We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.
Oh dear... the wording of the guidance note has just changed from "will be protected" to "may be protected". Perhaps they should have left it to the CAA after all...
Please confirm that 100% of your small client base (your ATOL is for less than 700 passengers), who requested a full refund, were in deed refunded within the legal timescale of 14 days. awaiting your confimation (not holding my breath !)
The CAA - conspicuous by their absence.
It creates a void I agree but a void it seems clear today that it would be reckless for others to attempt to fill.
At least the note was consistent on the more important point: the law stands and of course travel companies have to offer proper i.e. monetary refunds.
The spinning is getting intense and not helping customers understand the truth. Then again, that does not help much either. 90% of the industry went bananas and thought "who cares about the law, we don't need it".
Please confirm that 100% of your small client base (your ATOL is for less than 700 passengers), who requested a full refund, were in deed refunded within the legal timescale of 14 days. thank you
Game changer and good news for the Travel Companies.
ABTA's persistence seems to have paid off. Finally the Government has acknowledged the Travel Industry does exist.
Sorry, what exactly has changed?
The law? No. CAA clarification? No. The weather in West Sussex? No.
BEIS confirmation of Refund Credit Note protection.
And the West Sussex weather by 10 degrees over the next 5 days, I would guess.
I hope you are right on the weather!
It is not clear to me that BEIS have confirmed CRN's have full ATOL protection. I don't understand the relationship between BEIS and Business Companion? Maybe you can illuminate?
In any case many parties, most notably ABTA have been very clear from the beginning that CRN's are covered by ATOL.
Problem is the relevant body is CAA / ATT. That would be news.
Further, travel companies have been issuing CRNs from the beginning. Mostly with NO CASH REFUND OPTION. This makes the CRNs legality questionable and further obfuscates the legal status of any refunds due.
Lastly, all this is a distraction. The customers don't trust ABTA / travel companies / CRNs and who can blame them after this debacle. It follows that their take up of CRNs will be much lower.
At VIVID Travel we have had to make further refunds this week as customers previously happy to postpone have become spooked by the general disrespect for the law we have as an industry displayed.
The Turkey is coming home to roost and its retribution will be dire. Businesses and jobs lost that could have survived if, as an industry, we had been honest and retained our previously good reputation.
Please confirm that 100% of your small client base (your ATOL is for less than 700 passengers), who requested a full refund, were in deed refunded within the legal timescale of 14 days. I won't hold my breath waiting for your confirmation !
CAA administer ATOL not Business Companion.
Main message was companies should offer proper refunds which most are not, citing ABTA guidance.
Lastly ATT cannot pay out on CRNs issued without cash alternative, ie unlawfully, as most have, thanks to ABTA position (prior / now in reality if not officially).
So yes, bravo ABTA, it’s all going swimmingly. The consumer has full confidence in our industry and we can all look forwards to the bounce back.
Kane i agree - I said this morning I think this irresponsible journalism again - it needs FORMAL endorsement from CAA/ATOL and lots of use of words may 'a very well edited use of a single phrase and then all contradicted by 'Business Companion Coronavirus Bulletin acknowledges the Package Travel Regulations (PTRs) “still apply” to cancellations and says “a full refund or re-booking (if Abta or Atol protected) should be offered”. -so please which is it BEISand ABTA !!!!