Another sad cancelled wedding question

Undervalued

ThumbRemote said:

It's unusual for me not to side with a consumer on this board, but this time I think you're expecting far too much. 

Your payments aren't just profit to a venue, they cover fixed costs like year-round salaries, maintenance for the property, the planning that's already gone into the event, etc. Everyone saying that the food doesn't have to be prepared - realistically, the food cost is a very limited part of the overall costs, the staff payments for preparing it are much greater. Who knows whether the chef(s) still have to be paid; management of the venue certainly will. 

The venue have presumably also lost anticipated bar takings for the event, which could easily be a 4-figure sum. 

They've already refunded you the accommodation charge, which they absolutely didn't need to do. At such short notice they aren't going to get anything back on that. The fact that, despite this, you're already bad-mouthing them and considering leaving bad reviews suggests you're upset and the situation and lashing out at them. 

You claim that "in law a contract needs to meet certain tests of fairness and balance" then suggest that this one doesn't. How is it unfair or unbalanced? Maybe turn things around - would you have been happy if the venue cancelled 39 days in advance of the wedding? And if they had, how much would you be expecting them to compensate you?

This is not the venues fault, it's not the staffs fault, and it's unreasonable of them to lose out financially because of the cancellation. 

^^^^^^^^

I totally agree.

millie

ThumbRemote said:

It's unusual for me not to side with a consumer on this board, but this time I think you're expecting far too much. 

Your payments aren't just profit to a venue, they cover fixed costs like year-round salaries, maintenance for the property, the planning that's already gone into the event, etc. Everyone saying that the food doesn't have to be prepared - realistically, the food cost is a very limited part of the overall costs, the staff payments for preparing it are much greater. Who knows whether the chef(s) still have to be paid; management of the venue certainly will. 

The venue have presumably also lost anticipated bar takings for the event, which could easily be a 4-figure sum. 

They've already refunded you the accommodation charge, which they absolutely didn't need to do. At such short notice they aren't going to get anything back on that. The fact that, despite this, you're already bad-mouthing them and considering leaving bad reviews suggests you're upset and the situation and lashing out at them. 

You claim that "in law a contract needs to meet certain tests of fairness and balance" then suggest that this one doesn't. How is it unfair or unbalanced? Maybe turn things around - would you have been happy if the venue cancelled 39 days in advance of the wedding? And if they had, how much would you be expecting them to compensate you?

This is not the venues fault, it's not the staffs fault, and it's unreasonable of them to lose out financially because of the cancellation. 

ThumbRemote said:

It's unusual for me not to side with a consumer on this board, but this time I think you're expecting far too much. 

Your payments aren't just profit to a venue, they cover fixed costs like year-round salaries, maintenance for the property, the planning that's already gone into the event, etc. Everyone saying that the food doesn't have to be prepared - realistically, the food cost is a very limited part of the overall costs, the staff payments for preparing it are much greater. Who knows whether the chef(s) still have to be paid; management of the venue certainly will. 

The venue have presumably also lost anticipated bar takings for the event, which could easily be a 4-figure sum. 

They've already refunded you the accommodation charge, which they absolutely didn't need to do. At such short notice they aren't going to get anything back on that. The fact that, despite this, you're already bad-mouthing them and considering leaving bad reviews suggests you're upset and the situation and lashing out at them. 

You claim that "in law a contract needs to meet certain tests of fairness and balance" then suggest that this one doesn't. How is it unfair or unbalanced? Maybe turn things around - would you have been happy if the venue cancelled 39 days in advance of the wedding? And if they had, how much would you be expecting them to compensate you?

This is not the venues fault, it's not the staffs fault, and it's unreasonable of them to lose out financially because of the cancellation. 

They may even have turned other bookings away because of yours. It is unlikely they will be able to get one now

FadingGinger

How am I bad mouthing them?  I have been careful not to.

Their terms say nothing at all about compensating us were they to cancel.  They don't even explicitly state they'll return payments already received though it is implied,they just they they don't expect to cancell and if they do it will be for a good reason!

What I'm saying is that I think their level of retention is excessive.  For some perspective it represents 5.5 months take home pay for me..... for doing almost nothing.

Aylesbury_Duck

FadingGinger said:

How am I bad mouthing them?  I have been careful not to.

Their terms say nothing at all about compensating us were they to cancel.  They don't even explicitly state they'll return payments already received though it is implied,they just they they don't expect to cancell and if they do it will be for a good reason!

What I'm saying is that I think their level of retention is excessive.  For some perspective it represents 5.5 months take home pay for me..... for doing almost nothing.

Those two things aren't fairly comparable, and they may be doing almost nothing, but the point is that they shouldn't be out of pocket as a result of your family circumstances.

If you want to bring take home pay into it, you need to consider the lost earnings of the people involved, who entered into a contract with good faith and the expectation of being paid.

A fair and proper outcome for all is that the business gets the equivalent of whatever profit they would have made, and any excess is returned to the customer.  The details can be thrashed out but you're in no position to say what's excessive.

Grumpy_chap

I think catering businesses typically operate on thirds 
One third for premises.
One third for catering.
One third for overhead and profit.

The OP paid £15k
Deduct £1k deposit, so £14k.
One third is £4.5k.

The venue retaining £12k.
So, the refund is about half of the overhead and profit part. 
Maybe that reflects the profit and is reasonable.

ThumbRemote

FadingGinger said:

How am I bad mouthing them?  I have been careful not to.

"Another aspect, suggested by others but which I’m reluctant to do at this point, is to remind them that they take a reputational risk with their current line as there were 90 odd people to be involved at this event, all of whom have some limited understanding of what is going one and some of whom know quite a bit of the detail.  None of them are impressed, especially those with more detail."

It's fairly clear that you've already told people about the situation, from your own perspective and with your own spin on things. 

FadingGinger said:

What I'm saying is that I think their level of retention is excessive.  For some perspective it represents 5.5 months take home pay for me..... for doing almost nothing.

The venue probably has to pay a manager, catering manager, chef, maybe a weddings/events commercial manager, caretaker/maintenance staff, gardeners, HR department... plus possibly plenty of others. All with salaries, plus employers NI and pension contributions. 

They have to pay business rates. Insurance. Standing charges on utilities. 

They have to pay maintenance costs on their building. 

They pay for marketing, advertising materials, the glossy brochure that you picked up when you first made contact. 

And that's before they can make any sort of profit whatsoever! 

All these costs have to be split between the functions the venue hosts. They certainly won't be hosting a wedding every day. So it's absolute rubbish to say they are doing "almost nothing". The venue doesn't cease to exist for the other 364 days of the year, they still have costs. It's possible that the only saving to be made from your cancellation is the cost of ingredients. 

You've breached the contract, not them, but they've already gone above and beyond what was agreed by refunding the accommodation. The situation is not their fault but you want them to lose out financially. 

Okell

FadingGinger said:

How am I bad mouthing them?  I have been careful not to.

... Their terms say nothing at all about compensating us were they to cancel.  They don't even explicitly state they'll return payments already received though it is implied,they just they they don't expect to cancell and if they do it will be for a good reason!...

Don't their terms say anything about them cancelling the contract?  Or about them refunding payments already made if they cancel?

What exactly do their cancellation terms say - whether cancellation by them or by your son?

Unless they are balanced between the two parties, they could be unfair and therefore unenforceable.

FadingGinger

ThumbRemote said:

FadingGinger said:

How am I bad mouthing them?  I have been careful not to.

"Another aspect, suggested by others but which I’m reluctant to do at this point, is to remind them that they take a reputational risk with their current line as there were 90 odd people to be involved at this event, all of whom have some limited understanding of what is going one and some of whom know quite a bit of the detail.  None of them are impressed, especially those with more detail."

It's fairly clear that you've already told people about the situation, from your own perspective and with your own spin on things. 

FadingGinger said:

What I'm saying is that I think their level of retention is excessive.  For some perspective it represents 5.5 months take home pay for me..... for doing almost nothing.

The venue probably has to pay a manager, catering manager, chef, maybe a weddings/events commercial manager, caretaker/maintenance staff, gardeners, HR department... plus possibly plenty of others. All with salaries, plus employers NI and pension contributions. 

They have to pay business rates. Insurance. Standing charges on utilities. 

They have to pay maintenance costs on their building. 

They pay for marketing, advertising materials, the glossy brochure that you picked up when you first made contact. 

And that's before they can make any sort of profit whatsoever! 

All these costs have to be split between the functions the venue hosts. They certainly won't be hosting a wedding every day. So it's absolute rubbish to say they are doing "almost nothing". The venue doesn't cease to exist for the other 364 days of the year, they still have costs. It's possible that the only saving to be made from your cancellation is the cost of ingredients. 

You've breached the contract, not them, but they've already gone above and beyond what was agreed by refunding the accommodation. The situation is not their fault but you want them to lose out financially. 

I've not discussed it with anyone directly involved apart from my son.  I have discussed it with a few people with no connection - accountant at work, neighbour who runs a hotel etc, to try and get a bit of perspective.  Much as I'm doing here.  The venue has not been named.

As mentioned before, there are 90 odd guests who (inevitably) know who the venue are and approximately what is going on and that a "very small proportion of the cost is being refunded".   A few, closer to the couple have more detail.

And yes, I get your drift.  I understand your points, but I believe you are too far the other way.  I don't dispute the venue related retention.  I do dispute the catering, drink and services proportion.  No least because we were just 2.5 business days outside their own (pretty lengthy according to my hotel contact) 6 week deadline, at which point their own terms would have meant that they had to return what I'm asking for.

This is a "barn on a farm" (nice barn!) type venue that aims to do a maximum of two weddings a week from March to November.  They'll host/cater for other events too.  The only permanent "staff" are the husband/wife owners.

FadingGinger

Okell said:

FadingGinger said:

How am I bad mouthing them?  I have been careful not to.

... Their terms say nothing at all about compensating us were they to cancel.  They don't even explicitly state they'll return payments already received though it is implied,they just they they don't expect to cancell and if they do it will be for a good reason!...

Don't their terms say anything about them cancelling the contract?  Or about them refunding payments already made if they cancel?

What exactly do their cancellation terms say - whether cancellation by them or by your son?

Unless they are balanced between the two parties, they could be unfair and therefore unenforceable.

Hi Okell,
I quote below.  In fact they expressly absolve themselves of any consequential losses should they cancel.

"Cancellation by us

We do not expect to have to make any changes to your booking

but problems may occur resulting in bookings having to be

cancelled.

We would only cancel your booking if the venue was:

a) Unavailable or unsafe for reasons beyond our reasonable

control; for example severe flooding, fire, damage to the

property (this list is not intended to be finite).

In such instance we would offer you a full refund of

monies you have paid towards your Event. We would not

be held responsible for any additional costs incurred by

yourselves. (my bold)

b) If the booking might prejudice the reputation of the venue

and business.

c) If the client has made no attempt to achieve full payment

six weeks prior to the event. In which case the client

would forfeit their deposit."

and

"Cancellation by you

a) If you wish to cancel your booking, the Hirer should contact

us by telephone as soon as possible, and follow up with

written confirmation.

b) The deposit of £1000 is NON-REFUNDABLE upon

cancellation.

We reserve the right to make a full charge of the total balance

of your event for any cancellation within 6 weeks of the event

date. This includes all service charges, catering and beverage

costs. In addition to the deposit paid.

The following will be charged on cancelation if within 12 months

of the event date:

Cancellation 12 months prior: 25% of venue hire

9 months prior: 50% of venue hire

6 months prior: 75% of venue hire

3 months prior: 100% of venue hire

6 weeks prior the total balance of your event.

Thank you for your interest

Nick

swingaloo

FadingGinger said:

Hi All – long time lurker but first time poster looking for advice, new insights and a sanity check.

Back story is that my son recently found it necessary to break off his engagement  5 weeks and 4 days before the planned wedding.  This was a huge shock to both families and has caused massive trauma, which I’ll not dwell on.

Amongst the many other bits of fallout from this implosion is dealing with the wedding venue, who were informed the day after the collapse.  I have already done some reading around on this forum and found some relevant and helpful stuff which brings a bit of hope. This one was particularly useful:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5703165/wedding-cancellation-lost-deposit/p1

To be clear, we realise that we will take a substantial hit and have no wish to deprive the venue of costs incurred or any reasonable profits that they might have made.  However, at this point, though they claim to be “as devasted as you are”, the sad reality seems to be that they are happy to take extra profit from our horrible situation.  And that is not ok.

The couple did sign a contract with them – unfortunately without taking any advice.  They also paid by bank transfer and did not take out insurance – though most policies seem to exclude this cause anyway.  Money came from the couple themselves with substantial contributions from both families.

A  total of £ 15,275 was paid comprising:

- Deposit/damage deposit   £ 1,000.00 (Always returnable unless damage caused)

- Venue hire                         £ 4,438.50 (in three payments of £ 1,479.50) sliding scale of refund,                                                  nothing within 3 months.

- Accommodation totalling   £ 2,600.00 (not separately defined - within venue hire?)

- Catering, drinks & service £ 7,236.00 (6 week refund period)

By the letter of the contract, nothing within the 6 week period is refundable.  However, we’ve done a little better than that.

The £ 1,000 deposit has been refunded. No event = no damage, so difficult to defend keeping that!

The £ 2,600 accommodation has been refunded though they made a big fuss about how generous they were being.  Reality is that this money was paid separately by guests planning to stay at the venue so withholding this would have caused a lot of aggro to them from many people.  They claim that even at this level of refund they will be making a loss on the weekend.  At this point they retain £11,675 for doing very little, so I’m unsympathetic!

The venue hire we do not expect to get back.  Fair enough. It’s unlikely they’ll get another booking at this point though they do do events other than weddings and don’t appear to be even attempting to advertise it at this point.

The catering and drinks payment though, they are dead set on keeping in its entirety.  If we were closer to the event I’d be more sympathetic, but just 2.5 working days outside a fairly lengthy deadline I’m thinking that they are not actually in a materially different position than they were before the deadline.

I’ve therefore politely proposed that they return the catering/service cost less the accommodation cost already returned (£4,439).  This leaves them with £ 7k for doing very little.  To me this seems like a sweet deal for them. Am I wrong?

This has been flatly refused citing huge losses to them (they retain 50% of the money with a big reduction in their costs, so one has to wonder what the margins are in this industry?!)  and the need to stand behind their contract for all for “reasons of fairness to all parties”.

This last is interesting because as I understand it, under UK consumer law, contracts are required to be underpinned by a basic fairness to both sides and not to bring undue advantage to either side.  Not obviously the case here where, as far as I can see, they currently stand to make a handsome additional profit from our position.

My reading and such informal advice that I’ve had so far seems to bear out that in order to actually be enforceable in law a contract needs to meet certain tests of fairness and balance, which this one does not in my opinion.

I’m thinking to point this out in firm but polite terms as my next move, with the promise that I will take legal action (and at the current level of retention I am motivated to do this) demanding a higher figure if they continue to refuse.

Beyond that, some actual real legal advice or small claims court route seem to be possibilities.

Another aspect, suggested by others but which I’m reluctant to do at this point, is to remind them that they take a reputational risk with their current line as there were 90 odd people to be involved at this event, all of whom have some limited understanding of what is going one and some of whom know quite a bit of the detail.  None of them are impressed, especially those with more detail.  The majority are fairly local to the venue and a few of them are quite ready to “go to war”.  I’m discouraging this as unhelpful to negotiations!

Insights, constructive suggestions and sanity check very welcome.

Thank you for reading

 Nick

 

 

 

 

Quote-    I've not discussed it with anyone directly involved apart from my son.  I have discussed it with a few people with no connection - accountant at work, neighbour who runs a hotel etc, to try and get a bit of perspective.  Much as I'm doing here.  The venue has not been named.

So which is it?