the contract that they can... which most telecom contracts do  

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

ArbitraryRandom said:

RefluentBeans said:

I’m fairly sure that companies can raise the price of service - consider that TV providers like Sky can do so mid-contract. But they have to offer an exit to the contract. 

They can only do that if it says in the contract that they can... which most telecom contracts do  

It's not just that it's included but also that instead of saying "well maybe we'll put the price up at some random point, by some random amount", these terms state the increase will be at the end of March and will be 3.9% + the rate of inflation (or something along those lines) so the extra costs are anticipated at the time the customer signs up. 

ArbitraryRandom

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

ArbitraryRandom said:

RefluentBeans said:

I’m fairly sure that companies can raise the price of service - consider that TV providers like Sky can do so mid-contract. But they have to offer an exit to the contract. 

They can only do that if it says in the contract that they can... which most telecom contracts do  

It's not just that it's included but also that instead of saying "well maybe we'll put the price up at some random point, by some random amount", these terms state the increase will be at the end of March and will be 3.9% + the rate of inflation (or something along those lines) so the extra costs are anticipated at the time the customer signs up. 

Yes, I think it's called an escalator clause?

On a personal note, I recently had a quote (a couple of quotes actually from different traders) for some building work and they included a line saying basically they'd absorb materials cost increases up to x percent but any additional increase would be for the customer to pay on completion - which given I'm paying deposits now for work to be carried out in March, and given the dramatic increase in material costs over the last year or two, seems more than fair (though I did get him to agree to give me a firm price before placing the actual order). 

One of the builders has been doing a fair bit of work for me over the last year and has been saying otherwise he'd just have to refuse to quote for supply and fit (I'd have to buy the materials if he gives me a list) purely because of the risk to his bottom line quoting 6-12 months ahead. 

Only commenting as I've had work done on a few properties over the years and it's the first time I've seen that in a quote (vs an estimate). 

HillStreetBlues

user1977 said:

It would have been better if they had clarified it contractually, but I don't think it's that unreasonable to allow for prices to be adjusted if a booking is made 16 months in advance of the service being provided.

Are you just objecting to the price increase out of principle, or is it actually now uncompetitive?

But both parties knew it's 16 months away, 
Part of booking ahead is getting a lower price against the risk of losing the deposit.

Hoenir

sheramber said:

Is it likely  that they would not get another booking, at the new price, if you cancelled?

presumably, you booked early in case they became  fully booked if you waited later.

The fact that the business owners are sticking to their position. Suggests that they with have no problem in filling the vacancy. No need to discount their prices to attract business. The 10% increase in minimum wage plus all the additional employer on costs wouldn't have expected. 

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

ArbitraryRandom said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

ArbitraryRandom said:

RefluentBeans said:

I’m fairly sure that companies can raise the price of service - consider that TV providers like Sky can do so mid-contract. But they have to offer an exit to the contract. 

They can only do that if it says in the contract that they can... which most telecom contracts do  

It's not just that it's included but also that instead of saying "well maybe we'll put the price up at some random point, by some random amount", these terms state the increase will be at the end of March and will be 3.9% + the rate of inflation (or something along those lines) so the extra costs are anticipated at the time the customer signs up. 

Yes, I think it's called an escalator clause?

On a personal note, I recently had a quote (a couple of quotes actually from different traders) for some building work and they included a line saying basically they'd absorb materials cost increases up to x percent but any additional increase would be for the customer to pay on completion - which given I'm paying deposits now for work to be carried out in March, and given the dramatic increase in material costs over the last year or two, seems more than fair (though I did get him to agree to give me a firm price before placing the actual order). 

One of the builders has been doing a fair bit of work for me over the last year and has been saying otherwise he'd just have to refuse to quote for supply and fit (I'd have to buy the materials if he gives me a list) purely because of the risk to his bottom line quoting 6-12 months ahead. 

Only commenting as I've had work done on a few properties over the years and it's the first time I've seen that in a quote (vs an estimate). 

Does make you wonder if they’ve just priced the job with materials at x percent increase already!

What would make it fair is the balancing term of reducing the price if materials instead fall beyond x percent, as unlikely as that may be  

ArbitraryRandom

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

ArbitraryRandom said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

ArbitraryRandom said:

RefluentBeans said:

I’m fairly sure that companies can raise the price of service - consider that TV providers like Sky can do so mid-contract. But they have to offer an exit to the contract. 

They can only do that if it says in the contract that they can... which most telecom contracts do  

It's not just that it's included but also that instead of saying "well maybe we'll put the price up at some random point, by some random amount", these terms state the increase will be at the end of March and will be 3.9% + the rate of inflation (or something along those lines) so the extra costs are anticipated at the time the customer signs up. 

Yes, I think it's called an escalator clause?

On a personal note, I recently had a quote (a couple of quotes actually from different traders) for some building work and they included a line saying basically they'd absorb materials cost increases up to x percent but any additional increase would be for the customer to pay on completion - which given I'm paying deposits now for work to be carried out in March, and given the dramatic increase in material costs over the last year or two, seems more than fair (though I did get him to agree to give me a firm price before placing the actual order). 

One of the builders has been doing a fair bit of work for me over the last year and has been saying otherwise he'd just have to refuse to quote for supply and fit (I'd have to buy the materials if he gives me a list) purely because of the risk to his bottom line quoting 6-12 months ahead. 

Only commenting as I've had work done on a few properties over the years and it's the first time I've seen that in a quote (vs an estimate). 

Does make you wonder if they’ve just priced the job with materials at x percent increase already!

What would make it fair is the balancing term of reducing the price if materials instead fall beyond x percent, as unlikely as that may be  

You'd think, but the quote is competitive and the standard of work (that he's done previously) is excellent, so I think it's fair, especially given I have the option of buying the materials myself if I think the risk of the price going up between now and then is too high - plus when I checked I couldn't buy/get delivered what was needed commercially for the price he quotes  (and has charged for other jobs) via his trade contacts  

Essentially I guess what I'm saying is the same as I said to the OP at the start - if I'm happy with his work for the price and want to keep using him for other jobs then sometimes there needs to be some pragmatic flexibility vs 'principle' of if a contract is strictly enforceable.