Cooking class canceled by merchant who won't refund vouchers

eskbanker

I'm less convinced about the company's liability to refund than the above posts, on the basis that there are two essentially separate transactions involved, i.e. purchase of a voucher with a debit card and then subsequently the redemption of that voucher in return for a booking on a course.

The company's position seems to be that if they cancel the course, they're obliged to return the purchaser back to the same position as before booking, i.e. having a voucher rather than the cash equivalent, which is the same principle adopted by most retailers with gift cards/vouchers, where any refunds are made to the same means of payment.

I can understand why getting the voucher back is less useful for OP if they're unlikely to be in the area again in the foreseeable future, but in itself that doesn't necessarily put the company on the hook to refund in cash, and likewise it seems unlikely that an attempted chargeback would fail, on the basis that the card-funded transaction, i.e. purchase of a voucher, was fulfilled, in the same way as seen with Groupon and Wowcher threads.

They do suggest that they'll extend the validity of the vouchers if necessary:

6. OUR CANCELLATIONS AND REFUNDS POLICY 

6.1 If we cancel the course that is the subject of the Contract for any reason we will seek to organise an alternative date within a reasonable period of time or extend your voucher expiry date and offer an alternate theme.

Edit: removed an inadvertent double negative re chargeback!

RefluentBeans

eskbanker said:

I'm less convinced about the company's liability to refund than the above posts, on the basis that there are two essentially separate transactions involved, i.e. purchase of a voucher with a debit card and then subsequently the redemption of that voucher in return for a booking on a course.

The company's position seems to be that if they cancel the course, they're obliged to return the purchaser back to the same position as before booking, i.e. having a voucher rather than the cash equivalent, which is the same principle adopted by most retailers with gift cards/vouchers, where any refunds are made to the same means of payment.

I can understand why getting the voucher back is less useful for OP if they're unlikely to be in the area again in the foreseeable future, but in itself that doesn't necessarily put the company on the hook to refund in cash, and likewise it seems unlikely that an attempted chargeback would fail, on the basis that the card-funded transaction, i.e. purchase of a voucher, was fulfilled, in the same way as seen with Groupon and Wowcher threads.

They do suggest that they'll extend the validity of the vouchers if necessary:

6. OUR CANCELLATIONS AND REFUNDS POLICY 

6.1 If we cancel the course that is the subject of the Contract for any reason we will seek to organise an alternative date within a reasonable period of time or extend your voucher expiry date and offer an alternate theme.

I have to somewhat agree here. It feels like a Wowcher sort of model and limits the liability for the business, putting a lot more risk onto the consumer. 

However, the Wowcher business model requires the consumer to redeem a voucher so it is clear you’re buying a voucher rather than an event directly. I don’t know if Ann’s Smart School of Cooking does this step or not, but this appears a crucial step in the buying a voucher business model, without that it appears that the business is operating deceptively. If you book a ticket to a gig, and the gig gets cancelled, they can’t get a round a refund and say ‘well technically what you bought was a voucher and not the actual ticket so no refund for you’. 

If the OP had to redeem a voucher then I think that is somewhat fair game, but outside of that, taken with the very bad terms, I think the contract would appear to be unfair. 

I believe a chargeback would fail though, but if the complaints system doesn’t work OP, you can send a letter before action and I think you’ve got a pretty good case in the courts to be honest. 

Money_Grabber13579

eskbanker said:

I'm less convinced about the company's liability to refund than the above posts, on the basis that there are two essentially separate transactions involved, i.e. purchase of a voucher with a debit card and then subsequently the redemption of that voucher in return for a booking on a course.

The company's position seems to be that if they cancel the course, they're obliged to return the purchaser back to the same position as before booking, i.e. having a voucher rather than the cash equivalent, which is the same principle adopted by most retailers with gift cards/vouchers, where any refunds are made to the same means of payment.

I can understand why getting the voucher back is less useful for OP if they're unlikely to be in the area again in the foreseeable future, but in itself that doesn't necessarily put the company on the hook to refund in cash, and likewise it seems unlikely that an attempted chargeback would fail, on the basis that the card-funded transaction, i.e. purchase of a voucher, was fulfilled, in the same way as seen with Groupon and Wowcher threads.

They do suggest that they'll extend the validity of the vouchers if necessary:

6. OUR CANCELLATIONS AND REFUNDS POLICY 

6.1 If we cancel the course that is the subject of the Contract for any reason we will seek to organise an alternative date within a reasonable period of time or extend your voucher expiry date and offer an alternate theme.

Edit: removed an inadvertent double negative re chargeback!

That’s how I would see this as well. Looking at the website, there is an option to buy a gift voucher, with what is advertised as a significant discount (2 hour cookery class reduced from £129 to £45). Then, if you want to book a cookery class, that is a separate page on the website and you can either pay £129 or you can redeem the voucher. So I think there are two separate transactions here. What I don’t know is whether that approach would be unfair, given that nobody would do anything other than buy a voucher and then redeem it, given the “discount” for doing so is so significant.

eskbanker

Money_Grabber13579 said:

That’s how I would see this as well. Looking at the website, there is an option to buy a gift voucher, with what is advertised as a significant discount (2 hour cookery class reduced from £129 to £45). Then, if you want to book a cookery class, that is a separate page on the website and you can either pay £129 or you can redeem the voucher. So I think there are two separate transactions here. What I don’t know is whether that approach would be unfair, given that nobody would do anything other than buy a voucher and then redeem it, given the “discount” for doing so is so significant.

The vouchers appear to be primarily marketed as gift vouchers, so they'd presumably argue that the splitting into separate transactions would be intended to accommodate different people being involved in each.