No, not with credit card - I paid for my holiday by 6 x direct debits from my bank as was interest free credit.... ? ABTA/ATOL say that they Hitachi therefore owe me the money... ? thank you for any advise.. Clare
I'm sorry ClareBear but I do not fully understand the specifics - you might need to explain a little more fully.
I presume Tapestry are either a tour operator or a travel agent - which ?
When you say you paid by Hitachi Finance do you mean you borrowed money from Hitachi Finance (a lump sum amount) using this to then pay Tapestry ?
I presume you then, in agreement with Hitachi Finance repaid them in six installments - perhaps monthly ?
If my presumptions are right Hitachi are blameless. They simply loaned you a sum of money - how you spend it is your concern. ABTA/ATOL should refund you providing Tapestry were bonded. Generally, ABTA covers a travel agent and ATOL a tour operator. You need to know which one you're claiming from.
When you chase the relevant party explain your situation clearly for a faster response from them.
Pity you didn't pay by a credit card - one with a zero interest rate for transferred balances. If you'd used a credit card you would likely have your money refunded in full within a couple of weeks. Using a 0% finance method was a cute move though.
I presume Tapestry are either a tour operator or a travel agent - which ?
When you say you paid by Hitachi Finance do you mean you borrowed money from Hitachi Finance (a lump sum amount) using this to then pay Tapestry ?
I presume you then, in agreement with Hitachi Finance repaid them in six installments - perhaps monthly ?
If my presumptions are right Hitachi are blameless. They simply loaned you a sum of money - how you spend it is your concern. ABTA/ATOL should refund you providing Tapestry were bonded. Generally, ABTA covers a travel agent and ATOL a tour operator. You need to know which one you're claiming from.
When you chase the relevant party explain your situation clearly for a faster response from them.
Pity you didn't pay by a credit card - one with a zero interest rate for transferred balances. If you'd used a credit card you would likely have your money refunded in full within a couple of weeks. Using a 0% finance method was a cute move though.
Hi,
I think you are wrong on this one. Tapestry Holidays are an ATOL tour operator who recently went bust. The CAA will pay out a full refund to customers but this situation is different. Becuase the holiday was in effect paid for by Hitachi Finance who then charged the customer over 6 instalments. The holiday wasnt then provided so Hitachi are responsible for the refund.
If they stall get on to the CAA and they will put pressure on.
Kind Regards
Stewart
I think you are wrong on this one. Tapestry Holidays are an ATOL tour operator who recently went bust. The CAA will pay out a full refund to customers but this situation is different. Becuase the holiday was in effect paid for by Hitachi Finance who then charged the customer over 6 instalments. The holiday wasnt then provided so Hitachi are responsible for the refund.
If they stall get on to the CAA and they will put pressure on.
Kind Regards
Stewart
Wow,
thanks for the update on that Stewart. This is a new one on me. I guess Hitachi will therefore receive the full refund from the CAA and pass that on to ClareBear.
Not sure I like that concept as the contract for the pax is with the finance company rather than the holiday company. If problems were to arise during the holiday resolving them with the t.op. could prove awkward as technically you are not their customer.
In order to avoid having to pay for the holiday in the normal manner a zero percent interest credit card payment would seem to me to be better as most of these offer 6 or more months interest free on balance transfers and you then get full section 75 cover.
thanks for the update on that Stewart. This is a new one on me. I guess Hitachi will therefore receive the full refund from the CAA and pass that on to ClareBear.
Not sure I like that concept as the contract for the pax is with the finance company rather than the holiday company. If problems were to arise during the holiday resolving them with the t.op. could prove awkward as technically you are not their customer.
In order to avoid having to pay for the holiday in the normal manner a zero percent interest credit card payment would seem to me to be better as most of these offer 6 or more months interest free on balance transfers and you then get full section 75 cover.
Hi Mike,
Pretty sure Hitachi will not get anything back. When an ATOL company fails their bond is used to cover the refund of monies. The Bond is rarely large enough so invariably it comes out of the central fund ( which is in debt so therefore funded by the Government or us taxpayers ). In order to reduce the call on the Bond I am pretty sure the CAA will tell passenegrs who have paid by Credit Card that they must claim off the credit card company as they havent recieved the goods they paid for. The CAA will point out to the credit card companies it is there responsibility to check the tour operators financial situation and allow them the use of credit card facilities. Whenever a tour operator goes bust I think you will find the credit card companies are out of pocket.
Even if paid by finance as in this case the client does still have a contract with the tour operator and would expect to recieve all rep services and assistance, it is really paying by credit card in a slightly different way if that makes any sense.
Kind Regards
Stewart
Pretty sure Hitachi will not get anything back. When an ATOL company fails their bond is used to cover the refund of monies. The Bond is rarely large enough so invariably it comes out of the central fund ( which is in debt so therefore funded by the Government or us taxpayers ). In order to reduce the call on the Bond I am pretty sure the CAA will tell passenegrs who have paid by Credit Card that they must claim off the credit card company as they havent recieved the goods they paid for. The CAA will point out to the credit card companies it is there responsibility to check the tour operators financial situation and allow them the use of credit card facilities. Whenever a tour operator goes bust I think you will find the credit card companies are out of pocket.
Even if paid by finance as in this case the client does still have a contract with the tour operator and would expect to recieve all rep services and assistance, it is really paying by credit card in a slightly different way if that makes any sense.
Kind Regards
Stewart
Not really sure on that one. I would think that it would depend on the way the loan was arranged.
If the finance company lend money to fund a holiday then I could see them being a party to the claim. The fact you have an interest free loan facilty in itself, would not in my opinion make them liable. Because you have a loan and you manage your money so that it is paid in instalments to a third party could be viewed as money management on your part.
I have borrowed money in the past yet made staged payments and taken advantage of the fact that it could earn interest in the meantime.
If you are correct then it is something that needs taking into consideration by anyone who does that in the future. Does it specifically have to be for the holiday? - Could it be that you could use a cheap overdraft facility to fund the holiday be viewed in the same way?
fwh
If the finance company lend money to fund a holiday then I could see them being a party to the claim. The fact you have an interest free loan facilty in itself, would not in my opinion make them liable. Because you have a loan and you manage your money so that it is paid in instalments to a third party could be viewed as money management on your part.
I have borrowed money in the past yet made staged payments and taken advantage of the fact that it could earn interest in the meantime.
If you are correct then it is something that needs taking into consideration by anyone who does that in the future. Does it specifically have to be for the holiday? - Could it be that you could use a cheap overdraft facility to fund the holiday be viewed in the same way?
fwh
Buried away in Section 75 Credit Act wording is a complexity regarding paying by credit card where the person taking the money is not the company who is the "merchant" of the credit card company.
I found the section confusing to understand fully but my gut instinct is as follows:
If you deal with a tour operator directly and pay them via credit card and they go bust you are covered.
But, if you pay a third party by credit card who then pay the tour operator and the tour operator goes bust you are not covered. I guess you would be if the third party to whom you paid the money went bust.
I know this is more complex so it might be worth ClareBear ringing the expert, Ros Fernihough for some advice - 01922 621114 Clare.
I found the section confusing to understand fully but my gut instinct is as follows:
If you deal with a tour operator directly and pay them via credit card and they go bust you are covered.
But, if you pay a third party by credit card who then pay the tour operator and the tour operator goes bust you are not covered. I guess you would be if the third party to whom you paid the money went bust.
I know this is more complex so it might be worth ClareBear ringing the expert, Ros Fernihough for some advice - 01922 621114 Clare.
I dont know all the details on this one so I am only guessing ( and maybe wrong it has been known ).
I think this must have been some kind finance scheme offered by Tapestry Holidays as a means of paying for a holiday. A little like buying DFS furniture with nothing to pay for 3 years, this is done by finance so therefore the finance company has responsibility in offering this service to Tapestry.
If you took your own bank loan out and used that cash to buy the holiday then if would be just a normal booking with the tour operator and then your claim would be with the CAA.
Kind Regards
I think this must have been some kind finance scheme offered by Tapestry Holidays as a means of paying for a holiday. A little like buying DFS furniture with nothing to pay for 3 years, this is done by finance so therefore the finance company has responsibility in offering this service to Tapestry.
If you took your own bank loan out and used that cash to buy the holiday then if would be just a normal booking with the tour operator and then your claim would be with the CAA.
Kind Regards
Mike,
If you book a holiday with an ATOL company you are covered it will just depend where your claim is.
If direct with tour operator by cash/debit card then the CAA.
If via Travel Agent then they claim on your behalf and refund you once they have been refunded. IIn some cases with good travel agents if the tour operator goes bust near your departure date they will book you another holiday whilst awaiting the refund.
If by credit card then with the credit card company.
The anomaly here is this finance scheme which by the looks of this post the CAA regard this as a cedit service by Hitachi Finance and the claim is with them.
The CAA will usually assist if you are not getting your refund from third parties.
Kind Regards
Stewart
If you book a holiday with an ATOL company you are covered it will just depend where your claim is.
If direct with tour operator by cash/debit card then the CAA.
If via Travel Agent then they claim on your behalf and refund you once they have been refunded. IIn some cases with good travel agents if the tour operator goes bust near your departure date they will book you another holiday whilst awaiting the refund.
If by credit card then with the credit card company.
The anomaly here is this finance scheme which by the looks of this post the CAA regard this as a cedit service by Hitachi Finance and the claim is with them.
The CAA will usually assist if you are not getting your refund from third parties.
Kind Regards
Stewart
Thank you all for advise re compensation for the above... it now seems Hitachi are going to reimburse us for all monies paid to date... and Tapestry have promised to pay us for our deposit ... so finger's crossed and next holiday I will pay by credit card. Still I will for fat cheques to arrive via Postman Pat and am not holding my breath! Thanks again, you all obviously know what you are talking about. Clare
Hello,
I am in exactly the same situation as yourself. I have recieved the £200 deposit but am outstanding over £800 which was paid to Hitachi. I have now sent a letter (see below) to Hitachi, Atol, V12 Finance and CEGA claims handling, as well as emailing it to ABTA.
Had no response as of yet. Have you recieved written confirmation that Hitachi will be paying out?
______________________________
Dear Sir/Madam,
This letter was emailed to the following addresses on Friday 15th September.
-- email addresses removed --. Please accept my apologies for any correspondence I may not currently be in the possession of.
I have received a letter today from CEGA group dated 8 Sept with reference to my claim for our Tapestry Holiday. This letter outlined that I am entitled to a £200 refund in full and final settlement for my Tapestry Holiday claim, from a total claim of £1008. The £200 has been credited to my account and is the amount that we paid in cash to Tapestry for our holiday deposit. This leaves me with a balance of £808, to which I am entitled under the ATOL scheme that Tapestry operated under. The £808 has been paid to Hitachi Finance using there interest-free credit scheme which was operated between Tapestry, V12 Finance and Hitachi Finance.
At this point l would like to say to CEGA, how dare you trust that I am happy with the settlement of only £200.
I have emailed V12 finance who operated the scheme with Tapestry to try to understand the situation. From the emails I have received (outlined below) my understanding of the situation is that there is currently a dispute with regard to who should pay out any claims that involve finance agreements.
"Your holiday is ATOL bonded. The purpose of an ATOL bond is that they cover the cost of a holiday if the holiday company cease trading. In the past they have paid out for holidays regardless of payment method, and this was their position when it came to their attention that Tapestry Holidays had ceased trading.
Unfortunately they have changed their position and are now advising customers that they will honour the deposit payment but that customers must claim against the lending company, Hitachi Capital Consumer Finance. However Hitachi Capital are disputing this. Until this dispute is resolved we can not confirm which of the two companies will be
covering the costs of payments you have made or may still be making.
I couldn't agree more. My personal feeling is that their position changed when they saw the amount that they would be liable for. At that point they have tried to put the responsibility onto the lender (and possibly by extension, us) who would not receive any compensation from Tapestry as ATOL, through the bond, already have.
It is my belief that because ATOL is government sponsored they will not be allowed to prolong the dispute for very long and that payment to customers is inevitable, but it is a matter of who has to pay it. Until then we are waiting to see the outcome. I can't advise you of what action to take at present. Hopefully either Hitachi or ATOL will contact you once this has been resolved, but I will make a note to email you if we hear as well. Unfortunately at this exact moment I can't advise you how to retrieve your money."
Simon Sharp,
V12 Finance (who arranged the Hitachi Finance on behalf of Tapestry)
Simon did state that these were his personal opinions and not those of his company.
As a claims handling company I am surprised that CEGA have not enlightened me to this situation. I do not see why I should have to be using my time and energy to chase payment when I do not know the politics involved, surely this is the responsibility of all the parties involved and you should not just be passing the buck.
We desperately need to recover the balance of our holiday. As a consumer who purchased a premium holiday with an operator that was ATOL protected I am entitled to a full refund wether the holiday was purchased on finance or not. It was bad enough to have missed a holiday we have worked hard for all year, but an insult to only receive £200 compensation. I am not concerned with who pays me the balance as long as it gets paid soon. I have sent a copy of this letter to all interested parties.
I have drafted this letter to the relevant parties involved, should this not be the case it is purely down to the fact that I am not in possession of the relevant facts.
I trust you will respond with a matter of urgency, before I have to resort to using my solicitor and local MP.
Yours faithfully
-- Edited by MarkJ to remove email addresses --
I am in exactly the same situation as yourself. I have recieved the £200 deposit but am outstanding over £800 which was paid to Hitachi. I have now sent a letter (see below) to Hitachi, Atol, V12 Finance and CEGA claims handling, as well as emailing it to ABTA.
Had no response as of yet. Have you recieved written confirmation that Hitachi will be paying out?
______________________________
Dear Sir/Madam,
This letter was emailed to the following addresses on Friday 15th September.
-- email addresses removed --. Please accept my apologies for any correspondence I may not currently be in the possession of.
I have received a letter today from CEGA group dated 8 Sept with reference to my claim for our Tapestry Holiday. This letter outlined that I am entitled to a £200 refund in full and final settlement for my Tapestry Holiday claim, from a total claim of £1008. The £200 has been credited to my account and is the amount that we paid in cash to Tapestry for our holiday deposit. This leaves me with a balance of £808, to which I am entitled under the ATOL scheme that Tapestry operated under. The £808 has been paid to Hitachi Finance using there interest-free credit scheme which was operated between Tapestry, V12 Finance and Hitachi Finance.
At this point l would like to say to CEGA, how dare you trust that I am happy with the settlement of only £200.
I have emailed V12 finance who operated the scheme with Tapestry to try to understand the situation. From the emails I have received (outlined below) my understanding of the situation is that there is currently a dispute with regard to who should pay out any claims that involve finance agreements.
"Your holiday is ATOL bonded. The purpose of an ATOL bond is that they cover the cost of a holiday if the holiday company cease trading. In the past they have paid out for holidays regardless of payment method, and this was their position when it came to their attention that Tapestry Holidays had ceased trading.
Unfortunately they have changed their position and are now advising customers that they will honour the deposit payment but that customers must claim against the lending company, Hitachi Capital Consumer Finance. However Hitachi Capital are disputing this. Until this dispute is resolved we can not confirm which of the two companies will be
covering the costs of payments you have made or may still be making.
I couldn't agree more. My personal feeling is that their position changed when they saw the amount that they would be liable for. At that point they have tried to put the responsibility onto the lender (and possibly by extension, us) who would not receive any compensation from Tapestry as ATOL, through the bond, already have.
It is my belief that because ATOL is government sponsored they will not be allowed to prolong the dispute for very long and that payment to customers is inevitable, but it is a matter of who has to pay it. Until then we are waiting to see the outcome. I can't advise you of what action to take at present. Hopefully either Hitachi or ATOL will contact you once this has been resolved, but I will make a note to email you if we hear as well. Unfortunately at this exact moment I can't advise you how to retrieve your money."
Simon Sharp,
V12 Finance (who arranged the Hitachi Finance on behalf of Tapestry)
Simon did state that these were his personal opinions and not those of his company.
As a claims handling company I am surprised that CEGA have not enlightened me to this situation. I do not see why I should have to be using my time and energy to chase payment when I do not know the politics involved, surely this is the responsibility of all the parties involved and you should not just be passing the buck.
We desperately need to recover the balance of our holiday. As a consumer who purchased a premium holiday with an operator that was ATOL protected I am entitled to a full refund wether the holiday was purchased on finance or not. It was bad enough to have missed a holiday we have worked hard for all year, but an insult to only receive £200 compensation. I am not concerned with who pays me the balance as long as it gets paid soon. I have sent a copy of this letter to all interested parties.
I have drafted this letter to the relevant parties involved, should this not be the case it is purely down to the fact that I am not in possession of the relevant facts.
I trust you will respond with a matter of urgency, before I have to resort to using my solicitor and local MP.
Yours faithfully
-- Edited by MarkJ to remove email addresses --
My suggestion may holod no merit, but, many insurance policies are sold these days (house, building, car, travel) with legal assistance. I understand that this assistance is not necessarily restricted to the area the insurance covers.
Ring up each of your insurers and see if they will take on your legal support in this matter (pick one if more than one will undertake). Don't get over-excited however - my personal experience of the quality of such service is severely limited.
Mike
Ring up each of your insurers and see if they will take on your legal support in this matter (pick one if more than one will undertake). Don't get over-excited however - my personal experience of the quality of such service is severely limited.
Mike
Mike,
I really do not think they need to go this far. They have booked a holiday with an ATOL company which ensures a refund if a company fails. There is a delay in the pay out here because of the unusual situation of the finance. The finance company is arguing with the CAA about who should make the refund.
Clairbear needs to keep on at the CAA who will sort this out one way or the other. A private company arguing against the government I think I know who will win.
I understand for clairbear this delay is frustrating but I am confident she will will get her refund one way or the other without having to resort to legal action. The CAA underwrite the ATOL fund and clealry state it is there to provide a full refund in the case of tour operator failure.
Kind Regards
Stewart
I really do not think they need to go this far. They have booked a holiday with an ATOL company which ensures a refund if a company fails. There is a delay in the pay out here because of the unusual situation of the finance. The finance company is arguing with the CAA about who should make the refund.
Clairbear needs to keep on at the CAA who will sort this out one way or the other. A private company arguing against the government I think I know who will win.
I understand for clairbear this delay is frustrating but I am confident she will will get her refund one way or the other without having to resort to legal action. The CAA underwrite the ATOL fund and clealry state it is there to provide a full refund in the case of tour operator failure.
Kind Regards
Stewart
If you follow the link below it says you will get a refund from the CAA.
http://www.directline-holidays.co.uk/Tapestry%20Holidays
http://www.directline-holidays.co.uk/Tapestry%20Holidays
This link may explain things better.
It has a bit of imformation if you paid through Hitachi Finance.
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?categoryid=1139
It has a bit of imformation if you paid through Hitachi Finance.
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?categoryid=1139
Stewart/Samsung,
Thanks for the information. The links also helped to clarify the situation where a credit card is used to pay, not the tour operator but a third party. I posted a few days ago about this complexity. It appears that Hitachi are liable to their client (Clarebear) under the same section 75 regulations.
Please let us know Clare when they pay out.
Thanks for the information. The links also helped to clarify the situation where a credit card is used to pay, not the tour operator but a third party. I posted a few days ago about this complexity. It appears that Hitachi are liable to their client (Clarebear) under the same section 75 regulations.
Please let us know Clare when they pay out.
Post a Reply
Please sign in or register an account to reply to this post.
Similar Topics
-
Tapestry Holidays
Posted by HolidayRich in Tour Operators and Travel Agents
-
northern holidays coach holidays
Posted by mrabulldog in Tour Operators and Travel Agents
-
Winter 08/09 school holidays holidays!
Posted by welshlass in Tour Operators and Travel Agents
-
Holidays in school holidays!
Posted by bartown in General Holiday Enquiries, Hints and Tips
-
Top 10 UK holidays?
Posted by ClaudeKeller in UK and Ireland Discussion Forum