• Categories
  • Holiday Overbooking Claims | The Consumer Detriment 35

    HolidayTravelWatch continues to hear from Travel Consumers suffering ‘Holiday Overbooking’ detriment in their holiday contracts. A recent call for help came from a Mrs G1, she stated:

    “When he arrived at the hotel he was sent to the hotel next door.  It was apparent that his hotel had overbooked.  After one day he was asked to vacate the new hotel and move back to the original hotel.  It was now apparent the second hotel was now fully booked. They offered him a room that was dirty and not suitable.  He refused.  He contacted me in England so that I could speak with the tour operator.  2 hours later the tour operator called me to say the problem had been resolved and my husband was staying in his original hotel.  Today my husband telephoned again.  He is still not happy with the accommodation.  The room is still dirty.  Last evening he was getting ready to go out when he noticed the walls had recently been white washed, and the white was all over his clothes”.  (E.06.07)

    Mrs G1 has received advice and assistance from the team at HolidayTravelWatch.

    Frank Brehany, the Senior Consumer Advocate of HolidayTravelWatch states;

    “There is no excuse for overbooking clients.  This is a shabby practice, and is reminscent of the ‘bucket shop’ principles of the 1970’s!  Law-makers when amending the Package Travel Directive should outlaw this practice, and create real sanctions for those in breach”.

    All Holidaymakers affected by any of these issues should contact HolidayTravelWatch for further assistance.

    Note to Editors:

    Since 2005, HolidayTravelWatch has provided comment on the ever increasing threat to The Package Travel Regulations. This situation has developed partly through the changing style of purchasing holidays, but principally from the Court of Appeal decision as to what they considered constituted a ‘package’.

    After considerable debate, the Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (DBERR) has produced a Guidance note, in an attempt to assist with the definition as to what constitutes a ‘package’. Why is this definition important? Simply, if an agent or operator can show that they are simply selling components, then they will escape the regulatory requirements of the Air Tour Operator licence (ATOL) scheme and, the provisions of The Package Travel Regulations. If that is the case, then the hard fought rights to protect the consumer will be lost. The consumer will be unprotected.

    We have contributed to the continued debate, submitting our report examining consumer detriment, to the EU Commission and DBERR in October 2007. In that report we highlighted th very real risk that is now faced by the British Travel Consumer, through 160 case studies. We have also provided what we consider to be the solution to the diminution of Travel Consumer rights.

    The EU Commission are currently reviewing the Package Travel Directive, but the result of their enquiries, along with their recommendations, is not expected for some time. The reaction to the recent Guidance produced by DBERR, produced a cautious welcome from the Travel Industry, but it does not deal with their principle concern, that being the market operations of the airline industry. They argue, if they are subject to a regulatory regime, then so should the airline industry when they sell holidays on their websites. We have argued that any regulatory regime should apply across the board, not just to one segment of the Travel Industry.

    We have predicted, a notion rejected by DBERR, that their Guidance note and the Court of Appeal decision gives a green light to those who want to ‘deregulate’ the package holiday.

    HolidayTravelWatch has launched its petition, calling on Government and the EU Commission to protect the rights of Consumers in Holiday Contracts.

    Tags: , , ,

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.