• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Subject to Availability

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Subject to Availability

    I've tonight returned from a great honeymoon in Italy, we had a lovely time but I can't help but feel slightly irritated that I fell for 'one of the oldest tricks in the book' when I booked our hotel.

    I spent a lot of time looking and planning the trip, I wanted to make it as special a time as possible, especially as pressure of work meant that my wife and I couldn't take the 2 weeks we had hoped for and so just spent a week away. Italy is expensive, and with the current Euro rate I was struggling to afford the 'best of everything' that I had hoped we could share. Then someone recommended I look at the offers on the Citalia website, and there I found they were offering a 'complimentary room upgrade to Junior Suite' for honeymooners. It had 'subject to availability' in brackets after the offer (which is still there). However as I'd already investigated the hotel I was pretty sure they would have availability when we were staying (in fact I was certain).

    Low and behold when we arrived we were shown to a room, not a suite, and it was a bit of a dingy room. We didn't unpack and I went back to the reception and explained that we had been expecting a 'Junior Suite'. Needless to say the hotel knew nothing about this, and they showed me their booking form which made no mention of the upgrade nor that we were on honeymoon. I showed them my invoice from Citalia, which states in the notes section : Complimentary room upgrade to Junior Suite( Subject to avalability) [sic]

    Of course then I was informed that there was 'no availability' of 'Junior Suites on that offer' ... I couldn't make too much of a fuss about it, my new wife and I were quite tired after a 24 hr train journey, had just arrived and had not yet found our bearings, and I really didn't want to start our honeymoon with any sort of disagreement with the hotel. Therefore I asked what other rooms were available, and of course we were shown a Junior suite that was available as well as another more expensive suite that had a better view etc. I then negotiated with the manager and he offered us the suite at a slightly reduced rate.

    We had a nice stay, but it was quite over-budget, and I am now wondering if I have 'a leg to stand on' with Citalia. There was availability, we know that because we stayed in one of the suites, but basically the hotel implied that they didn't honour these upgrades - or maybe they had a quota of them. The net result is that we paid I think around double (more probably) the amount - once to Citalia, and once to the hotel directly for the upgrade.

    Sorry for my long post, there are details I have left out - I paid on debit card not credit card (I don't have one), but if there is anything else I will try and check this thread regularly for sage advice.

    MTIA

    Irksome

  • #2
    Re: Subject to Availability

    In their terms - ''Some hotels offer wine, sparkling wine, fruit or flowers, room upgrades or other gifts and these must be claimed in resort as we cannot refund against non provision of these offers.'' Which puts the onus on the hotel.

    so misleading advertising ?

    offers like this ''Free room upgrade from a Classic to a Superior for bookings made 60 days or more before arrival.'' should be honoured as they imply a discount of the supplements so the onus is on citalia, as does this one ''Honeymoon Offer: complimentary room upgrade and one meal for two for stays of 5 nights or more (not combinable with other offers)''

    They like their ''Offers are not combinable.'' thing don't they all very confusing.




    I would write in the first instance to Citalia to complain and see what they come back with.
    Last edited by Amethyst; 6th November 2009, 14:33:PM.
    #staysafestayhome

    Any support I provide is offered without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

    Received a Court Claim? Read >>>>> First Steps

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Subject to Availability

      If you feel you have suffered, as a result of the failure of the hotel to honour the offer that you bought and paid for, then you may sue for breach of contract and recover damages for distress and inconvenience.

      Damages are usually quantified by means of reliance loss, restitution loss or loss of bargain and although there are further certain heads of loss which are incapable of being recoverable, distress and inconvenience will be recoverable. In cases where the contract itself “was to provide peace of mind or freedom from distress” (Bliss v SE Thames RHA (1987)), a holiday, such loss will be recoverable. In Jarvis v Swan Tours (1972), another holiday case, the Court of Appeal made it clear that substantial damages may be recovered for disappointment, vexation and mental distress caused by a breach in the holidaymakers contract.

      Where it is clear that the purpose of the contract is to supply more than the ascertainable face-value of a non-repeatable benefit with no market value you may be able to issue a claim, either via the Visa Debit Chargeback Scheme (provided that it is a Visa Debit card that you have) or directly against the Tour Operator themselves. Furthermore and as above, the Consumer Protection Act 1987 makes it a criminal offence to give consumers a misleading price indication and retailers can be fined up to £5000 each time a consumer is misled.

      The fact that your holiday has cost you more than twice as much as it should have done, would appear to me to fall under the heading "misleading" and if I were you, I would take action at once.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Subject to Availability

        Awww sorry everything didnt go to plan x Mrs Irksome did however, look absolutley stunning and was definitley a beautiful blushing bride. Congrats to you both x
        Dragging myself and my family back into the light with the help of Beagles.

        My Hardship Claim
        Me VS Abbey Win
        BIL HSBC Credit Card
        BIL EGG
        BIL HSBC Loan
        BIL PPI Win




        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Subject to Availability

          Originally posted by Mochamoo View Post
          Awww sorry everything didnt go to plan x Mrs Irksome did however, look absolutley stunning and was definitley a beautiful blushing bride. Congrats to you both x
          Thank you A ... well done on guessing who I am

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Subject to Availability

            Thank you Amethyst and Cetelco, I have finally found 'a window' in my day long enough to sit down and right a lengthy letter to Citalia, and drew on both of your posts for infomation. I shall inform you and the rest of the board of what reply I get.

            I suspect the added detail I didn't share with you (I didn't want it to be too lengthy) will be their first line of attack, but I hope that the fundamental facts of the matter will result in a satisfactory result.

            Comment

            View our Terms and Conditions

            LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

            If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


            If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
            Working...
            X