Thank you Glynis for your useful comments.
My major point is that each traveller should be responsible before they set out and make allowances for the fact that sometimes a journey does not go as expected for no fault of the operator.
I am sure that Hoverspeed programme their departures for the Sea Cat to ensure that their passengers travel safely, and reserve the right not to put to sea in inappropriate weather conditions, as determined by the Captain of each particular departure. And I am sure that this appears in the terms and conditions of travel on your ticket.
As to my comments about the quality of English, I am not referring to the invective that is the first response to a Brit not having their way in a situation - I am referring to grammar and local idiomatic expressions. Indeed English is taught to far more individuals in schools in France and a higher level of communication is reached than by their British counterparts in England in the French language.
Sometimes emotion tends to overwhelm a situation; a calm head is required and sometimes flexibility is required between both parties. It is often unfortunate how a situation escalates into a competition of who can shout the loudest and take the least number of breaths in a conversation!
All I persist in is this: does financial compensation really fix the situation? I don't like the idea that everyone seems so keen to find someone else to blame and not accept that in many circumstances, there is noone to blame and the situation, though unacceptable just has to be lived with.
I would also like to see more tolerance between members of the British public and those 'foreigners' in whose countries they are visiting as guests. Different does not mean inferior.
Incidentally do I detect a similarity between a certain Captain Pugwash who posted when this subject appeared under a different thread and the new user Sneeze Muffin - as both of you had very strong views on the Hoverspeed services between the UK and Ostend, which subsequently closed? Perhaps you could advise me on this point? If you are one and the same, no offence taken then or now! Just spices up the discussion!!
Hope this autumn does not cause similar weather conditions .... remember the great storm of 1987? Perhaps Hoverspeed will be ready and waiting to solve the potential problems more amically than earlier this year.
does financial compensation really fix the situation
It might not fix it but it helps and if hooverspeed are at fault for not having somewhere for passengers to wait until the next sailing they should pay up. The cancellation of the sailing due to bad weather is nobodies fault, but looking after you paseengers to reasonable degree in a foreign country is a must. If they felt they had no reponsibility why did they settle instead of going to court. The world is a very different place now and everybody wants their £ of flesh.
It might not fix it but it helps and if hooverspeed are at fault for not having somewhere for passengers to wait until the next sailing they should pay up. The cancellation of the sailing due to bad weather is nobodies fault, but looking after you paseengers to reasonable degree in a foreign country is a must. If they felt they had no reponsibility why did they settle instead of going to court. The world is a very different place now and everybody wants their £ of flesh.
does financial compensation really fix the situation
That very much depends on the situation, the point that I was trying to make is that its about making enough of a point that companies improve the service they provide. If on making a complaint I was to receive an apology and an assurance that they were going to implement changes for the better, then I might leave it at that but if they were offhand about my complaint, then I would consider if taking my case to court was the only way to implement changes. Companies are not going to spend money making things better if we let them get away with things the way they are, if that means we pay a little more, then so be it, I would rather travel with a company that has consideration for its customers than one that just chucks you out in a force 9 gale.
Lynn
Totslly agree with you silverpixie.
I have enjoyed discussing this topic, and I thank both Mike and Silverpixie for their interest and points of view. There is no point in my continuing the thread once the conversation turns petty and personal as I feel it has from Sneeze Muffin. Thank you all, and au revoir.
Hoverspeed filed an Admission with the Croydon County Court and I got a nice letter of apology confirming this from the PA to the Managing Director Geoffrey Ede. I was a bit surprised they don't have a legal department though! Hoverspeed sent a cheque for the expenses which was one part of my claim but nothing for the distress and inconvenience part of it. Hoverspeed incorrectly sent their cheque to the Court instead of to me, so the Court sent it back to them and Hoverspeed then put the cheque in an envelope with not even a compliment slip let alone a letter and posted it to me.
To dispose of the dispute quickly, I offered to settle for a modest sum, I cannot say how much as the correspondence is "Without Prejudice". I told them it was non-negotiable as modest, but Hoverspeed chose to mess me about and offered me half of it, a paltry figure after what I had been through. So I entered Judgement and now an appointment will be scheduled by the Court to fix the amount of the damages.
This dispute should have been settled by Hoverspeed long before it got to court. I daresay a lot of other people complained and and have been fobbed off with a free crossing that they don't ever want to make after their last experience.
I would be interested to hear from anybody who did complain and know what their experience was.
I repeat, I am not an ambulance chaser
To dispose of the dispute quickly, I offered to settle for a modest sum, I cannot say how much as the correspondence is "Without Prejudice". I told them it was non-negotiable as modest, but Hoverspeed chose to mess me about and offered me half of it, a paltry figure after what I had been through. So I entered Judgement and now an appointment will be scheduled by the Court to fix the amount of the damages.
This dispute should have been settled by Hoverspeed long before it got to court. I daresay a lot of other people complained and and have been fobbed off with a free crossing that they don't ever want to make after their last experience.
I would be interested to hear from anybody who did complain and know what their experience was.
I repeat, I am not an ambulance chaser
rhinestonemaiden
This may not be what you want to hear, but it looks to me from your last post that Hoverspeed may not have admitted liability in the way that you expected. Obviously, its difficult for me to tell exactly, so I may be entirely off the wall.
The fact that they didn't pay for your damages claim MAY be that they they are disputing this. Admitting a claim is described in the BBC website describing small claims court procedures "How does it work?.....
The procedure starts with the claimant filling out a standard form, which sets out details about the claim and the various parties. This is returned to the Court office with the appropriate fee. A summons is then sent out to the Defendant who may choose to pay up in full. However, they also have the option to admit part of the claim and pay that part or request to pay by instalments, or may also dispute the claim in its entirety.
If any part of the claim is disputed, the matter goes to a Court hearing where the evidence is heard in informal surroundings, usually around the table in the judge's chambers. Judges tend to be very patient with lay claimants, who will be nervous and unaccustomed to court procedures. However, interruptions, verbal abuse and unreasonable behaviour will not be tolerated."
I've put the bit about admissions in bold.
In case anyone wants to look at the full page, its on http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/law/smallclaimscourt.shtml
Could it be that they admit the facts, but deny liability, and as a gesture of their good faith have offerd to pay your expenses? If so, by cashing the cheque you may be deemed to accept their offer. I mention this in the hope that you can disprove it.
Also, from what you say, you may have to go to court to make your case for the damages, unless they have specifically admitted liability.
You can also let us know how much they've offered. "Without prejudice" means that they can make an offer to settle the case, and if that offer is not accepted, you can't rely on that offer later. So if you claim £10, they offer £5, you refuse and the claim comes to court, you can't therefore use the fact that they offered £5 as justification for your claim.
Best of luck!
Parkie
This may not be what you want to hear, but it looks to me from your last post that Hoverspeed may not have admitted liability in the way that you expected. Obviously, its difficult for me to tell exactly, so I may be entirely off the wall.
The fact that they didn't pay for your damages claim MAY be that they they are disputing this. Admitting a claim is described in the BBC website describing small claims court procedures "How does it work?.....
The procedure starts with the claimant filling out a standard form, which sets out details about the claim and the various parties. This is returned to the Court office with the appropriate fee. A summons is then sent out to the Defendant who may choose to pay up in full. However, they also have the option to admit part of the claim and pay that part or request to pay by instalments, or may also dispute the claim in its entirety.
If any part of the claim is disputed, the matter goes to a Court hearing where the evidence is heard in informal surroundings, usually around the table in the judge's chambers. Judges tend to be very patient with lay claimants, who will be nervous and unaccustomed to court procedures. However, interruptions, verbal abuse and unreasonable behaviour will not be tolerated."
I've put the bit about admissions in bold.
In case anyone wants to look at the full page, its on http://www.bbc.co.uk/crime/law/smallclaimscourt.shtml
Could it be that they admit the facts, but deny liability, and as a gesture of their good faith have offerd to pay your expenses? If so, by cashing the cheque you may be deemed to accept their offer. I mention this in the hope that you can disprove it.
Also, from what you say, you may have to go to court to make your case for the damages, unless they have specifically admitted liability.
You can also let us know how much they've offered. "Without prejudice" means that they can make an offer to settle the case, and if that offer is not accepted, you can't rely on that offer later. So if you claim £10, they offer £5, you refuse and the claim comes to court, you can't therefore use the fact that they offered £5 as justification for your claim.
Best of luck!
Parkie
As an ocassional user of hoverspeed I will be interested in the outcome of this case. Fortunately I have never been stranded in France.
Post a Reply
Please sign in or register an account to reply to this post.
Similar Topics
-
Seacat To Close.
Posted by Trisantona in UK and Ireland Discussion Forum
-
Penguin Crossing
Posted by Judith in Holiday Truths Gallery
-
border crossing
Posted by rdv in Cyprus Discussion Forums
-
Crossing the Border
Posted by fwh in Cyprus Discussion Forums
-
Crossing the Equator?
Posted by tidewatching in Cruises