Significant changes

[Nimbus]

Originally Posted by Mickie

For the dining it is definitely a significant change and clearly cover by the packaged travel regulations.

See more...

Except it isn't.

It does apply if you've booked half-board or full-board and this is changed or removed. In that case, the hotel booking has changed from half/full board to room-only, which is a significant change.

However, in the OP's case, the OP booked the hotel on a room-only basis and then received a dining plan for no additional cost as a separate perk. Removal of that perk does not constitute a significant change to their hotel booking - the OP will still be getting the hotel board basis that they paid for - i.e. room-only.

[rsvdaz]

not wanting to fuel the debate on this but...

I booked the hotel on the basis that it included the QSDP -if that wasnt on offer I would have more or likely not booked the hotel.

using your analogy what if I saw a car in a showroom that had 4 wheels and had a sign on the top - todays offer -this car with 4 wheels free- I buy the car and it gets delivered without any wheels - and they argue but they was free anyway?

I will however word my reason for cancellation and refund using exceptional circumstances

[Donaldfan]

Originally Posted by rsvdaz

not wanting to fuel the debate on this but...

I booked the hotel on the basis that it included the QSDP -if that wasnt on offer I would have more or likely not booked the hotel.

using your analogy what if I saw a car in a showroom that had 4 wheels and had a sign on the top - todays offer -this car with 4 wheels free- I buy the car and it gets delivered without any wheels - and they argue but they was free anyway?

I will however word my reason for cancellation and refund using exceptional circumstances

See more...

Wheels are needed for a car to work. A free dining plan isn't needed when staying at a hotel. Having had it the last 2 years it's nice to have but it's not needed as food can be paid for with cash.

[rsvdaz]

Originally Posted by Donaldfan

Wheels are needed for a car to work. A free dining plan isn't needed when staying at a hotel. Having had it the last 2 years it's nice to have but it's not needed as food can be paid for with cash.

See more...

but you can also buy the wheels?

[Lozzi]

Originally Posted by Nimbus

Except it isn't.

It does apply if you've booked half-board or full-board and this is changed or removed. In that case, the hotel booking has changed from half/full board to room-only, which is a significant change.

However, in the OP's case, the OP booked the hotel on a room-only basis and then received a dining plan for no additional cost as a separate perk. Removal of that perk does not constitute a significant change to their hotel booking - the OP will still be getting the hotel board basis that they paid for - i.e. room-only.

See more...

Are you sure ? Not saying you are wrong as to be honest id be applying my own opinion rather than it being factual, but may I ask why you are so certain ?

Please also don't take that the wrong way as doubting you, just wondering if you work in the travel industry and have experience?

[Nimbus]

Originally Posted by rsvdaz

using your analogy what if I saw a car in a showroom that had 4 wheels and had a sign on the top - todays offer -this car with 4 wheels free- I buy the car and it gets delivered without any wheels - and they argue but they was free anyway?

See more...

That's not quite the right analogy though.

Instead, let's say you were buying a car with no entertainment system (no radio/music/navigation/bluetooth/whatever system) at all - and the price did not include any entertainment system - but you were also provided a free entertainment system as a separate perk. You put a deposit down on the car. The contract stated you were purchasing a car with no entertainment system plus it listed a free entertainment system as a separate item, bought for one total price. Then, before you finally buy the car, the free perk was taken away.

The first item is not affected - you are still getting a car without an entertainment system - so no significant change there. You have lost the free additional entertainment system - so you'll receive a refund (of nothing) for that.

In the above case, it is not legally a significant change to what you were going to buy. It is only the removal of the free perk. You were going to buy a car with no entertainment system and that's exactly what you'll now get.

Yes, to you there is a significant difference. I agree with you there. But what you think is significant and what the seller deems as legally significant are two different things.

[Nimbus]

Originally Posted by Lozzi

Are you sure ? Not saying you are wrong as to be honest id be applying my own opinion rather than it being factual, but may I ask why you are so certain ?

Please also don't take that the wrong way as doubting you, just wondering if you work in the travel industry and have experience?

See more...

Please do doubt me. I'm not a lawyer. I do not work in the travel industry business. I could be totally wrong (just as anyone else here could).

I'm just putting forward my view and also what I've seen from other people trying to argue it's a "significant change" with Virgin. The OP may get a different response from their TA.

And if I was working for the TAs legal team, it's how I would argue it. Of course, the TAs PR team might have something different to say.

[steve30]

Sorry Nimbus I disagree with you. Free or not, its the package that matters here. The package included a dining component.

That part of the package has been removed, therefore it was not the "package" that was purchased, and is therefore a significant change.

[steve30]

I think maybe "significant change" is the wrong terminology here, and isn't whats used in the package travel regs.

This from Which makes it pretty clear there is a claim for refund in this instance:

By law you have the right to expect that the holiday you booked and paid for matches the description given to you when you bought it. So, pay careful attention to how the package holiday is described by your travel agent, in the brochure or a website.

If the holiday doesn’t match how it was described, The Package Travel and Linked Travel Arrangement Regulations 2018 (The Regulations) - which implement the EU's Package Travel Directive 2015 - give you the right to ask your tour operator to put it right and - if it’s unable to - claim compensation.

[Nimbus]

Originally Posted by steve30

Sorry Nimbus I disagree with you. Free or not, its the package that matters here. The package included a dining component.

That part of the package has been removed, therefore it was not the "package" that was purchased, and is therefore a significant change.

See more...

Nothing wrong with disagreeing with me.

I'm just warning the OP that the TA may argue that this isn't a significant change because the OP purchased the hotel on a room-only basis with a free perk thrown in. They are still getting the hotel on a room-only basis but now without the free perk thrown in. Losing a free perk would not be considered a legally significant change to their package (even if it seems like a fairly major change to us).

Again, it's what Virgin have tried to argue.