 Poster: A snowHead
|
There're different travellers, as there're snowheads.
Some, as Bode Swiller profess, will go anywhere for the least expense. So it's difficult for him to understand why ed is so fussy about the change of resorts.
Others, on the other hand, believe they booked a particular holiday to a particular resort and even a particular hotel. For them, suggestion of "substantial change" should only be taken with great care, i.e. significant compensation.
If I go to a McDonald, I expect the food to be cooked, but not neccessarily gourmet. So if they substitute chicken for fish, a refund would be the most I would expect, even if it leaves me hungry.
But if I'm going to a gourmet resturant, I expect the food to be reasonable quality and taste. So when an order of salmon was substituted with cod, it shouldn't surprise anyone the customer expects more than a simple refund! And if the customer happened to be a diebatic and needed to accept the food for health reason even though he may not like the food, simply refunding the difference would be consider wowfully inadequate.
What I see here is Neilson insist they're no McDonald of the travel industry, as Pip repeatedly post on this thread. So, is it any surprise some of us felt a simple refund isn't enough? Or alternatively, some of us consider Neilson no better than the McDonald of TO's?
But I can see now there're enough customer like Bode Swiller who will happily accept cod in place of salmon, or chicken in place of fish. Just don't be surprised when all gourmet restaurant will be replaced by McDonalds. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
ed.bremner, there you go, the perfect use for your 25 quid compensation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
abc, this time a restaurant analogy. Previously we've had analogies about building and other totally non-connected stuff. Soon, I'm sure, someone will be along with a nice car analogy. And we're also well versed in what would happen if we all lived in Ireland even though we don't. This is about a ski holiday... they are moveable feasts at the best of times, people need to be ready to cheerfully accept that things can and will change. Flight times change, transfers get screwed up, heating breaks down, chalet staff get taken ill, lifts get closed, skis get stolen, baby gets chickenpox etc etc. OK, you don't expect the plan to change right at the beginning but, having bought a super super cheap deal you shouldn't be totally surprised if things change.
Of course it does happen in restaurants. Often you order something and the waiter comes back and politely informs you that the item is no longer available and would you mind chosing an alternative. It's never a problem. Do I allow it to ruin my evening? No. So what do you do abc? The salmon is off, everyone else is settled and happy, but because you're not happy you get them all to move out?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
abc, rubbish analogy unless you like to eat in restaurants where everything comes out of the freezer, and is therefore in limitless supply.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
ed.bremner,
| Quote: |
I keep seeing that 'sig' and would love to know more. I used to really dig doing the full run from Le Fournier to Les Brevs in the Killy Espace. But the full length of Paradiski would be something else....and anything that ends up with that killer run down to Villaroger would be a right giggle. God, my legs ache just thinking about it.
|
Click on the words on my sig and all is revealed, I'll be doing it this weekend, you are welcome to join us, I suspect you could get a last minute cheap deal from the awful Bristol airport with Easyjet 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bode Swiller, Whilst you are right about the analogies with fastfood restaurants and their ilk are inappropriate; your basic premise that paying less for a product means that you should expect inferior treatment is crazy.
Pricing of that chalet is totally down to the principal . They choose to vary their pricing by week etc. ,but the customer can reasonably expect exactly the same service/treatment regardless of when they choose to travel. Consequently, the expectation should be exactly the same if the principal choses to discount any given week -- or if they choose to push it through channels who then reduce their own commission in order to secure a sale. Every discount you ever see works on similar principles.
Your argument that 'Travel Providers' should somehow be exempt because life is difficult and they have to deal with French people to organise property allocations ( another assumption by you ) does the travel industries no favours and is NOT representative of anyone I know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
Your argument that 'Travel Providers' should somehow be exempt because life is difficult and they have to deal with French people to organise property allocations ( another assumption by you ) does the travel industries no favours and is NOT representative of anyone I know.
|
Agenterre, where did you get that nonsense from? I haven't said anything like that.
It's just a fact of life. Two parties are booked into the same chalet. One has to be bumped. Which one gets bumped first?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| drkpower wrote: |
| a Forum is CAPABLE of editing its content just as much as a newspaper is. I know that it is certainly far more impractical for a fourm to do so, but i wouldnt be so sure if that would stand up as a Defence if someone was genuinely defamed. |
the subtle difference is that the forum is not publishing in a way a newspaper does, the individual posters are publishing, unless the Administrator decides to change posts and then the forum becomes more 'newspaper like', but the fact that it is 'capable of editing' i think is irrelevant - I could sit in a public building with a ciggie behind my ear and be capable of smoking the ciggie, but this does not mean that I have smoked the ciggie, and likewise I can sit with a licensed gun in my hand and be capable of killing but commit no murder, and a last example is the classic knife in the window of a shop and the distinction between 'an invitation to treat' rather than the (illegal) sale of the knife. So the capability of something does not really have a large bearing, it is the exercising of such capability that is in the main part an important factor
I would agree with you in the circumstances whereby a forum does actively pursue an editing policy. Facebook and Utube are classic examples of a 'hands off' approach by the administrators whereby Jo Public paddle his/her own canoe and the rantings of such an individual does little harm, for example, to the character of a celeb, but the rantings of a red top newspaper is completely different, and I believe forums fall inbetween the two depending upon how it is administered and whether there is an editing policy.
It would be interesting to see this issue debated in the courts
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Bode Swiller wrote: |
abc, this time a restaurant analogy. Previously we've had analogies about building and other totally non-connected stuff. Soon, I'm sure, someone will be along with a nice car analogy. And we're also well versed in what would happen if we all lived in Ireland even though we don't. This is about a ski holiday... they are moveable feasts at the best of times, people need to be ready to cheerfully accept that things can and will change. Flight times change, transfers get screwed up, heating breaks down, chalet staff get taken ill, lifts get closed, skis get stolen, baby gets chickenpox etc etc. OK, you don't expect the plan to change right at the beginning but, having bought a super super cheap deal you shouldn't be totally surprised if things change.
|
Of course not. It happens.
But if it does happen, then since they have broken their contract with you, that means you are entitled to some compensation for that.
Obviously, there will be a number of factors involved in determining how much compensation you are entitled to, and the price you paid for the holiday will be one of the factors taken into account.
But the fact it was cheap does not mean you are not entitled to anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
I prefer cod to salmon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
alex_heney, I agree with that. And it could be that £25 per head is appropriate. We just don't know how much Ed paid for the holiday and, for some reason, he's not telling us. I'm sticking by my educated guess that it was very cheap... sub £200.
Happy birthday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Lechbob wrote: |
| I prefer cod to salmon. |
Sorry, cod's off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
The restaurant analogy can be extended more fundamentally. I was once in a group which experienced a double-booking by a small restaurant in Zermatt, which we suspected had been approached by other clients who they sensed would order more expensive meals. There seemed no other explanation, but the result was that we were banished into the night.
I ordered a TV last week with a full cash deposit. The retailer promised that the set would be in his shop the next day. On that day they explained that Panasonic would not deliver until the following week. Had Panasonic sold my TV to someone else, or was the retailer at fault? Impossible to say, though probably the latter [we got it 4 days later and are delighted].
Entertainment venues have a tendency to double-book seats, because (although their computer systems are technically foolproof) they often deal with multiple ticket agencies and mistakes are made with allocations etc.
I daresay there are contributors to this forum who book their time to their employers and double-book it to snowHeads. I've had plumbers who do this. You book a time and they don't turn up because they're on the internet, or fixing someone else's u-bend.
Despite these contextual excuses, Swiller is wrong. A bargain is a bargain in both senses of the word. Neilson apparently acknowledged this, and my impression has always been that they have a good reputation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
David Goldsmith,
Thanks.
Rather funny really....I am a member of countless forums (Is it Fora?)....I regularly post to 3....and am moderator of 2 including a rather over-sensitive forum for an international sailing class. I have had a job, where part of my job-description was to 'post' to a group of relevant mailing lists.
God knows how many posts I have made over the last 9 years I have been doing it.
But the longest thread I have ever started, was made on my first ever post to SnowHeads.
And believe me....I was only half expecting an answer at all. I just wanted some info to help in negotiations with Fast Track. I didn't know whether the moderators would let it run. I thought it might well be too contentious and get pulled straight away. I hoped not. I wouldn't pull it from one of my forums, but if it came up, I know that I would get a lot of pressure to do so.
So thanks again to SnowHeads and the mods.
It has been a gas.....well is a gas
If I can't be skiing, this may well be the 2nd best....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| alex_heney wrote: |
| Obviously, there will be a number of factors involved in determining how much compensation you are entitled to, and the price you paid for the holiday will be one of the factors taken into account. But the fact it was cheap does not mean you are not entitled to anything. |
actually I would say compensation should be based upon the nature/spec of holiday and not the price - I was once advised never to confuse quality and price ! - a sh$t holiday during haf term school holidays that costs sheds of money should not warrant more compensation than a 5 star holiday that was procured cheaply due to under occupancy in January !! which is why I am wary of this idea that just because you get a cheap deal for a great holiday that the compensation should in some way be devalued, except in Ireland whereby they have a legislated minimum link between compensation and price
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| ed.bremner wrote: |
| [Paulio] You said we were offered a 'significant upgrade'. That was their words....not mine. Maybe it was....certainly nominally according to the brochures it was.....but two points. The first is that if I book a holiday to go skiing with my 5 year old, then I don't consider somewhere that makes this 'harder' an upgrade. They could of put me in a 5 star hotel will all expenses paid in St Moritz with Keira Knightley as a chamber made, but if I could not take my 5 year old skiing safely and easily....then for me - it is no upgrade. Secondly, if it was a 'significant upgrade' why was (is) the accommodation at the Les Arcs apartment being sold so much cheaper than the accommodation we originally booked in Courchevel. If the resorts were 'equivalent' as they say and the accommodation a 'significant upgrade', wouldn't you expect it to be more expensive, rather than less? |
Um right, that was my point entirely. See Yad Moss/St Moritz comment elsewhere. It's the customer's role to define what might be an upgrade. The TO simply proudly declaring it as such (in between tearful telephone conversations) is preposterous arrogance on their part.
Good luck with the compensation fight and that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
David Goldsmith, in the case of a TV, you get the same TV whatever the sticker price. In the case of a package holiday you sign an agreement that acknowledges that you understand that the holiday might change but, if it does, that you'll be compensated. Ed is negotiating his level of compensation. All I'm saying regards that is that the compensation should be in line with what the financial committment was in the first place.
The other point I'm making is that sh*t happens. If the store called you and said "sorry Goldenballs but Panasonic are fresh out of tellys, would a better Sony model for the same money be OK" you'd probably say OK. That's what Neilson/Fast Track did... here's another huge suitable resort in the same vicinity, with a better grade of accommodation and some compensation and we'll tidy up the ski hire issue... as it turned out Ed decided to decline so the remaining thing to be done is give him all his money back and agree compensation. The size of that compensation should be in line with the holiday price in my view. Doesn't signing a contract mean anything?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
ed.bremner, Everyone makes mistakes including tour operators. I think you'll find that, in the small claims court situation, it would be ruled that they did offer you a reasonable alternative. Frankly, I think you've given yourself a whole load of grief. I'm sure your kids would have enjoyed Les Arcs every bit as much as Courchevel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
erica2004,
| Quote: |
I'm sure your kids would have enjoyed Les Arcs every bit as much as Courchevel
|
Good point plus I suspect that Ed would have been happier with the lower prices of food and drink in Les Arcs, he would also have the option of going over to La Plagne and doing the Villaroger to Montalbert challenge as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ed.bremner, I don't think they are finished yet....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
erica2004, Boredsurfing, 12 pages...Think I made post 2 on page 1 that any claim in court would be laughed at. I am sure Mr Judge will be very sympathetic that someone got shoved form Courcheval to Les Arcs 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Bode Swiller
Re: costs.
I think I pretty much covered that. It was originally suggested by PipT that the details of any negotiation be kept out of the public domain. Subsequent advice has supported that, whilst negotiations are in progress.
I agreed it was cheap, but don't agree with you that excepting a 'cheap' offer at market prices means that you have less rights than if you paid a higher price for the same product. We didn't set the price, we simply excepted the contract, presuming that them being bonded by ABTA meant they intended to honour their code of conduct.
I understand your restaurant analogy, but if I wished to eat out with someone who was a vegetarian and I found a restaurant that advertised how good their vegetarian meals were....so booked a table specifically for a veggie meal, then I might feel different if if I turned up and was told by the waiter:
Me: Hi, I have come for that wonderful vegetarian meal you advertise
Waiter: Oh you, look all the veggie food is off, it wasn't our fault.....we have made you something....don't know what it is....but it may have meet in it.
Me: Oh, but I don't eat meatl...Any chance of anything else
Waiter: No
Me: Can I ask the Cook if he could make me something
Waiter: No.....look can you hurry up, I have got other tables you know
Me: It's just we don't eat meat.....maybe the Cook could just make a cheese omelette?
Waiter: Sorry, not company policy havn't tested the eggs
Me: Well anything veggie would do, we will even come back tomorrow if that helps,
Waiter: Nope, look if you are not going to eat our meat....now, can you p*&& off
Me: Wait, what exactly does the meal contain, could you ask the cook?
Waiter: For god's sake it's food! what else do you want? ....
Waiter goes off.....muttering something about 'bloody' vegetarians....
I dare say he might return.....but would we still be there?
cheers
eib
ps I really have to do some work today, so this will be my last post till the end of day. Have fun!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
I'm sure your kids would have enjoyed Les Arcs every bit as much as Courchevel.
|
erica2004, absolutely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Hmmmm 12 pages.... are TO's the new helmets...? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Gosh....it never stops.....
But Bode Swiller,
you may well of hit the nail on the head with your tv example and maybe it is a difference in character.
I know for many a change of TV from Panasonic to Sony would be totally acceptable.
But I really doubt it would for me.
When I buy something. I don't go into the shop and say I want a TV.
I spend hours researching what I want & need. I write lists, I go to Forums and ask, I talk with mates, I go and see one in action and then I make my mind up and buy that specific model at the best price that I can find.
Another option, given to me at the last minute would nearly always be turned down, simply to avoid that 'oh my god, what have they given me' feeling.
Anyway...enough is enough....must get down to work
cheers
eib
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ed.bremner, don't take up playwriting eh? I'm done with side-tracking analogies thanks.
So, everything but the price paid is public domain  . That instantly tells me that the TO considers it to be embarrasingly cheap and not the kind of price they'd like publicised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
thefatcontroller, I think the preferred upgrade would be to a resort like La Plagne rather than Les Arcs
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Bode Swiller, I thought we knew the price was £25.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Boredsurfing, Bitch but back to reality I have just done our 5th holiday in Les Arcs/La Plagne last week with 3 kids and ain't seen happier kids as I saw last week. So much hot air over a fecking holiday to a snowy place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Bode Swiller, You are naughty .. but ...
... you're definitely keeping this moving along nicely
| Quote: |
| It's just a fact of life. Two parties are booked into the same chalet. One has to be bumped. Which one gets bumped first? |
... depends who made that decision, at what stage in the process and how long before delivery. I've had a look back and it isnt particularly clear in this case.
Most travel companies obviously have procedures around overbooking - and they are very different - although generally the initial criteria relate to 'Which is the easiest to fix? ' and most providers will keep as many balls in the air as possible until having to make the final call. It is not solely based upon price paid nor transaction profit nor costs. It does appear to have been a late 'awareness' of overbooking in this case .. and Xmas period will not have helped; none of us, (possibly not even Neilson) may ever know the full story around the circumstances leading to the overbooking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
Doesn't signing a contract mean anything?
|
It certianly does but usually a lot more than people realise (which has been amply demonstrated in this thread). But the contract is not the end of the story because the legislature have created rules (usually to protect the little guy) governing what people can and cannot put in their contracts.
Bode makes a number of mixed moral and legal points, but on the legal side, there is no doubt Ed/someone in this situation is entitled to copensation (and indeed he was offered some - £25), the only question is the quantum. The "is £25 raesonable?" debate depends on a multitude of factors, but the following WILL and HAVE been considered by the courts in similar situations:
1. The Price; it simply is and must be a relevant consideration in any circumstance
2. The actual inconvenience; both subjective (how was the customer himself affected?) and objective (how would the hypothetical reasonable man have been so affected)
3. The relative rights and wrongs of each party; the equitable principle of "clean hands"
And just to clear up the irish/UK problem/difference (not the one thats been around for 800 years, just the Package Holiday one which is a little easier...). The limit on compensation in the Irish legislation only restricts the level at which a TO can set the MAXIMUM compensation in a contract; the actual amount that any customer might get is entirely up for grabs (once it is below that maximum). The UK law doesnt provide any figure/guidance for this maximum figure, except to say that it must not be unreasonable, so it could be that the UK law is MORE generous!.
The Irish law has NO RELEVANCE to the UK law except in one respect; the UK & Irish law enacts the exact same EU law - the manner in which one EU member state enacted the EU legislation IS AND HAS BEEN held to be evidence of the interpreatation of a law in another state - its a side issue but an issue nonetheless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Boredsurfing wrote: |
| thefatcontroller, When you going back out to your place? Half term? |
No busy with work, not out now till end of March 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
ed.bremner, you shoulda gone to Les Arcs, you clearly need a holiday.
Anyway I'm off out now. Another lavish restaurant appointment. I am going to make a point of asking for something I know they don't have and then I'm going to persue the restaurant for compensation until I die. You will be able to catch all the action on restaurantheads.com where the waiter, a Bulgarian gap-year student on £3 per hour, will be hung out to dry for not fawning all over me enough.
Later
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bode Swiller, Give my regards to Chemmy, or will she be substituted last minute by Loraine Kelly
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Quote:
It's just a fact of life. Two parties are booked into the same chalet. One has to be bumped. Which one gets bumped first?
... depends who made that decision, at what stage in the process and how long before delivery. I've had a look back and it isnt particularly clear in this case.
|
In my own case (where we werent informed until we got to the resort - the TO found out that morning apparently), the TO confirmed that, although we had booked first, they gave the apartment to the crowd who arrived at the resort first.........! There is no specific law on it but it would seem that in most cases, first booked would be the more sensible solution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ed.bremner wrote: |
David Goldsmith,
But the longest thread I have ever started, was made on my first ever post to SnowHeads.
|
Can't wait for your 2nd thread
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
