Non refundable hotel booking - what are my ACTUAL rights?

born_again

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Hello OP

Hotel can claim costs or loss of profit, not both, if loss of profit they must mitigate by trying to find another customer. 

Terms stating non-refundable are likely to be viewed as unfair under the CRA, supported by CMA guidance.

You need to argue higher, front line staff are unlikely to understand much of this and stick to policy. 

Was waiting for this post 👍👍👍

TBH With these situations. Why are the authorities not doing something to stop this so called unfair situation?

As per OP post. They chose a non refund, as many of us do. Due to it being cheaper than a booking that allows cancelation.
So should the CRA be amended to allow no refunds, in situation like this where the customer has a choice to a low No cancelation/refund booking or pay more & have the right to cancel & refund?
All about personal choice.

Sometimes the law is plain stupid. Which in this case it seems it is 🤷‍♀️

Okell

Alderbank said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Terms stating non-refundable are likely to be viewed as unfair under the CRA, supported by CMA guidance.

...but this was not a 'take it or leave it' no choice contract.

The OP had the option to either pay the full rate and the business would stand the full loss if they cancelled, or alternatively pay a discounted price where it was very clear that in return for the lower profit the contract would not entitle the OP to a refund.

A contract should be fair to both parties.
Choosing the discounted deal and also demanding a refund would in my opinion have been unfair to the trader.

If the hotel offers 2 and 3 star accommodation, is it fair to pay 2 star price and insist on a 3 star room?

But is that true even if the hotel is successful in getting someone else to book the OP's accommodation?

You're right that if the OP could have afforded to pay the extra £100 for a booking where they could cancel and get there money back, then they are entitled to their money back regardless of whether the hotel can re-let the room or not.  So if the hotel can't re-let then they - the hotel -  have to stand the full loss on the room.

But I'm not convinced by the other proposition that the law would allow the hotel to profit from in effect having sold the same room twice in the event that they end up with 100% occupancy.

Seems to me that the gamble anyone is taking who books a non-cancellable room is not that if they cancel they won't get their money back, but that they only won't get theri money back if the hotel can't relet the room

Seems a fair arrangement to both sides to me

Okell

photome said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Hello OP

Hotel can claim costs or loss of profit, not both, if loss of profit they must mitigate by trying to find another customer. 

Terms stating non-refundable are likely to be viewed as unfair under the CRA, supported by CMA guidance.

You need to argue higher, front line staff are unlikely to understand much of this and stick to policy. 

I nearly always book non refundable rooms . If I end up not being able to go I would forfeit the charge, are you saying we could all book non refundable rooms and then decide not to go and claim a refund ?...

I think the argument is that if the hotel successfully re-lets the room(s) and enjoys 100% occupancy, then you (and everybody else who cancelled) should be entitled to a refund.

photome said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Hello OP

Hotel can claim costs or loss of profit, not both, if loss of profit they must mitigate by trying to find another customer. 

Terms stating non-refundable are likely to be viewed as unfair under the CRA, supported by CMA guidance.

You need to argue higher, front line staff are unlikely to understand much of this and stick to policy. 

... the end result in that would be no cheap rooms for anyone as the hotels would only have the dearer refundable rate

or hotels might find that they have to drop their prices in the face of a drop in demand for their rooms...

(I really don't know the answer and I'm not an expert in demand/price elasticity of hotel rooms, but it simply seems odd to me that the law would be happy with traders selling the same thing twice to different people, but providing nothing in return to one of those people)

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Alderbank said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Terms stating non-refundable are likely to be viewed as unfair under the CRA, supported by CMA guidance.

A contract should be fair to both parties.

Indeed they should but whoever wrote the list of terms that may be classed as unfair decided those terms that have the object or effect of requiring that, where the consumer decides not to conclude or perform the contract, the consumer must pay the trader a disproportionately high sum in compensation or for services which have not been supplied may be tested for fairness. 

Equally as is 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.

I wonder if the hotel will pay the room rate if for some reason they can't offer the room? 

photome said:

the end result in that would be no cheap rooms for anyone as the hotels would only have the dearer refundable rate

Regulation usually increases costs but ultimately the hotel market, and accommodation market in general, is highly competitive. 

As with everything it is supply and demand, if price increases reach a point where people don't pay prices will fall.

If price increases are of concern to you, you should be more bothered by these tech companies that have created an unnecessary middleman taking cuts of up to 25% on services by creating booking platforms that we used to live without.  

Okell said:

I think the argument is that if the hotel successfully re-lets the room(s) and enjoys 100% occupancy, then you (and everybody else who cancelled) should be entitled to a refund.

Even if they don't let the room to another they have less costs to host an empty room (granted minor as the biggest expenses are day to day running costs). 

If the term is unfair then it's void and the ordinary position applies which is costs or loss of profit. 

powerful_Rogue

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

If the term is unfair then it's void and the ordinary position applies which is costs or loss of profit. 

I'm still yet to see a forum post/reddit post where someone has gone through the small claims court and been refunded.

The same with air travel. I'm sure if it was that cut and shut then Mr Lewis would have been all over it.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

powerful_Rogue said:

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

If the term is unfair then it's void and the ordinary position applies which is costs or loss of profit. 

I'm still yet to see a forum post/reddit post where someone has gone through the small claims court and been refunded.

The same with air travel. I'm sure if it was that cut and shut then Mr Lewis would have been all over it.

CAA discusses the matter over airline travel:

https://www.caa.co.uk/publication/download/17375

Noting certain fees the airline does not suffer if the passenger does not fly should be refunded.

They do note

 it is not possible to predict with perfect accuracy the number of passengers that will book tickets for a particular flight and therefore whether, in circumstances where a passenger has cancelled their ticket, that this particular ticket has been resold to another passenger (except for cases where the flight is fully booked). Therefore, the CAA does not consider that a process for mitigating passengers’ losses based on whether a forfeited ticket has been re-sold would be achievable in practical terms.

Although it is not often a business's inability to do something gives them immunity from abiding by legislation... 

Would likely require a higher court case where the airlines will pay top dollar to retain the status quo. 

"Haven't you heard it's a battle of words the poster bearer cried" 

In terms of hotels, as loathed as I am to reference them, Which touch on this:

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/can-i-claim-back-a-non-refundable-deposit-aHwOj3S21AWP

So it's not like is some totally obscure thing.

Mr Lewis has his agenda to serve, if such a matter fell within that I'm sure he'd shout about it  

GDB2222

We should all:

Book refundable rooms
cancel at the last possible minute to get the refund
Ring the hotel up and ask if they have a room available at a really good rate

Grumpy_chap

powerful_Rogue said: 

I'm still yet to see a forum post/reddit post where someone has gone through the small claims court and been refunded.

The same with air travel. I'm sure if it was that cut and shut then Mr Lewis would have been all over it.

I am not sure that the comparison between hotel rooms and air travel is a particularly good one.
AIUI - airlines often have a business model based around over-selling more seats than the plane has and the pricing has a built in expectation of a certain quantity of no-shows.
Do hotels have the similar model?

The fees that airlines have to refund if the passenger does not fly tends to be taxes and the airline is permitted to apply an admin fee for processing the refund of these cost elements.

user1977

Grumpy_chap said:

powerful_Rogue said: 

I'm still yet to see a forum post/reddit post where someone has gone through the small claims court and been refunded.

The same with air travel. I'm sure if it was that cut and shut then Mr Lewis would have been all over it.

I am not sure that the comparison between hotel rooms and air travel is a particularly good one.
AIUI - airlines often have a business model based around over-selling more seats than the plane has and the pricing has a built in expectation of a certain quantity of no-shows.
Do hotels have the similar model?

Probably not that far apart. I expect hotels do account for the likely amount of late cancellations and overbook. And some of the budget airlines don't overbook.

DullGreyGuy

IvanOpinion said:

GDB2222 said:

We should all:

Book refundable rooms
cancel at the last possible minute to get the refund
Ring the hotel up and ask if they have a room available at a really good rate

I know someone who has successfully done that.
The same person has also been known to walk into hotels late at night, ask if there are rooms available, and then offers them a fraction of their room rate to occupy it. Most of the time his offer has been accepted.
Not for me though since I would find it far too stressful.

Then cite the case reference so the judgement can be looked up otherwise it sounds like pub chat like the ex colleague who claimed his grapes were used in an award winning wine but was caught out when he said he grew chardonnay and yet chardonnay arent included in the blend of the wine