Mis-sold a holiday which is unsuitable for my 1yr old

[rigs]

I have just booked a holiday with First Choice to Mexico for me and my family of 5. My youngest daughter is one year old. I booked it a week ago, and we are due to depart in 8 weeks, so have had to pay all the money up front.

Because of the risk of contracting serious diseases, we had arranged for us all to have vaccinations. One of these is Typhoid and we have just found out that one year olds are not allowed to have it.

This means that we can't go on the holiday without putting my daughter at risk of a serious illness, so I would like to cancel the holiday.

However, First Choice will not refund the money. They want to apply a cancellation charge (£50, or £50p/p, I am not sure yet) and give us a credit note.

I feel like they should refund the cash so that I can book my holiday with whoever I choose.

As they are a travel agent weren't they obliged to have made me aware of this hazard before I booked? If so, is this a case of mis-selling, and are they therefore obliged by law to return all of money?

 

Thank you,

[flying_visitor]

Oh Rigs, i'm new here so not quite sure on the protocol for answering other peoples questions but as it happens I was an assistant in an infectious diseases unit which had a travel clinic for a long time and we had signs everywhere that say you should always check for vaccination requirements before signing up for a holiday. Of course these signs are posted in the hospital but one would imagine that the travel agent would have a similar sign up somewhere. It seems awfully irresponsible if they don't have these printed on a sign or maybe in the brochure.

[Chesterexpress]

Not the travel agents fault. You say your youngest is only a week old and you booked it a week ago......crazy!

[Guest louis wu]

Rigs, I honestly don't know what the legal aspect of this is, but do you really think that booking a holiday, costing £1000's without checking if it was suitable for your 1 WEEK old daughter, was responsible?

 

My youngest daughter is one week old. I booked it a week ago, and we are due to depart in 8 weeks

 

did you really book it the day she was born?

 

 

 

Forget the TA's responsibility, what about your responsibilty as a parent.

 

It seems awfully irresponsible if they don't have these printed on a sign or maybe in the brochure.

 

I would be very suprised if there wasn't any mention of immunisation anywhere involved in the booking of this holiday.

 

I think you should just accept the charge and be more careful with your daughters health

 

louis

[gizmo111]

I think the week old should be a year old as per the title.

[Guest louis wu]

or is it the other way round?

[Bookworm]

No, it's not the T/A's responsability to know which vaccinations are or are not suitable for age groups, it is yours to choose a country which won't require immunisation your daughter can't have. You should have checked with your GP, or online, before booking.

 

Be glad it's only £50 pp, so close to the holiday, they could well have charged you a lot more, they usually do.

[Loubychew]

Hi,

I have to concur with previous posts. It is your responibility to check out what vaccinations are needed before you book.

 

Click the link below taken from FC website and scroll almost to the very end where you will find a list of immunisations required for tropical destinations.

 

First Choice - Information on Health and Special Needs.

 

In fairness, at the time of booking they can't tell us every single thing down to the smallest detail. We have to take some of the responsibility when it concerns our families.

 

Will they allow you to change to a destination that does not require typhoid vaccs? Dom Rep, Cuba for example?

[rigs]

Lol. Apologies for the confusion, I meant to say that she is 1 year old (15 months in fact), so I've now corrected my original post. I agree, that would have been a very hasty holiday to book!

 

Anyway, we were aware that vaccinations were required and will not travel without them if they are recommended. What we were not aware of was that it is not legal for my daughter to have the vaccination, this is a contradiction which I feel the agent had a responsibility to warn me of. The main point is that the travel agent was fully aware that we were travelling with an infant - she was with me when we booked, we discussed her age and the booking includes one infant (

1) Go to Mexico against medical advice and put my daughter in danger

2) Cancel the holiday, losing ~20% of the total cost

3) Re-book with the agent from a reduced set of holidays and forfeit ~£200

 

Also, when I explained my position to the travel agent, they thought it was perfectly reasonable for us to travel without the vaccinations even though I told them that it was against the advice of our doctor (and every advice I can find on the subject on the internet).

 

So for everyone concluding that I had acted irresponsibly by booking the holiday (I would argue that it was innocently or at worst, naively) do they still think the travel agent is acting responsibly? Or is a child's welfare only the responsibility of a parent?

 

The question boils down to whether the travel agent should have allowed us to book a holiday without at least mentioning that we would have to go against medical opinion to go.

I am not expecting every detail, just ones that completely invalidate my ability to use what they are selling me, especially when they were pressing for a quick decision because the holiday was only 8/9 weeks away. I got their advice and booked on the same day!

[Guest louis wu]

Lol. Apologies for the confusion, I meant to say that she is 1 year old (15 months in fact), so I've now corrected my original post. I agree, that would have been a very hasty holiday to book!

 

I must admit, I nearly fell out of my chair when I first read it:)

[gizmo111]

Did you ask the TA about vaccinations?

[Bookworm]

Or is a child's welfare only the responsibility of a parent?

Ultimately, yes.

It is YOUR responsability to check what vaccinations are needed, YOUR responsability to make sure that they can be administered to your child, YOUR responsability not to book until you have checked that your child will be as safe as can be when you go.

 

Let's put this in an analogy that might make things easier: If your child was allergic to peanuts, would you go to the supermarket, tell the cashier your child is allergic to them, and expect her to point out items in your basket that may contain nuts as you put them on the conveyor belt? No. You would have checked before putting the stuff in your basket.

 

I know it's not what you want to hear, but I really don't think you're going to get anywhere on that one, in all honesty.

 

A few years ago, I got a call from a Scottish lady, 1st time ever out of Scotland in her 50 years or so, and she decided to go to Turkey in Mid-August. After 3 days, she wanted to curtail her holidays "because it was too hot". Well, duh! if you'll forgive the expression. The insurance didn't pay for an early return, of course. Regardless that the holiday ended being unsuitable for her, it was still her who chose to book, it was her responsability.

 

The TA sells a product, it is not up to them to check whether that product is right for you, it is up to you to see that the product you're buying fits your requirements.

[rigs]

This is all a moot point for me now, because we have rebooked with the travel company (is it libelous to use their name?). The overall cost to me was ~£340. The admin fee was only £140, but then it also cost me ~£200 because they would not offer me their best available prices because they already had my money. I knew this would happen, which is partly why I was so vigorously opposed to having to rebook with them.

Anyway, from a theoretical point of view, I still find the opinions in the thread interesting to debate.

 

A few years ago, I got a call from a Scottish lady, 1st time ever out of Scotland in her 50 years or so, and she decided to go to Turkey in Mid-August. After 3 days, she wanted to curtail her holidays "because it was too hot". Well, duh! if you'll forgive the expression. The insurance didn't pay for an early return, of course. Regardless that the holiday ended being unsuitable for her, it was still her who chose to book, it was her responsability.

I don’t think this analogy has any relevance unless Mexico were tagged as the country of “Sun, Sand, Sea and diseases that children under 2 can’t be protected against”. It’s common knowledge that Mediterranean countries are a lot hotter than the UK, in fact it is a major component of how the product is marketed. Funnily enough, I think I’ve heard the story several times myself before and it wouldn’t surprise me if it is an “amusing” anecdote which is part of the standard training that travel agency staff would receive for dealing with customer complaints.

 

Let's put this in an analogy that might make things easier: If your child was allergic to peanuts, would you go to the supermarket, tell the cashier your child is allergic to them, and expect her to point out items in your basket that may contain nuts as you put them on the conveyor belt? No. You would have checked before putting the stuff in your basket.

This is closer to the mark, but still distinctly different. My daughter doesn’t have a condition which requires specialist care or knowledge. The problem she has is universal for all holders of the ticket she has been sold by the agency.

The predicament she is (I am) in, is in my opinion much closer to this analogy:

A ticket agency sells two ranges of tickets for a quiz night. Adult tickets @£5pp, and Child tickets @£2pp. Then when you turn up at the venue, you are told that it is a pub quiz and children are not allowed in (although it is not illegal for children to enter a pub). My opinion is that the agency (which is not the same as the venue) should not be selling tickets that the customer can’t use. The customer could of course have found this information themselves by calling the venue before purchasing the tickets, but it is still a mis-selling of the product.

 

 

Did you ask the TA about vaccinations?

I was already aware that we would all require some vaccinations, and I think the TA did indeed raise the issue, but this was missing a crucial piece of information related to booking an infant ticket in particular - no infants are able to take the recommended vaccination. If this had been mentioned, obviously we would never have booked the holiday in the first place.

I don’t think the agent did anything wrong at the advise stage, I just think that travel agents and operators should train their staff to mention that key piece of information when people are making similar bookings. I do however think that it was wrong of the travel agency staff to try to convince me to ignore the medical advice I received from my GP, and an independent private clinic after I discovered it (my earlier posts had not clarified that, because I don’t think it is the essence of my dispute).

 

Ultimately, yes.

It is YOUR responsability to check what vaccinations are needed, quote]

I don’t think this is quite true. The travel agent has a legal responsibility to make you aware of compulsory vaccinations. Typhoid is not compulsory unfortunately for me, so I think you’re right, they do not have a legal responsibility. However, I don’t think they have acted as responsibly as they should in cases such as this. I think they have a moral responsibility to make people aware of this.

 

Firstly, in major tourist destinations vaccinations which are not permitted for infants are quite rare. It is a lot easier for a travel agent to make customers aware of this than it is for every family going to these countries to find it out individually (we had done some research, and did not notice this subtle problem). However, this kind of information is quite easy for the travel agency to make their staff aware of through company communications. I realise the argument against this is that they can’t know everything down to the tiniest detail, but personally I think this is headline information. Can anyone name 3 pieces of information as important as this, but as difficult to discover on your own?

 

Secondly, not making people aware of this puts children in danger that could be avoided. If I had discovered this problem a week later, the financial penalty for changing my plans would have been much greater (I think in excess of £1000). That is a sum of money that would spur some parents take the decision (rightly or wrongly) to go ahead with the holiday and put their child at risk. Yes, it’s the parent’s responsibility ultimately, but it is a scenario that could easily be avoided if the travel agents acted more responsibly in the first place. The temptation to take the risk would only be increased when you ring the agency to complain about your predicament, and they suggest that you should ignore the medical advice and go ahead with the holiday (even though they did not have any statistical evidence of probabilities of catching the disease, or mortality rates for infants).

 

Ultimate legal responsibility for the child’s welfare is in the hands of the parents, but I think the travel agents should give you every chance to make the right decision. In this case, I think they have made it unnecessarily difficult.

[Bookworm]

I had written a very long and detailed response, but lost my Internet connection as I posted it, and since it seems to me that whatever I say won't convince you that you made a mistake and not the TA, I won't bother retyping it. The only thing is will comment on is this:

Funnily enough, I think I’ve heard the story several times myself before and it wouldn’t surprise me if it is an “amusing” anecdote which is part of the standard training that travel agency staff would receive for dealing with customer complaints.

Having never worked as a TA myself, I would be very surprised if that were the case, unless someone got access to my caseload as a medical emergency assistance coordinator and decided to pass it around.

 

You may not like it, but it doesn't make it less true: As a parent, the buck stops with you. Always.

[Loubychew]

The usual TO or TA member of staff surely would not know that a child of 1 or 2 could not have a typhoid vacc anyway. They are not doctors.

I'm a rep and I didn't know!

 

Even if they did know, they would probably not be able to advise just in case they got it very wrong and then where would they be? A claim for ill advice or negligence. Due to the compensation culture we live in these days, there are many things TO and TA staff cannot say or do in a medical type situation. This is probably one of them.

[Guest louis wu]

Where in mexico are you going, and do you intend to travel to the more 'rural' areas?

 

I have been to mexico many times and never had a typhoid injection. To my knowledge it's only recommended to those straying off the beaten track.....which I'm sure with a 1 year old in tow you won't be doing.

 

Could you list the other drugs you've taken for this trip, and whether your daughter has had these as well. If you've consider typhoid, I would imagine you looked at HEP A & B, malaria....and possibly RABIES as well. I assume your daughter will be having her MMR and is up to date with her other jabs, especially diphtheria. A TB booster can also be considered for the adults, along with a few I haven't mentioned.

 

You see the list is quite extensive. As well as protecting against sunstroke/dehydration etc, never in easy in 80+ degree heat with a one year old.

 

louis

[Guest louis wu]

but I think the travel agents should give you every chance to make the right decision

 

Travelling abroad, especially with a family carries many risks and unknowns. If the travel agent had to sit there and walk you through every potential mishap you could face, you'd still be sitting there now. And it's no good saying immunisation should be top of the list, because for many it isn't. If you got knocked over, would you blame the TA for not telling you they drove on the other side of the road? Did they give you advice on food/water, sings and symptoms of malaria, beach vendors, taxi's, excursions, police/fire/ambulance issues....the list is as endless as it is varied, and every single person would have different priorities/needs when it comes to help and information.

 

I believe there are specialist companies that will taylor a holiday for you, and give this info to you. It does, however, cost considerably more than the usual method, much like GP services and private clinics.

 

There is more than enough info on the internet and these issues are easy to look up. It will take less than a second for my computer to give me thousands of pages on immunisation, and then it's just a bit of time to look through and find whats relevant. It's what we all do every day.

 

louis

[Carriep]

Hi,

 

I work for a BBC1 consumer affairs programme called "Don't Get Done, Get Dom", in which presenter Dominic Littlewood attempts to resolve issues that have arisen between consumers and companies.

 

Having read your story, we would be extremely keen to hear from you to see if there is anything we might be able to do to help.

 

If you would like to talk to us, please get in touch at:

 

[email protected]

02072785052

 

Thanks very much,

 

Robert Gershinson

Don’t Get Done, Get Dom (BBC1)