We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Discrimination over single person holiday

2

Comments

  • hcb42
    hcb42 Posts: 5,962 Forumite
    sounds more like an error than a deliberate strategy i would guess...might be something as simple as the rate is not loaded against the occupancy.........? Might also be them yielding to ensure greater occupancy, but I would check/challenge.
  • arcon5
    arcon5 Posts: 14,099 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Give them the name of a second person who "might" be attending with you :)
  • boobies
    boobies Posts: 283 Forumite
    arcon5 wrote: »
    Give them the name of a second person who "might" be attending with you :)

    It's for five people, so still likely to attract an under occupancy charge. ;)

    I know of someone that bought holiday accom from ebay for one of the Radisson resorts in Malta. The ad specified that it had to be a couple (timeshare resort). She went on her own and was turned away. :o
  • arcon5
    arcon5 Posts: 14,099 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    boobies wrote: »
    It's for five people, so still likely to attract an under occupancy charge. ;)

    Give them 4 extra names then :D

    I know of someone that bought holiday accom from ebay for one of the Radisson resorts in Malta. The ad specified that it had to be a couple (timeshare resort). She went on her own and was turned away. :o

    :eek:

    On what grounds?


    Maybe i'm missing something, but I don't understand the logic if it's a villa
  • JimmyTheWig
    JimmyTheWig Posts: 12,199 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Depends on the set-up. If it's in a block then there might be facilities that they hope will be paid for.

    The only other explanation I can find is if it is a shared villa, where the OP is having one room. The price quoted would be per person, but with a suppliment for single people, which would be reasonable.
    Would also explain why someone (on a Money Saving website) wanted a five person villa for themselves!
  • fluffnutter
    fluffnutter Posts: 23,179 Forumite
    boobies wrote: »
    It does not fall into one of the protected groups, and why should it - it is simply targeted marketing, nothing wrong with that (and I am a single traveller).

    What are the protected groups?
    "Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward Abbey.
  • antrobus
    antrobus Posts: 17,386 Forumite
    fluffnutter wrote: »
    What are the protected groups?

    See http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/hr/equality/law/principles/#characteristics
  • fluffnutter
    fluffnutter Posts: 23,179 Forumite
    antrobus wrote: »
    See http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/hr/equality/law/principles/#characteristics

    See, this is what I thought which is why I asked. It includes marriage/civil partnership. So by that token, isn't placing a premium on someone holidaying alone in breach of this?

    Of course that person could be married and merely choosing to holiday alone, but that's a bit of a loophole IMO. Essentially charging a single person more because they are single is falling foul of discrimination law, isn't it?
    "Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward Abbey.
  • antrobus
    antrobus Posts: 17,386 Forumite
    fluffnutter wrote: »
    ...
    Of course that person could be married and merely choosing to holiday alone, but that's a bit of a loophole IMO. ..

    I imagine that would be the very loophole that the coach and horses would be driven through.
  • fluffnutter
    fluffnutter Posts: 23,179 Forumite
    antrobus wrote: »
    I imagine that would be the very loophole that the coach and horses would be driven through.

    No doubt.

    Even so, the majority of people holidaying alone probably are single (and possibly paying a premium as a result). Why isn't this challenged more often? I can't see that it's legal personally.
    "Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell" - Edward Abbey.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.8K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.3K Life & Family
  • 258.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.
Update Your Picture