Hi I wonder if anyone can help, we went to Sal (Cape Verde) for one week FOR OUR HONEYMOON outbound on the 27th of May returning 3rd of June.
The flight was advertised with extra leg room (33inch)and seat back television on 767's.
We ended up with a 5 hour delay outbound and a bog standard aircraft, BOTH ways we had our knees under our chin and to add insult to injury they played the same films both going and return!!
What helped us choose this destination and resort (the resort was fantastic) was the luxury level of transport and all inclusive rersort.
I feel that Thomson fly has been at the least missleading with the brochure and according to other wab sites it happens all the time, so they can't blame operational problems.
People who had booked the upgraded service got a refund of the difference on the flight home, so why can't we in cattle class???
Do we have aleg to stand on even getting them to withdraw the inacurate brochure?
The question is did you pay for extra legroom? If you didn't then I'm afraid you can't claim for anything. Their brochure will have in small print that aircraft may change. You should have been given a snack voucher for the delay as it was over 4 hours.
To be honest if you had a fantastic time and the resort was everything you wished for, I would just put this down to experience, but if you did pay extra for legroom then write and request a refund for that.
To be honest if you had a fantastic time and the resort was everything you wished for, I would just put this down to experience, but if you did pay extra for legroom then write and request a refund for that.
If you regard it as false advertising then you should contact your local Trading Standards with a copy of the brochure as they may be interested.
luci
luci
Hi,
On the Thomson website you have to pay for extra legroom at £50 each. If you have got confirmation that you were getting extra legroom then challenge them.
Gail
On the Thomson website you have to pay for extra legroom at £50 each. If you have got confirmation that you were getting extra legroom then challenge them.
Gail
Please see my posting "£140/week for a double bed". Same trip, same company, similar problem. We corresponded with Thomson over a period of months, but got nowhere. I wonder how many others have had a problem.
Can I ask where you saw that the flight would be on a 767? Thomson usually only use those planes on long haul and Cape Verde is Mid, I think.
On our trip to Cape Verde Sal in January 2008 we flew out and back on the same plane, which was "Sir Matt Busby CBE" which is a 767-200. In the Thomson brochure (October 2007 to April 2008 - 3rd Edition), the flight details are bullet pointed and highlighted in yellow, including the £159/person for Premium Seats. In the explanation for the bullet pointed and yellow highlighted, the brochure states "Extra legroom for all, seat pitch of 33", more than Virgin and British Airways. Plus seat back TVs including movies and games."
When we flew out we were in the few larger seats in rows 1-5. when we flew back we were in 29" pitch seats and there were only a couple of rows of the larger seats at the front of the plane. Same plane, just different seating arrangement. None of the seats had seat back TVs, which checks out with the advice give by one of the Thomson reps on Sal that the planes originally intended for this route were being used for Hong Kong.
In the current Thomson brochure (May 2008 to October 2008 3rd Edition) the details in the flight schedules are different in that instead of there being "Premium Seats" at £159/person, there is now "Extra Seats" and £50/person, again with the whole line being highlighted in yellow and preceeded by a bullet point. The explanation for the yellow highlighting and bullet point though is identical to that given in the October 2007 to April 2008 brochure.
Are Thomson now only charging £50 for what they were previously charging £159? And, what exactly were they charging for anyway? What did they actually deliver?
If 150 - 200 people on each weekly trip over the six month winter period paid £159 for something they didn't get, then this is not a £159 problem, it could be a £750,000+ problem. Could this be why Thomson will not verify to us what we actually paid for and given us a load of rubbish about charging £140/Week for a double bed? (our room was the same size as those with two single beds, and the double bed was just two single beds side by side with a double mattress over anyway)
When we flew out we were in the few larger seats in rows 1-5. when we flew back we were in 29" pitch seats and there were only a couple of rows of the larger seats at the front of the plane. Same plane, just different seating arrangement. None of the seats had seat back TVs, which checks out with the advice give by one of the Thomson reps on Sal that the planes originally intended for this route were being used for Hong Kong.
In the current Thomson brochure (May 2008 to October 2008 3rd Edition) the details in the flight schedules are different in that instead of there being "Premium Seats" at £159/person, there is now "Extra Seats" and £50/person, again with the whole line being highlighted in yellow and preceeded by a bullet point. The explanation for the yellow highlighting and bullet point though is identical to that given in the October 2007 to April 2008 brochure.
Are Thomson now only charging £50 for what they were previously charging £159? And, what exactly were they charging for anyway? What did they actually deliver?
If 150 - 200 people on each weekly trip over the six month winter period paid £159 for something they didn't get, then this is not a £159 problem, it could be a £750,000+ problem. Could this be why Thomson will not verify to us what we actually paid for and given us a load of rubbish about charging £140/Week for a double bed? (our room was the same size as those with two single beds, and the double bed was just two single beds side by side with a double mattress over anyway)
The best advice has been given.
They will not withdraw any brochure unless it can be proved that it is misleading.
Aircraft seat configurations can be changed. Your description refers to "Premium Seats" You say the current brochure says "Extra Seats" - It is a different brochure - full stop. You cannot compare as they call them something else and charge a different price
The prices and configurations are a matter that is under constant review.
If you cannot sell at one price then you try to encourage sales by changing things and charging less. Standard business practice - nothing wrong with that.
What do you want? We can offer opinions forever but that is all we are doing.
If you wish to be compensated financially then whilst asking for advice on here is a first step you personally need to take the action.
If you wish for professional (against our opinions) advice and help then here are the details of someone who can actually do just that.
http://www.holidaytruths.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=117254
fwh
If you regard it as false advertising then you should contact your local Trading Standards with a copy of the brochure as they may be interested.
They will not withdraw any brochure unless it can be proved that it is misleading.
Aircraft seat configurations can be changed. Your description refers to "Premium Seats" You say the current brochure says "Extra Seats" - It is a different brochure - full stop. You cannot compare as they call them something else and charge a different price
The prices and configurations are a matter that is under constant review.
If you cannot sell at one price then you try to encourage sales by changing things and charging less. Standard business practice - nothing wrong with that.
What do you want? We can offer opinions forever but that is all we are doing.
If you wish to be compensated financially then whilst asking for advice on here is a first step you personally need to take the action.
If you wish for professional (against our opinions) advice and help then here are the details of someone who can actually do just that.
http://www.holidaytruths.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=117254
fwh
I have no problem with Thomson changing aircraft or seating configurations, as they are entitled to do, or reducing the price for something.
Our problem is very simple in that we believe we have paid for something we did not get, but we do not have sufficient paperwork to verify our position, other than what we think we paid for adds up to what we actually paid. Thomson say we did not pay for Pemium seats, but that we paid for something else, i.e. £140/week for a double bed. The difficulty is that excluding 2 x £159 but including the £140 does not add up to what we actually paid and Thomson refuse to tell us what else it was that they charged us for.
Not a lot of money is at stake for us, and so ultimately it is not worth pursuing. However, from simple arithmetic it is clear that Thomson's view makes no sense and they have not been willing or able to substantiate their view. They did not deliver 33" pitch seats for all etc., and it seems that albeit at a reduced price they are continuing to not deliver when the charge for the facility is not an optional extra.
Our problem is very simple in that we believe we have paid for something we did not get, but we do not have sufficient paperwork to verify our position, other than what we think we paid for adds up to what we actually paid. Thomson say we did not pay for Pemium seats, but that we paid for something else, i.e. £140/week for a double bed. The difficulty is that excluding 2 x £159 but including the £140 does not add up to what we actually paid and Thomson refuse to tell us what else it was that they charged us for.
Not a lot of money is at stake for us, and so ultimately it is not worth pursuing. However, from simple arithmetic it is clear that Thomson's view makes no sense and they have not been willing or able to substantiate their view. They did not deliver 33" pitch seats for all etc., and it seems that albeit at a reduced price they are continuing to not deliver when the charge for the facility is not an optional extra.
The very simple answer to your problem is to contact Ros Fernihough
Contact details here - http://www.holidaytruths.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=117254
The only connection that Ros has with HT is the number of members she has helped.
She neither reads or contributes to the forum and is one of the top people in the country on travel law and its many alleyways.
Members and contributors to HT may only express their own personal views and opinions. Whilst some of them may be very accurate due to the occupation or experiences of the poster they are still only a personal viewpoint.
fwh
Contact details here - http://www.holidaytruths.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=117254
The only connection that Ros has with HT is the number of members she has helped.
She neither reads or contributes to the forum and is one of the top people in the country on travel law and its many alleyways.
Members and contributors to HT may only express their own personal views and opinions. Whilst some of them may be very accurate due to the occupation or experiences of the poster they are still only a personal viewpoint.
fwh
Not only Thomson are getting away with this,it is false advertising,they should put you COULD have a plane with ect ect then its ok if you get something else, but to make it a focal point to sell the holiday or flight its false advertising.It seems the travel industry can flout the Trade Discriptions Act at will and get away with it.
I had a very similar experience with Thomson. We booked a holiday through their webpage to Agadir for May this year. At the time of booking the flight was advertised as having 33" legroom and back of seat TVs, plus a few other bits. When we got on the plane it was just a standard short haul setup. So 28" legroom and about 6 TVs on the plane. Speaking to the cabin crew, it was the correct plane for the route and we had been incorrectly advised. Likewise the return flight was on the same plane.
Admittedly we survived the flight ok (well apart from a 7 hour delay on the return journey, and no food as they hadn't loaded enough, but that is another story...) and we had a really good holiday. However we could have booked exactly the same holiday through Thomas Cook (with Thomas Cook flights) for several hundred pounds less. At the time of booking the 'upgraded' flights convinced us to go with Thomson.
I have written to Thomson about this and am currently waiting their reply. Interestingly their webpage is still showing upgraded flights to Agadir - which is well over six months since we booked our holiday.
Admittedly we survived the flight ok (well apart from a 7 hour delay on the return journey, and no food as they hadn't loaded enough, but that is another story...) and we had a really good holiday. However we could have booked exactly the same holiday through Thomas Cook (with Thomas Cook flights) for several hundred pounds less. At the time of booking the 'upgraded' flights convinced us to go with Thomson.
I have written to Thomson about this and am currently waiting their reply. Interestingly their webpage is still showing upgraded flights to Agadir - which is well over six months since we booked our holiday.
Since my last contribution I have reported our particular problem to Trading Standards, who took full details and said it would be forwarded to some central department. If you phone 0845-404-0506 from a land line you will be put through to your local area Trading Standards. Perhaps if more people would do this, Thomson's non-delivery of advertised facilities (which we have all paid for)would be recognised as something other than a small one-off problem.
Post a Reply
Please sign in or register an account to reply to this post.
Similar Topics