Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hobnail you don't know Elms too well yet. I am surprised that they got as close as they did to adding up to 30. I think the poor dears get confused because most other letters they send out are to give 28 days notice. They even  have difficulty with their two times table and often consult with the char lady to confirm that 2 plus 2 equals 4.  Just act on the notion that they are total numpties and you won't be far out.
    • To carry on from the above post it may be helpful to go through their WS using their numbers. 9] motorists do NOT accept the contract when entering the land. First they have to read it and understand it and then they realise that a] "No stopping" is prohibitive and cannot offer a contract. b] the signs around the bus stop do not mention who issued the No Stopping signs so it could not have been issued by VCS since the IPC CoP states that their signs should include the IPC logo and the creditor be identified.  10]There is no mention of £100 charge for breaching the No stopping request or if there is it is far too small to read even for a pedestrian. 11] no matter how often VCS say it, it is NOT a contractual clause   22]" the claimant has given the Defendant its contractual licence to enter the site". No it hasn't. This is a road leading to the airport. All sorts of people are going to the airport-travellers, taxis, fuel bowsers, airport staff, companies delivering food and drink for each aircraft, air traffic controllers, buses. It is absolutely ridiculous to attribute VCS wth any sort of permissions. The land owners yes, but not VCS . There can be no sort of analogy between a car park and a major thoroughfare where VCS have no place as it is not relevant land.   23] there can be no contract as there is no offer only a prohibition. And it is not relevant land no matter how Mr Walli attempts to prove otherwise. 25] VCS may have won a few times but none quoted was on an airport covered by the RTA and its own Byelaws. They also have lost more cases than they have won using their prohibitive signs. 26] First one has to consider if there is a contract. Is it relevant land? No. Does a valid contract exist betweer VCS and Peel? NO.  27] the signage at the bus stop may show the conditions ie  no stopping, and restricted zone but not the terms ie is there a charge for stopping and who is the creditor. The last section of the sign is illegible  29] already stated that a WS between VCS and peel is not a valid document 31] it will need more than the Claimants feather to outweigh the case against the Defendant no matter who was driving. 32] there is no law of agency involved. This is not a case of employer/employedd relationship. VCS are muddying the waters because they have no way of transferring the driver's liability to the keeper 33] this a red herring. There is no list of highways at all  on the Highways act 1980 so this is a deliberate strategy to debunk the fact that this road is not relevant land. VCS are put to strict proof that it is relevant land not covered by the Road Traffic Act nor by Byelaws. 34] there ican be no comparison between a railway station and an airport. Totally fatuous analogy.  35] yes the landowners can bring in their own terms but what the cannot do is overrule Byelaws and the Road Traffic Act. 39] surely the paralegal cannot be that ignorant of PoFA. If Bye Laws are involved then the bus stop is not relevant land and so the specious argument about FGW is rubbish   36] what on earth is he talking about with Permits. There is no mention of permits on the signage and even if there were  would it mean that Permit holders were allowed to stop on No Stopping roads? There are enough examples on CAG to counter act their idiocy on continuing charging the extra £60   46] VCS had NO reasonable cause to apply to the DVLA for the Defendants details. No valid  contract with the landowners No stopping is prohibitive therefore cannot form a contract the event happened on a bus stop over which VCS has no jurisdiction the signage either does not show that there was a charge of £100 for stopping, or the font size was too small for a motorist to be able to read it  the signage does not show the Creditor which fails the IPC CoP so not valid the WS contract does not appear to authorise VCS to pursue motorists to Court Given all these factors it seems that VCS have breached the GDPR of the Defendant quite substantially and it would appear right that an exemplary award is made against VCS in the hope that they will drop all further cases at Doncaster airport where they are pursuing motorists on non relevant land.   48] what is this guy on? You weren't in a car park you were on a bus stop 59] this case is totally without merit. I am not surprised that the paralegal will not be turning up. Some statements are pretty close to perjury and others are designed to mislead or misdirect. None of the analogies seem appropriate or relevant. Could have been said in at least half the time without the repetition and trying to make a case where none was there. One particularly bad example of misdirection was in the photographs. The Clearway sign shown near the bus stop is very unclear  unlike the Clearway sign two photos before it which may well include terms and conditions. The one by the bus stop is totally different.      
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote...   your defence doesnt need any return of docs.. carefully read what has been posted here and in the other threads i pointed to in your old thread merged here too.   redwood/harwood or STA or brachers.   just use our enhanced google search box.   uni fees is useful too.   this guy is just in front of you    
    • Tech firm CEO Jeff Lawson warns bosses not to make hasty judgements about their employees.View the full article
    • I have just spent last few hours registering and signing up and filling in all the details.   Below is a POC I have drafted.   The defendant is a parcel delivery company DPD (UK) LIMITED On 09/08/2021 the defendant agreed to deliver the claimant's parcel containing a PlayStation 5 Disc Version value £530, to an address in the UK. The delivery fee of £7.79 was paid by the claimant. Parcel tracking number: ???????? Parcel reference no: ????????? The defendant failed to deliver the parcel and have reported it as lost on 20/08/2021. The defendant refuses to refund the full value of the item and the delivery fee. The claimant seeks £530 being the value of the item, £7.79 delivery cost and legal fees.        (Sorry for being stupid but this POC is supposed to go where it says    " Claim details Why you believe you’re owed the money: " right? Reason why I'm asking is because I don't see anywhere it specifically says what are your particulars of claim)   Tomorrow being the 15th day, I will be ready to click it off (assuming the POC is ok)    I have read a few more hermes/packlink etc stories where they were resolved and gives me hope I will regain my lost money.  Will carry on reading up as much as I can.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

First Choice quoted wrong price for amendments.


ajjars
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5276 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

This question is a bit long winded, so please bear with me! We booked a holiday for next month - 22 of us and due to circumstances 2 people dropped out, but we managed to fill their places. I was quoted £20 per person per name change by first choice - who the booking was made through to amend the booking to include the 2 "new" people. The girl who quoted me £20 did not stipulate a time by when the changes had to be made, she merely said the tickets will be with us between 7 - 14 days before we go. I assumed she meant we had to do the name changes before this time. Not having the correct information (full names, D.O.B's etc) on me at the time she told me this, I left the shop. A couple of weeks later, 4 1/2 weeks before departure I drove back down to the shop to make the amendments. The young girl who served me told me the amendments she "thinks" will cost £20. I told her thats what I had been quoted. She proceeded to ring Thomsons to make the amendments, but as it was busy she told me I could go home and she would ring me when it was done to confirm. She asked me what to do if it was not £20, and I told her to go ahead as we needed the changes to be done. (If i'm quoted £20, it can't be much more can it?) WRONG!! The girl never actually rang me back, because I forgot to tell her I do not receive calls from withheld numbers (in fact, this never even crossed my mind at the time). A couple of days later, I went back to the shop to add another person to the booking and to pay the £40 for the name changes, but when I went to pay I was told it will be £100 - £50 each! The girl had just gone ahead and made the amendments on what I had said to her earlier. She never thought to check first as the price was 2 1/2 times my original quote. Basically first choice told me to take this up with Thomsons. When I rang Thomsons they said their charges have never been £20 and I was quoted wrongly in the first place. Thomsons don't want anything to do with this saying it is down to first choice. I rang first choice back and spoke to the young girl, who started to back track on what was said during our conversation. She then passed me to a manager, who stated that the girl had in fact quoted me £50 at the time of making the amendement, before I left the shop. When I pointed out that I had just spoken to the girl 5 mins previously and she agreed that she said she thought the charge was £20 per person, the manager then said "No! I meant she told you that when she rang to confirm with you before she made the amendments". Well thats funny because there is no way they can ring me. My phone does not accept withheld numbers, and they cannot get through on their phones.

By this time the manager was all flustered and told me to ring back tomorrow (today) and she will speak to someone more senior (thought she was the manager?). Apparently, the tickets have been printed and therefore it will cost £50 in admin charges to reprint them (are they in collusion with the banks and their charges?) I haven't actually managed to sort this out today as when I got home my phone was up the creek!

So, basically, who is in the right? I am prepared to meet them half way over this issue, but I am not prepared to pay £50 when I was (rightly or wrongly) quoted £20. I'm a bit peeved with them as the service overall I have received from them regarding this booking has been less than great, and this is just 1 incident in a catalogue of misinformation we have received. (Another thing they did was quote wrong flight times, 3 hours later than the actual flight, and we have had to cancel our travelling arrangements to the airport, incurring cancellation fees).

 

Can anyone help on this? Any thoughts welcome!

 

Cheers Ajjars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

Basically, in a nutshell, if you made any changes within 8 weeks of departure, the charges do go up ALOT!! Anything right up to cancelling the original person and losing that money and rebooking the new person and paying again.

 

You need to look in the back of the Thomson brochure to find out exactly what their charges are, and were you charged in line with those advertised??

 

I understand what you are saying about being misinformed in the first place. In the agents defence you did say to go ahead regardelss, not her fault, and also not her fault that she couldn't get through to you on the phone. What I dont understand is why the mis quoted you in the first place, its in black and white in the back of all the Thomson brochures what their charges are, all they had to do was take one off their shelves and read it.... not exactly difficult.

 

Your complaint isn't with Thomson, its with your booking agent (First Choice) I would begin by telling them that you expect them to pay the £60.00 difference (not much to them on a booking for 22 people) as a gesture of good will. If they refuse point blank then ask them to meet you half way.

 

I would also ask to see back over the notes on your account with them, as they should have record of your previous conversations regarding this matter, the girl should write in what you asked and what she said in reply eg: "....came into office to ask how much the amndt chgs are for name chng, advsd £20.00 per person" or words to that effect!

 

The trick is (and its hard I know) not to get angry with them in the first instance, as if you do they will be unwilling to help you! Try and keep your cool and see how you go.

 

Good luck

 

Heidi

I am not a legal expert, any advice I give is based purley on experience or opinion.

Please tip the scales if you feel I have helped you!! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply heidi,

 

Managed to get it sorted, thanks for the advice! In the end we agreed to meet halfway. Much better than the whole £100 - more beer money! lol

 

Will know for next time when it comes to matters like this, make sure there is written proof somewhere!!!

 

Once again thank you,

 

Ajjars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...