Whether Thomson have incorporated the fuel surcharge or not doesn't really matter to me.As long as I get the holiday for a price I think is reasonable I don't care how they come to that price.I have just booked with them for 10 days to Corfu in September for £310 each ,which I think is reasonable, so to me it's the end price that matters and if I think it's too much I look to other tour operators to see what they are offering. Nobody forces you to book with them.

A valid point Hurdler, but the original post was essentially asking can airlines/TO's justify fuel surcharges when fuel prices are falling. At the time of my original post some TO's were plugging "no fuel surcharges on any holiday booked as from today". If that turned out to be a holiday that someone had booked the day before and paid the surcharge then I questioned the TO's pricing. I suspected that no fuel surcharges meant the lack of fuel surcharge would be recouped somewhere else in the package. I paid the surcharge because it was the holiday I wanted but if I'm being charged for a cost that is not incurred by the airlines then I think that is unjustified!

Yes I see your point but the other side of the coin is that if ,like me,you book your holidays early you sometimes miss out on a fuel surcharge added later.I booked my 2006 holidays in June 2005 and didn't pay the surcharges which were added to holidays last year. I admit it's infuriating when one day can make a difference how much you pay but it's the same with buying a big article for the home and then seeing it reduced in the sale a few days later.We can't win either way so you pay your money and make your choice.

Hurdler,
just to pick up on a point in your past post, namely,

I booked my 2006 holidays in June 2005 and didn't pay the surcharges which were added to holidays last year. I admit it's infuriating when one day can make a difference how much you pay

I may be misunderstanding what you are saying here, but I believe fuel surcharges are meant to be added to the operating flight and it's irrelevant when the passengers booked as to application of the surcharge (or not) unless a guarantee was provided when the booking was made that no such surcharge would be added.

I do think the airline should be able to justify the application of a surcharge - I believe they are obliged to do just this to the CAA - but would welcome somebody correcting me on this point.

The surcharge can only be added if the increase exceeds a (quite) small percentage. Likewise, a removal is required if the fall in fuel costs exceeds that same percentage.

Hoping to obtain clarity in this area from airlines/tour operators will be practically impossible.

Mike Cunliffe

My point exactly. I have no problem with a surcharge if it's a legitimate cost to the airline, if not then they should not be charging it.

I keep reading about the fuel surcharges. As a matter of interest I took 2 holidays last year and have booked 2 for this. I have paid the balance on the first.

At no time have I been surcharged and all the holidays were booked many months in advance. I have paid the brochure price or less in every case.

I rather think it depends on the TO - There has to be a decent profit margin in every case. It just depends how much they want to make.

Or perhaps some are more ethical than others.

fwh

As said previously I booked a holiday for June 2006 in June 2005 and did not pay a fuel surcharge but my daughter who booked the same holiday a few weeks later did pay a surcharge.So in that instance I gained.I'm not saying the charges ate justified just that it can work to the customers advantage sometimes.

Just to divert slightly. I think all these 'add ons' are wrong. I would much prefer to see in a brochure, the total per adult and per child price. As it is now, you see the per person from price, but by the time a whole list of 'surcharges' for this, that and the other have been applied, what you initially thought you would be paying has increased significantly.

Why does the pricing have to be so complicated!!??

Pam

Pam,

I agree with you - I'd prefer a straight, fully costed price.

I do think that airlines should be legally obliged to show the true flight cost, inclusive of mandatory air passenger duty and airport fees. When a company sells to the general public they are not permitted to quote prices exclusive of v.a.t. Only on business to business sales can vat be left-out - generally because both seller and buyer are vat registered.

So, why can an airline get away with advertising flight prices that do NOT include the APD and Airport Charges ?

I suspect we, the public are ultimately to blame. We compare primariliy on price. If we rated service, efficiency, comfort more highly than price the airlines/tour ops. would be able to compete with each other on such aspects.

As it stands they need to compete almost exclusively on price. This results in somewhat misleading price structures designed to confuse and complicate. A recent report in the national press highlighted this perfectly. A family of 4, mum, dad and two kids paid, say, £1800 for an apartment in some Spanish resort.

A group of 4 adults (two couples) in the same apartments at the same time - same flights - paid approx. £1700. This was caused by under-occupancy charges for the family as the kids were given the child discount so only two full-paying adults in the apartment.

Mum and Dad should have paid full for their kids.

I could be cynical and suggest such practices are "sharp" but like all transactions - buyer beware - and anyway, it's Friday so my cynicism has a day's rest.

A group of 4 adults (two couples) in the same apartments at the same time - same flights - paid approx. £1700. This was caused by under-occupancy charges for the family as the kids were given the child discount so only two full-paying adults in the apartment.

Mum and Dad should have paid full for their kids.

The problem lies in the small print. I once asked someone how they calculated interest on a mortgage on a daily basis. I was told that there were in fact about 16 people in the country who could explain the formula.

The same problem applies with the surcharges that are applied by the TOs - the average person is unable to understand how they arrive at the costings.

If 4 adults pay x then 2 adults and 2 kids even with the surcharge calculation should pay the same. But the figures never match. The TO has set a price for a holiday based upon 4 persons. It should not matter what age they are. But it does.

Is everyone so fixated with early booking discounts and free child places that they cannot see that?

fwh

The Office of Fair Trading has issued an edict to all travel companies and airlines that all "non optional extras" must now be included in advertised and quoted prices. They have about three months to comply. If they don't, then a law will be passed forcing them to do it.