I have not been here for a while, apologies for that! We recently introduced a 'Baggage Included' flag on the price list page for flights. This means you can see no frills flights without the flag, against scheduled flights with the flag, and compare them.

As soon as a provider starts charging for baggage, we remove the Baggage Included flag and offer the baggage as an optional extra.

Some providers charge for baggage on their website, but sell their seats through us including baggage. You are right SMa, Jet2 prices on our website include baggage, whereas on their website it is an extra. We have a similar situation with Aer Lingus on their flights from Gatwick to European destinations. On their web, you have to pay extra for bags, but the price we display includes bags and any credit/debit card fees.

It is a bit of a minefield keeping it up to date, but we hope that by flagging who includes bags, we are offering a small service for customers trying to choose their flight.

ATOL action demanded as Travel Republic is cleared of all charges

Thomson and First Choice have strongly criticised a ruling which cleared Travel Republic of alleged breaches of ATOL regulations.

All 19 charges against the Travel Republic were dropped following a three week hearing at Statford magistrates court.

Managing director Kane Pirie said: "We welcome the clear judgment from the court and the dismissal of all charges against Travel Republic and me. Our position has been vindicated.

"This confirms that it is perfectly legal to sell more than one travel product at the same time.

"Travel Republic has always, and will always, act within the law, including the ATOL regulations, in their current, and any future form.

"The whole process has been an expensive, unpleasant and gruelling diversion for the whole company and for me personally.

"I am now looking forward to being able to focus once again on driving the ongoing growth of the business."

But Christian Cull, communications director for Thomson and First Choice Holidays responded by saying: "Travel Republic insist they don't sell packages, but if something looks like a duck, waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck.

"We are incredibly disappointed that the courts have not recognised this.

"The ATOL system is confusing enough for consumers and we hope that those who book with Travel Republic will be made aware that their money is not financially protected in the way it is when they book with other businesses such as ourselves.

"This judgment emphasises the need for government to act, both here in the UK and in Europe, and to give us the new regulatory framework that this industry so desperately needs"

He added that parent company TUI Travel would continue to campaign for regulatory change both in the UK and at the European level.

"[Chief executive] Peter Long will be taking those same messages to Brussels when he meets with Commissioner Kuneva next week," Cull added.

ABTA chief executive Mark Tanzer said: "The failure of the CAA's case against Travel Republic marks a low point in the administration of the travel industry's system of financial protection.

"The uncertainty that surrounds this area has led to the initiation of expensive and ultimately futile proceedings against a prominent ABTA member.

"The case for reform of the ATOL scheme and the Package Travel Regulations is now irrefutable.

"ABTA initiated discussions with the Department for Transport at the beginning of this year with a view to bringing all holiday arrangements within a single scheme of financial protection, and I am pleased that this idea has been taken up within the DfT's forthcoming consultation.

"The opportunity to remove the uncertainty for ABTA members and their customers must not be missed."

The Association of ATOL Companies described the decision as a major step backwards in the battle for consumer protection.

"We are dismayed but not entirely surprised at the outcome' said AAC chairman David Mortimer.

"Regrettably this opens the door to more consumers wrongly believing they are protected when they are not.

AAC legal advisor Alan Bowen added: "For AAC members this is a major opportunity to emphasise that they always protect package holiday sales through the ATOL scheme.
"The AAC has always strongly supported the view that customers should be protected by an ATOL licence when buying an air based holiday but this outcome simply adds to the confusion.

"Many customers of failed companies such as the XL Group last year and Freedom Direct in 2009 thought they had protection when in fact they didn't'
"Bringing clarity to financial protection must be a priority for the entire industry, this decision, whilst only a magistrates decision, is likely to encourage more agents to dynamically package without explaining the consequences to their customers."
On Holiday Group CEO Steve Endacott said the ruling demonstrated that ATOL regulations were fundamentally outdated for retail agents.
"The problem is that the agent takes whole liability when an airline collapses," he said.
He backed calls for ATOL reform but warned about what will happen while the estimated year to 18 month process takes place.

Insurance schemes could fill the gap, Bob Atkinson, travel expert at travelsupermarket.com, said: "Today's ruling in favour of Travel Republic in the CAA's test case has made it clear that the online agency has not been selling package holidays outside of the rules set by the CAA's ATOL scheme.

"However, the underlying issue for the industry as a whole remains - consumers are still exposed to the risks of purchasing unprotected holidays and travel arrangements online and in high street agencies with no financial backing from the official scheme which was designed to protect the consumer.

"Beyond Travel Republic's customers, this ruling means that agents can continue to dynamically package holidays on behalf of the consumer and expose them to the financial risk of all or part of the trip going wrong due to company collapse.

"In light of a number of high profile collapses such as XL, the industry needs to wake up and work harder to ensure innocent holidaymakers are protected.

"Travel Republic do indeed have their own protection scheme in place, making a mockery of the point of the ATOL system and confusing the customer even further as to what cover they have.

"Consumers should remember that if they are booking a holiday or travel arrangements which are not ATOL protected, the prudent thing is to book using a credit card or visa debit card at all times.

"Given today's ruling, which may still be appealed, travelsupermarket.com is calling on the EU commission to review the outdated Directive on Package Holidays and for Government to reform the current ATOL scheme.

"They should ensure that however consumers book and pay for their holidays, flights and accommodation, they are adequately protected."
*The AAC will discuss the outcome in detail at its seminar ‘Is this the end of Consumer Protection as we know it?' at World Travel Market on Thursday at 11.00 in rooms 6 & 7 North Gallery.

With permission from Travelmole

Thanks for the up-date. As one of the customers caught up in the XL Fiasco, I can only speak as I find and my personal opinion is that I'm glad TR won as I was not mis -lead by them in any way, shape or form into thinking I was buying a package holiday.

Indeed, the reason why they are cheaper than the main TA's is that you can buy separate parts of a holiday and put them all together yourself. The one criticism I do have with their website is that I think it should state which bed bank etc they will be using for my booking, as the choice would then be mine on whether to proceed. My main concern is that some of these companies e.g. Jumbo tours (which my Dec booking was made with) are not ABTA/ATOL members.

Hopefully, all will be pain free when I arrive in Prague for the New Year. I shall keep you all up-dated.

The bit I don't understand is if you're not getting package protection what's the point of using them? Paying for flights and "seperate" accomodation is trouble waiting to happen - if anything happens to the flight (like Ryanair suddenly decides not to go there or XL goes bust) you're stuck with unusable beds and despite the comments in the report you're unlikely to be covered by your insurance.

I have followed the story here on HT and noted the comments. If all their customers were having problems they would have ceased trading a long time ago. There is an obvious demand for building your own holiday - and it does make sense. The problem as I see it, and have said before is how people understand the term "Package holiday" and the lack of knowledge people have about the way in which they are protected.

When people buy a product/service - and a holiday is a product/service - it often can be made up of several components which they understand is a package. But when you buy a holiday from A it is yet buy the same from B it is not. In my opinion the court case has not answered the question. The way in which the act is worded says it is a package where two or more components form part of it. It does not say But If!!!

fwh

Good points.

regarding the question of how it can be a package when bought from company A but not from company B I'm guessing it's to do with the way they advertise and how their website works. If you advertise an inclusive price then you are clearly talking about a package. If prices are only quoted as individual elements and you have to book each bit at a different stage (and the price of each element is the same regardless of whether you book it with another element) then it's not a package.

where it gets confusing with TR (and others) is that they have a section on the website where you can book flight+hotel in the same stage. That seems to meet the EU Directive definition of a Package but TR have a footnote that says it isn't a Package.

EU Directives are not laws in individual countries, they set a minimum standard that has to be included within national law. So it's possible that TR have complied with UK law (seems to be the Judge's view) but that law doesn't meet the EU Directive standard. In which case the EU could tell the UK Government to improve the consumer's protection within the UK law but TR are safe for everything that happens until then because the EU can't take direct against them. I think this case has gathered enough steam to keep going to UK Appeal and then European Courts for clarification. In the meantime I will be booking flights direct with airlines and hotels that won't want paying in advance and will allow cancellation without cost!

The bit I don't understand is if you're not getting package protection what's the point of using them? Paying for flights and "seperate" accomodation is trouble waiting to happen - if anything happens to the flight (like Ryanair suddenly decides not to go there or XL goes bust) you're stuck with unusable beds and despite the comments in the report you're unlikely to be covered by your insurance.

So are you saying that the only way to go on holiday is on a package deal? What about the thousands that go DIY regularly? In the very unfortunate event that your flight is cancelled, you find an alternative. Not ideal, I agree as you may not get the same airport/price etc but it's a calculated risk people are prepared to take.

Shirley

No I'm not saying that at all, I always go DIY. I'm saying why use a middleman if you end up with no more protection than DIY but have had to pay for the accomodation up front and have the risk of them going bust without passing your money on. That's the key bit, I book and pay for flights (because I've not found an airline that let you book now and pay on departure!!) but normally only book hotels where I can pay when I'm there and have the option to cancel until almost checkin time.

I'm saying why use a middleman if you end up with no more protection than DIY but have had to pay for the accomodation up front and have the risk of them going bust without passing your money on.

Because I have frequently found that booking with Travel Republic has saved me money compared to going direct to the airline or hotel. My most recent trip was a case in point - booking Jet2 flights to Tenerife for 3 via Travel Republic saved us £120 compared to booking direct on the Jet2 website. The savings made paid for two really good meals out for the three of us. Similarly, I've never found anybody that can beat the price they quote me for a particular hotel that I like to use in Seville - not even the hotel themselves have been willing to beat the price!

I do, however, always pay by credit card - I regard the small fee payable as the equivalent of paying for insurance.

SM

Just to clarify a few points raised in the discussion over last few days.

We offer total financial protection, wont go on about it and fill up the thread, but if you want a read, it is here

http://www.travelrepublic.co.uk/help/totalFinancialProtection.aspx

You would be covered if we go bust or the provider goes bust. If the provider isnt ABTA or ATOL, you are still covered. The non-ABTA bit will therefore mean they wont necessarilly have to comply with issues like dealing with complaints within ABTA guidelines. We do however deal with this by addressing issues like complaints, when we set up a contract to do business with our providers.

If the provider isnt ABTA or ATOL, you are still covered.

I didn't realize this Steve. Thanks for clarifying. I also get far better hotel deals with TR than direct with the hotel. I've booked 3 nights B&B (2 adults) at a hotel in central Prague over New Year, totalling £141 with TR. The hotel's website were asking £328 and breakfast is extra! for the same break

I think I'll stick with TR

A quick mail to support Travel Republic. I have used them since year dot and have always been delighted. My paperwork is invariably from Med Hotels, but is much cheaper that booking directly with them. I have recommended them to numerous people and everyone has become a regular customer. Jenny x

Thanks everyone. I am not saying how we do it is best/right/only way to go, but for the moment we are doing what we can to reassure everyone about protection, rather than scare them, which is what others seem intent on doing.

All the same, we dont get it right all the time, so feel free to tell me if you are not comfortable with any dealings you have with us. Service or price!

Steve

It is a fact that TRL did not have a scheme for protection of customers money in place when XL went bust. TR's new scheme (linked to above) was introduced months afterward the XL failure leaving many out of pocket. Not sure how this scheme protects customers if suppliers fail as the Terms and Conditions of the policy can not be seen or read from TRL website. Please correct me if I am wrong (sure I will be if I am wrong) as I have read similar policies before, that these types of policy state in their T&C;s - First apply for a refund from the ATOL supplier if not then apply for a refund from your credit card company? So what exactly is the policy covering?

I think it is a shame, that there still will be confusion when you book a DIY holiday about who provides your financial protection and if your agent (not saying TR but any agent) goes bust. Who owes customers the pipeline money. ie. you have paid it to the agent but the agent hasn't paid the supplier, so when the agent goes bust and the suppliers not been paid you loose your money/booking. All this needs to be sorted out.

Credit card companies will start charing larger card charges and become tighter on regulations with travel companies they work with. Charges that will end up being passed on to the consumer.

ATOL companies are regulated in so many ways, with good reason.

This ruling now opens up a whole can of worms for new cowboy online companies who will prey on the confused public.

Hi Alice, you are right, we only started offering the total financial protection in response to larger ATOL holders advertising and commenting that unless you booked with them (for often more cash) that your 'holiday' was not safe. These larger ATOL holders, have a big say with the CAA, as they pay so much into it, and travel agents dynamically packaging hotels and flights were undercutting them, so I guess it is in their interests to do this.

Customers booking with Travelrepublic dont have to worry about t&c's of the total financial protection policy. We stand by what is said (in brief, no small print) on the page I added a link to above. We take out the necessary insurance policies ourselves, and that allows us to make clear, simple statements about what we are offering.

If an agent goes bust, and they are ABTA (which Travelrepublic is) then the ABTA scheme protects your money, whatever the agent may or may not have done with it.

All this is before you have used your credit card to pay!

If anyone thinks Travelrepublic is joining the ranks of the cowboys, please do not hesitate to tell me, and I will try and fix it, but I do take your point!

Steve

steve 1

don't know if you remember me but you helped me with adjusting my booking for this year and was very helpful. i am looking to book again now ready for next year and have been on TR web site and again i am impressed. the only problem i have is that i want 3 rooms. 1 for our family and 2 for another family. if i search 2 rooms and 1 room seperately the price is good but if i search all 3 rooms together then its another 500 pounds! why is this? is there a way round this?

thanks in advance
ali

It could be that the lower cost provider only has two rooms, and when you increase the request to three rooms, it brings back a quote from a more expensive provider.

Send me a private message with what you need, so I can find out for certain what the problem is. We could possibly request a third room from the cheaper provider so you get three at the lower rate. Also I can check that something isnt broken!

Steve

CAA appeals Travel Republic ruling

The Civil Aviation Authority has lodged an appeal after losing a case against Travel Republic over alleged breaches of ATOL regulations.

The CAA has today asked a District Judge to begin the process to appeal his decision in the case of CAA v Travel Republic and Kane Pirie.
The case concerns the protection of the public who book flight inclusive holidays.

A statement said: "The CAA considers it must do what is necessary and all that it can to try to ensure that when someone books an air package holiday they receive the protection that Parliament and the EU has decided they are entitled to, and hence are protected by ATOL for the whole of that package.

"We have therefore decided to seek clarity for both holidaymakers and industry from a higher court as swiftly as possible."

In the period before an appeal is heard the CAA said it would continue to strictly enforce regulations "and will do so in part based on the Government guidance issued in January 2008 following the decision in the Court of Appeal on CAA v ABTA".

That decision remains as the definitive judicial statement as to the meaning of a "package".

CAA will also continue to monitor firms that sell air holidays without an ATOL.

"If it considers that they are breaching the regulations then it will continue to refer cases for investigation," the authority said.

With permission from Travelmole

Hi all, been caught up in this custom flights drama and I don't know what do! TR are saying not to rebook alternate flights just yet as flight may be transfered but if it isn't then flights are going up and up in price today and availability is going down and down

i didn't even know I had booked via custom flights untill the email this morning......what is really annoying is the flight have booked is still available, I just wish i had booked it direct now!

Oh and TR wont answer the phone and their website is down when i try to manage my booking....I appreciate there are alot of people in a bad situation today..............