Swimming lesson provider didn't process cancellation, now chasing late fees?

GavHTFC

eskbanker said:

GavHTFC said:

eskbanker said:

Did the July email state, or imply, that cancellation could be invoked simply by replying to the email, rather than requiring the standard defined process to be followed?

To give you the exact wording used: "During routine attendance checks, it has been identified that your ******* has not been attending the above sessions for some time now. Please can you let us know if you would like to continue with the lessons or not, or if we could do anything to help your child to return to the lessons?"

Unless there's anything expressed elsewhere in that email, I wouldn't have thought that the above wording can be equated to 'you can cancel by replying to this email, rather than using the process defined in the Ts & Cs', so am unconvinced about the strength of your case.  Not unreasonable to expect them to read, and respond to, a reply sent to that email, but that still wouldn't make them liable to accept a cancellation request via that channel IMHO....

I can certainly appreciate that stance, and thank you. What would you say to my reply to that asking, specifically, "Would you need anything further from me in order to do that, or will this email suffice?" - that's the one that the auto-responder promised a reply to that never came.

[In my quest for brevity, I understand it may not have been clear that my original reply included that line.]

eskbanker

GavHTFC said:

eskbanker said:

GavHTFC said:

eskbanker said:

Did the July email state, or imply, that cancellation could be invoked simply by replying to the email, rather than requiring the standard defined process to be followed?

To give you the exact wording used: "During routine attendance checks, it has been identified that your ******* has not been attending the above sessions for some time now. Please can you let us know if you would like to continue with the lessons or not, or if we could do anything to help your child to return to the lessons?"

Unless there's anything expressed elsewhere in that email, I wouldn't have thought that the above wording can be equated to 'you can cancel by replying to this email, rather than using the process defined in the Ts & Cs', so am unconvinced about the strength of your case.  Not unreasonable to expect them to read, and respond to, a reply sent to that email, but that still wouldn't make them liable to accept a cancellation request via that channel IMHO....

I can certainly appreciate that stance, and thank you. What would you say to my reply to that asking, specifically, "Would you need anything further from me in order to do that, or will this email suffice?" - that's the one that the auto-responder promised a reply to that never came.

I'd repeat that it's not unreasonable for you to anticipate a response, but that lack of one can't really be taken as acceptance of your informal cancellation request - don't get me wrong though, I can see both sides of the argument, so am just suggesting that your case may not be as 'rock-solid' as you feel it is.

GavHTFC

eskbanker said:

GavHTFC said:

eskbanker said:

GavHTFC said:

eskbanker said:

Did the July email state, or imply, that cancellation could be invoked simply by replying to the email, rather than requiring the standard defined process to be followed?

To give you the exact wording used: "During routine attendance checks, it has been identified that your ******* has not been attending the above sessions for some time now. Please can you let us know if you would like to continue with the lessons or not, or if we could do anything to help your child to return to the lessons?"

Unless there's anything expressed elsewhere in that email, I wouldn't have thought that the above wording can be equated to 'you can cancel by replying to this email, rather than using the process defined in the Ts & Cs', so am unconvinced about the strength of your case.  Not unreasonable to expect them to read, and respond to, a reply sent to that email, but that still wouldn't make them liable to accept a cancellation request via that channel IMHO....

I can certainly appreciate that stance, and thank you. What would you say to my reply to that asking, specifically, "Would you need anything further from me in order to do that, or will this email suffice?" - that's the one that the auto-responder promised a reply to that never came.

I'd repeat that it's not unreasonable for you to anticipate a response, but that lack of one can't really be taken as acceptance of your informal cancellation request - don't get me wrong though, I can see both sides of the argument, so am just suggesting that your case may not be as 'rock-solid' as you feel it is.

I can see where you're coming from there, and thanks for providing that stance! It does help with deciding on what I should do next.

I won't be around now until a bit later this evening because, wouldn't you believe it, we're off to hospital again. A routine appointment thankfully, poor kid's had more blood tests than I have!

Jumblebumble

eskbanker said:

GavHTFC said:

eskbanker said:

Did the July email state, or imply, that cancellation could be invoked simply by replying to the email, rather than requiring the standard defined process to be followed?

To give you the exact wording used: "During routine attendance checks, it has been identified that your ******* has not been attending the above sessions for some time now. Please can you let us know if you would like to continue with the lessons or not, or if we could do anything to help your child to return to the lessons?"

Unless there's anything expressed elsewhere in that email, I wouldn't have thought that the above wording can be equated to 'you can cancel by replying to this email, rather than using the process defined in the Ts & Cs', so am unconvinced about the strength of your case.  Not unreasonable to expect them to read, and respond to, a reply sent to that email, but that still wouldn't make them liable to accept a cancellation request via that channel IMHO....

You are totally missing the point
Only an imbecele sends an email asking a question from an email address that they dont read.
How else would the OP communicate if they wanted the offered help for the child to return to class?
Why should the OP go off and waste time that they wont be paid for  look for T and C when the offer is
"if you want to cancel please let us know"  which is exactly what I understand the OP did

If I were the OP I would ignore any further communications  as I doubt anyone is going to a small claims court for £25.00 if they think thet the defendant is going to tell the district judge that the swimming club were told via email  that the OP wanted to cancel

eskbanker

Jumblebumble said:

eskbanker said:

GavHTFC said:

eskbanker said:

Did the July email state, or imply, that cancellation could be invoked simply by replying to the email, rather than requiring the standard defined process to be followed?

To give you the exact wording used: "During routine attendance checks, it has been identified that your ******* has not been attending the above sessions for some time now. Please can you let us know if you would like to continue with the lessons or not, or if we could do anything to help your child to return to the lessons?"

Unless there's anything expressed elsewhere in that email, I wouldn't have thought that the above wording can be equated to 'you can cancel by replying to this email, rather than using the process defined in the Ts & Cs', so am unconvinced about the strength of your case.  Not unreasonable to expect them to read, and respond to, a reply sent to that email, but that still wouldn't make them liable to accept a cancellation request via that channel IMHO....

You are totally missing the point
Only an imbecele sends an email asking a question from an email address that they dont read.
How else would the OP communicate if they wanted the offered help for the child to return to class?
Why should the OP go off and waste time that they wont be paid for  look for T and C when the offer is
"if you want to cancel please let us know"  which is exactly what I understand the OP did

If I were the OP I would ignore any further communications  as I doubt anyone is going to a small claims court for £25.00 if they think thet the defendant is going to tell the district judge that the swimming club were told via email  that the OP wanted to cancel

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, and I'm not defending the company's conduct here, but just highlighting that two wrongs don't make a right, so just because the provider failed to respond to an email, that doesn't in itself absolve OP from responsibility to comply with documented terms, hence the comments earlier about the distinction between what might be considered a moral view versus a legal/contractual one, which is obviously what would be examined in a court.

I wouldn't disagree with your final point though about the likelihood of the provider pursuing this through court, but understand OP to be trying to reclaim money from them (the £27 already taken for September), so would still lose out if simply letting it lie.

Jumblebumble

eskbanker said:

Jumblebumble said:

eskbanker said:

GavHTFC said:

eskbanker said:

Did the July email state, or imply, that cancellation could be invoked simply by replying to the email, rather than requiring the standard defined process to be followed?

To give you the exact wording used: "During routine attendance checks, it has been identified that your ******* has not been attending the above sessions for some time now. Please can you let us know if you would like to continue with the lessons or not, or if we could do anything to help your child to return to the lessons?"

Unless there's anything expressed elsewhere in that email, I wouldn't have thought that the above wording can be equated to 'you can cancel by replying to this email, rather than using the process defined in the Ts & Cs', so am unconvinced about the strength of your case.  Not unreasonable to expect them to read, and respond to, a reply sent to that email, but that still wouldn't make them liable to accept a cancellation request via that channel IMHO....

You are totally missing the point
Only an imbecele sends an email asking a question from an email address that they dont read.
How else would the OP communicate if they wanted the offered help for the child to return to class?
Why should the OP go off and waste time that they wont be paid for  look for T and C when the offer is
"if you want to cancel please let us know"  which is exactly what I understand the OP did

If I were the OP I would ignore any further communications  as I doubt anyone is going to a small claims court for £25.00 if they think thet the defendant is going to tell the district judge that the swimming club were told via email  that the OP wanted to cancel

Everyone's entitled to their opinion, and I'm not defending the company's conduct here, but just highlighting that two wrongs don't make a right, so just because the provider failed to respond to an email, that doesn't in itself absolve OP from responsibility to comply with documented terms, hence the comments earlier about the distinction between what might be considered a moral view versus a legal/contractual one, which is obviously what would be examined in a court.

I wouldn't disagree with your final point though about the likelihood of the provider pursuing this through court, but understand OP to be trying to reclaim money from them (the £27 already taken for September), so would still lose out if simply letting it lie.

It looks like the OP has been refunded
from the OP
As they weren't going to refund, I had my bank do it instead.