Legal Recourse for Disappointing Package Holiday: Expert Advice

A family's long-awaited vacation turned into a disappointment, prompting questions about legal recourse. The case highlights common issues with package holidays and sheds light on consumer rights in the travel industry.

Kerry and her family booked an all-inclusive package to Turkey, their first such holiday in 12 years. Upon arrival, they found the hotel falling short of its advertised four-star rating. Issues included maintenance problems, cramped accommodations, and lack of support from the tour operator.

Consumer lawyer Gary explains that such disappointments can translate into valid legal claims. The Package Travel and Linked Travel Arrangements Regulation 2018 (PTR 2018) provides protection for consumers booking package holidays, which typically include at least two travel services combined for a single trip.

The legal basis for claiming damages stems from the 1972 case Jarvis v Swans Tours Ltd, which established precedent for awarding damages for loss of enjoyment in holiday contracts. This ruling recognizes that the purpose of a holiday is to provide enjoyment, making it an exception to the usual rule against awarding damages for disappointment in contract breaches.

Gary outlines three potential "heads of claim" under PTR 2018:

• General damages, including loss of enjoyment
• Diminution in value, comparing the price paid to the value received
• Special damages for out-of-pocket expenses

To pursue a claim, Gary advises:

• Gather evidence (photos, witness statements)
• Quantify the loss
• Write to the tour operator detailing the issues
• Request a cash offer, not a discount on future holidays

It's worth noting that star ratings for hotels are not standardized globally, which can lead to discrepancies in expectations. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted the travel industry, potentially affecting service quality and increasing the importance of consumer protections.

While Kerry's family won't receive a full refund, they may be entitled to compensation for the difference between the holiday they paid for and the one they experienced. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of understanding consumer rights and the potential for legal recourse in disappointing travel experiences.

"You are not going to get a full refund, and you should pay for the holiday you have had. But the point is that the holiday was disappointing, and it fell short of what you paid for."

As the UK travel industry, regulated by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and ABTA, continues to recover from the pandemic, cases like this underscore the ongoing need for robust consumer protections in the tourism sector.