What is FCC technically? Legally classed as?

[cublet]

Hello,

 

Didn't ABTA walk away from the XL Airlines failure (2008) saying that paying-out on the usual terms would bankrupt the compensation scheme?

 

Regards,

 

Cublet

[Harry Peterson]

ABTA have always made a very big thing of the much vaunted 'ABTA Protection'  -  looks now to be about as useful as a chocolate teapot (Andy - do you have one in your collection? 🙂)!

[AndyMichelle]

27 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

ABTA have always made a very big thing of the much vaunted 'ABTA Protection'  -  looks now to be about as useful as a chocolate teapot (Andy - do you have one in your collection? 🙂)!

Ha, no, but I bet Michelle will want one now you have given her the idea. 😊

ABTA agreed my daughter was entitled to a refund under usual circumstances, but said they would not support any claim against any travel company at this 'difficult time for the industry'... (their words)... 

Andy 

 

[zap99]

35 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

ABTA have always made a very big thing of the much vaunted 'ABTA Protection'  -  looks now to be about as useful as a chocolate teapot (Andy - do you have one in your collection? 🙂)!

And TUI put U in the middle. Who pays ABTA ( clue, association of British travel agents) staff wages. NOT a consumer organisation.

Edited April 19, 2020 by zap99
Spell

[Selbourne]

3 hours ago, glittergal1 said:

Thanks to you all so far, from this forum and face book forums plus research It seems that 

No one actually knows what a FCC is legally classed as

that no where do we seem to have a proper paper trail for our FCC

That P&O,  TA's and Abta keep changing terms/conditions and keep offering conflicting information 

 

One thing that does seem to be coming up more than once is to book a cruise quickly with any FCC (it should then be covered) 

But most of all its better to take a full money refund no matter how long it takes 

 

I will keep you informed if/when I get a proper answer from P&O to my questions 

 

We have yet to get definite  answers to our other questions we get so much conflicting info its mind boggling 

 

I’m a little unclear as to what you are still trying to find out. I think we have established that FCC is not a credit note, it is an incentive, so is not covered by the protection that a credit note has. Also, FCC is not covered by ABTA protection until it is used to make a confirmed booking. What else are you trying to establish? You are unlikely to get a sensible answer from P&O. We know from several other examples posted on here over the years that two different people at P&O will give you two different answers to the same question. As I say, I’m not sure what additional info you would glean by knowing what the technical legal definition is, beyond what has already been stated?

[glittergal1]

3 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

I’m a little unclear as to what you are still trying to find out. I think we have established that FCC is not a credit note, it is an incentive, so is not covered by the protection that a credit note has. Also, FCC is not covered by ABTA protection until it is used to make a confirmed booking. What else are you trying to establish? You are unlikely to get a sensible answer from P&O. We know from several other examples posted on here over the years that two different people at P&O will give you two different answers to the same question. As I say, I’m not sure what additional info you would glean by knowing what the technical legal definition is, beyond what has already been stated?

Have we established that FCC is an incentive ? I dont think we have unless I missed that confirmed legal bit 

Anything offered above your cancelled booking is an incentive so when they offer 110% or 125%  the extra 10% or 25% is incentive and not covered in the same way The 100 % of your booking back is not incentive

 

I think  All we confirmed that no one knows what a FCC is . Once I get an answer from P&O and only then will I be sure.

 

 

 And Yes I said we need to rebook with Fcc to make sure its covered  by abta

 

 

And Yes so far I have not had a sensible answer from P&O and Ive had many different answers to the same question and because of this I am more determined to get the truth, and the correct information .

 

And the knowledge I will glean by knowing what the technical and legal definition of FCC is , well its so I legally know where I stand.

 

Unlike many P&O customers I am not one to roll over and give in , I dont like injustice and I fight my corner .

 

So if you are happy with the way P&O are treating customers well good for you , I am not so I will continue to pursue them . (luckily Ive time on my hands at the moment) 

[Selbourne]

4 minutes ago, glittergal1 said:

Have we established that FCC is an incentive ? I dont think we have unless I missed that confirmed legal bit 

Anything offered above your cancelled booking is an incentive so when they offer 110% or 125%  the extra 10% or 25% is incentive and not covered in the same way The 100 % of your booking back is not incentive

 

I think  All we confirmed that no one knows what a FCC is . Once I get an answer from P&O and only then will I be sure.

 

 

 And Yes I said we need to rebook with Fcc to make sure its covered  by abta

 

 

And Yes so far I have not had a sensible answer from P&O and Ive had many different answers to the same question and because of this I am more determined to get the truth, and the correct information .

 

And the knowledge I will glean by knowing what the technical and legal definition of FCC is , well its so I legally know where I stand.

 

Unlike many P&O customers I am not one to roll over and give in , I dont like injustice and I fight my corner .

 

So if you are happy with the way P&O are treating customers well good for you , I am not so I will continue to pursue them . (luckily Ive time on my hands at the moment) 

I have never said that I am happy with the way P&O has handled this situation. If you read all my posts earlier on in this saga you would know that, but with respect I believe that you are over thinking this. I am satisfied from my research that FCC is an incentive, as it is at an enhanced rate and not at the precise value of the booking. Others have said that they also understand it to be an incentive. Your assertion that only the extra above the base price constitutes the incentive contradicts ABTA’s advice, which I pasted. You won’t get a defined legal definition from anyone on this forum and certainly not from P&O. It is not in their interest to answer that question as it would encourage everyone to take a cash refund, which they are desperately trying to avoid. I would think that you will need to engage a lawyer to establish the precise legal definition, if that matters to you, but, as I have said, I’m not sure what you would achieve by doing so. The answers would be the same, with a lot of legal words around it - and a bill for their trouble. That’s why I did my own research and posted my findings in an attempt to help you, but you prefer to just cast doubt on it without having done your own research? Most people would want to know the practical implications and risks of taking FCC over a cash refund. That has been comprehensively answered but isn’t good enough for you. If you want an answer from a lawyer you will need to ask one if the answers posted here aren’t satisfactory for you, but I fear that asking P&O will get you nowhere as firstly I don’t believe that they will answer your question directly and even if they do I wouldn’t put too much faith in it. 

[mercury7289]

With nothing better to do was thinking about the problems that the Company has with refunds.

Was told on the recent video that there are 200 people employed to carry out the change of bookings, take new bookings and deal with refunds.

 

Bearing this in mind If you were to split the work force 50% on refunds the other 50%  on new bookings and change of bookings. there would be 100 staff dealing with refunds.

 

Taking 50,000 which is in excess of the true number of guests on board, during the first period of pausing, across All P&0 Ships, divide by 2 because the majority of bookings are couples gives 25,000 bookings divide by 50% refunds as apposed to FCC gives 12500 total refunds to deal with. Further divide this by the 100 staff, means that each one has 125 to deal with. Further divide this into the number of weeks that have elapsed, say 5, means 25 per week or 5 per day! each!

Seems to makes nonsense of what we are being told!

 

My head hurts!

Edited April 19, 2020 by mercury7289
CORRECTION

[Selbourne]

20 minutes ago, mercury7289 said:

With nothing better to do was thinking about the problems that the Company has with refunds.

Was told on the recent video that there are 200 people employed to carry out the change of bookings, take new bookings and deal with refunds.

 

Bearing this in mind If you were to split the work force 50% on refunds the other 50%  on new bookings and change of bookings. there would be 100 staff dealing with refunds.

 

Taking 50,000 which is in excess of the true number of guests on board, during the first period of pausing, across All P&0 Ships, divide by 2 because the majority of bookings are couples gives 25,000 bookings divide by 50% refunds as apposed to FCC gives 12500 total refunds to deal with. Further divide this by the 100 staff, means that each one has 125 to deal with. Further divide this into the number of weeks that have elapsed, say 5, means 25 per week or 5 per day! each!

Seems to makes nonsense of what we are being told!

 

My head hurts!

Very sound maths mercury7289 and further enforces what many of us have been saying elsewhere, that the 60 days delay is far more to do with helping their cash flow than because of work load. I hope that you and Mrs mercury7289 are both OK? I was concerned to read some of your posts earlier in the crisis, but then relieved to hear that things had improved for you. My thoughts are with you both. 

[mercury7289]

4 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

Very sound maths mercury7289 and further enforces what many of us have been saying elsewhere, that the 60 days delay is far more to do with helping their cash flow than because of work load. I hope that you and Mrs mercury7289 are both OK? I was concerned to read some of your posts earlier in the crisis, but then relieved to hear that things had improved for you. My thoughts are with you both. 

Thank you, all is well, was very difficult to ask for help to start with, went against my upbringing, but with the assistance of a few people on this site, was able to find a way forward. Shame about the Iceland Cruise we were looking forward to meeting you again. We trust that things are as well as can be for both of you.

Keeping MOH safe with no chances being taken.We were booked on Arcadia 19 nights J003 next weekend, but alas!!

Keep safe.

[glittergal1]

1 hour ago, Selbourne said:

I have never said that I am happy with the way P&O has handled this situation. If you read all my posts earlier on in this saga you would know that, but with respect I believe that you are over thinking this. I am satisfied from my research that FCC is an incentive, as it is at an enhanced rate and not at the precise value of the booking. Others have said that they also understand it to be an incentive. Your assertion that only the extra above the base price constitutes the incentive contradicts ABTA’s advice, which I pasted. You won’t get a defined legal definition from anyone on this forum and certainly not from P&O. It is not in their interest to answer that question as it would encourage everyone to take a cash refund, which they are desperately trying to avoid. I would think that you will need to engage a lawyer to establish the precise legal definition, if that matters to you, but, as I have said, I’m not sure what you would achieve by doing so. The answers would be the same, with a lot of legal words around it - and a bill for their trouble. That’s why I did my own research and posted my findings in an attempt to help you, but you prefer to just cast doubt on it without having done your own research? Most people would want to know the practical implications and risks of taking FCC over a cash refund. That has been comprehensively answered but isn’t good enough for you. If you want an answer from a lawyer you will need to ask one if the answers posted here aren’t satisfactory for you, but I fear that asking P&O will get you nowhere as firstly I don’t believe that they will answer your question directly and even if they do I wouldn’t put too much faith in it. 

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree as to whether seeking the truth is worth the effort

Obviously Im not going to acquire a lawyer I will seek the answer from P&Os legal department. It may take me a long time to get an answer , I dont care I have the rest of my life They will get fed up of me asking before I get fed up of asking I dont have a reputation like P&O does to lose .

 

I still believe that any refunded  100% fcc  or Split monerary  % refund / FCC % upto 100% is equal to the amount of your booking and does not constitute an incentive ,  It is your money you are owed so no incentive

However if you accepted the 110% or 125 % then the extra % is the incentive and the part not covered by Abta and any financial protection 

 

I will say no more  Thank you to all you who posted 

[Selbourne]

6 minutes ago, glittergal1 said:

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree as to whether seeking the truth is worth the effort

Obviously Im not going to acquire a lawyer I will seek the answer from P&Os legal department. It may take me a long time to get an answer , I dont care I have the rest of my life They will get fed up of me asking before I get fed up of asking I dont have a reputation like P&O does to lose .

 

I still believe that any refunded  100% fcc  or Split monerary  % refund / FCC % upto 100% is equal to the amount of your booking and does not constitute an incentive ,  It is your money you are owed so no incentive

However if you accepted the 110% or 125 % then the extra % is the incentive and the part not covered by Abta and any financial protection 

 

I will say no more  Thank you to all you who posted 

In a further attempt to try to be helpful to you (for what it’s worth), I do agree with you that FCC to the precise value of the cruise would constitute a credit note, not an incentive. I don’t think that P&O would refund it if it was unused at expiry, but I would think that you would have a much stronger case, if you perused them legally, than if you had accepted the 110% or 125% incentive. 
 

I accept that we don’t agree regarding the 110% / 125% being an incentive. I follow your logic but think it is highly tenuous and I don’t agree. Neither does ABTA, so good luck with that one. 
 

When you get the definitive legal answer from P&O’s legal department (which you are confident that you will receive), perhaps you would be kind enough to post it here? I have some experience of taking P&O to task legally (twice, in fact) and the only thing that ever comes out of their legal department is a Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA). They use NDA’s when they know that you have a sound case, but only when you have refused their first two offers to settle. Although it is an admission of fault, they will never say so in writing. I won both cases without the aid of lawyers, just through my own research, as has been the case with the advice that I gave you. As I say, I mention all of this by way of help, as is the spirit of this forum, even when the answers aren’t always what you want to hear.

[Harry Peterson]

I've kept out of this, because I have no knowledge of the terms on which FCCs have been offered and accepted. 

 

But I can certainly back up what Selbourne says above about NDAs. You will reach that stage only by perseverance though, and by being on firm legal ground.  It's an acceptance by them that you've won the argument, and that they don't want to run the risks involved in an adverse court decision.  You're agreeing of course not to let anyone else know.

[cublet]

Hello,

 

Today, Wednesday 22nd April, there were long articles on both Radio 4's 'Today' programme and 'Breakfast' on BBC1. What was said on the News on 'Today' was that ABTA was writing to the government to ask it to give protection to holders of credit notes in the event of a travel company collapsing before it is used.

 

What that tells me is that they are not protected now.

 

Regards,

 

Cublet

[Eddie99]

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2020/04/uks-biggest-airlines-and-holiday-providers-breaking-the-law-over-cancellation-refunds/?utm_campaign=whichukt&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_content=HolidayRefunds&utm_term=twnews

[AndyMichelle]

39 minutes ago, Eddie99 said:

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2020/04/uks-biggest-airlines-and-holiday-providers-breaking-the-law-over-cancellation-refunds/?utm_campaign=whichukt&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_content=HolidayRefunds&utm_term=twnews

Wow, that's an interesting read.. 

P&O are by no means the worse then.. 

Fair play to EasyJet, the only ones managing to get most of their refunds done in 14 days.. Shows it can be done, they must have huge amounts to do.. 

Andy 

[AndyMichelle]

48 minutes ago, cublet said:

Hello,

 

Today, Wednesday 22nd April, there were long articles on both Radio 4's 'Today' programme and 'Breakfast' on BBC1. What was said on the News on 'Today' was that ABTA was writing to the government to ask it to give protection to holders of credit notes in the event of a travel company collapsing before it is used.

 

What that tells me is that they are not protected now.

 

Regards,

 

Cublet

Worryingly, some companies are giving credit notes that you can only claim a refund after they expire, leaving your money unprotected until that date... 

Andy 

[johnthecook]

5 minutes ago, AndyMichelle said:

Wow, that's an interesting read.. 

P&O are by no means the worse then.. 

Fair play to EasyJet, the only ones managing to get most of their refunds done in 14 days.. Shows it can be done, they must have huge amounts to do.. 

Andy 

I think any company that holds back on refunds will get the bad feedback they deserve and will cost them dearly for future business, after this mess clears up we will not forget who they are.

[AndyMichelle]

6 minutes ago, johnthecook said:

I think any company that holds back on refunds will get the bad feedback they deserve and will cost them dearly for future business, after this mess clears up we will not forget who they are.

The problem is, with the exception of EasyJet and some smaller companies, they are all doing it, seemingly supported by ABTA. 

Andy 

[Eglesbrech]

16 minutes ago, AndyMichelle said:

The problem is, with the exception of EasyJet and some smaller companies, they are all doing it, seemingly supported by ABTA. 

Andy 

Andy, note the quote from ABTA today below. The excuse they are now giving for delays in repayment is that companies are waiting for money back from airlines, hotels etc P&O have no such excuse for the majority of their bookings they (and other cruise lines) are the hotel and the money went directly to them.

 

”A spokesman for Abta, which represents travel companies and agents, said: "The worldwide travel shutdown has led to a huge volume of holidays being affected.

"Many travel agents and tour operators are unable to provide immediate cash refunds because they have not yet received money back from airlines and hotels, so they need more than 14 days to process refund requests."

[AndyMichelle]

8 minutes ago, Eglesbrech said:

Andy, note the quote from ABTA today below. The excuse they are now giving for delays in repayment is that companies are waiting for money back from airlines, hotels etc P&O have no such excuse for the majority of their bookings they (and other cruise lines) are the hotel and the money went directly to them.

 

”A spokesman for Abta, which represents travel companies and agents, said: "The worldwide travel shutdown has led to a huge volume of holidays being affected.

"Many travel agents and tour operators are unable to provide immediate cash refunds because they have not yet received money back from airlines and hotels, so they need more than 14 days to process refund requests."

Yes, and the airlines are doing the same as P&O for no legal reason and are not getting pushed by ABTA either. 

It just seems that legalities are being ignored. 

Andy 

[tring]

This link, that can be clicked through to from the "Which" link given above, gives the answer to this thread and agrees with what I had said earlier in this thread:-

 

https://www.which.co.uk/news/2020/04/should-i-accept-a-holiday-company-or-airline-voucher-do-i-have-to/

Edited April 22, 2020 by tring

[Eglesbrech]

6 minutes ago, AndyMichelle said:

Yes, and the airlines are doing the same as P&O for no legal reason and are not getting pushed by ABTA either. 

It just seems that legalities are being ignored. 

Andy 

ABTA was never there for customers.
 

We had a brush with them a few years ago going through the stages of a serious complaint and it was very clear that their only purpose is to protect their members not customers. We ended up instructing legal action at which point they all backed down very quickly. Unfortunately most people give up, particularly if the money to be recouped is not sufficient even for a small claims action.

 

 

[Wedgeh]

On 4/19/2020 at 1:38 PM, cublet said:

Based on no more than an 'A' Level in Contract Law, my view is that in the event of , say, P&O going bust, the holder of an FCC would be an unsecured creditor in a long line of unsecured creditors.

Edit:
Apparently I'm wrong about gift-voucher holders, they basically join the unsecured creditors as well.

 

I think that's true if you had asked for a refund, and not received it yet (a position I'm currently in with RCCL), but it seems to me - a non-lawyer - that a FCC is more akin to a gift certificate which becomes worthless if the company stops trading. If the FCC has a term where it can be converted to a refund then the only way I can see that being sorted out is in court, but since there's likely to be little left for unsecured creditors anyway whether it would be worth doing is a different question.

 

 

Edited April 22, 2020 by Wedgeh
Corrected myself

[tring]

20 minutes ago, Eglesbrech said:

ABTA was never there for customers.
 

We had a brush with them a few years ago going through the stages of a serious complaint and it was very clear that their only purpose is to protect their members not customers.

 

 

 

This is true - ABTA is a trade body.  The protection normally offered if companies go bust is something that would have to be provided by the companies concerned.

 

Which is a consumer body and has been making representations to the Government regards the requests by ABTA to the Government.  It is Which who will give advice to customers, and the articles posted above are "Which" articles and it is well worth reading them to the end as advice is also given regards Insurance.  That is another thing people are getting very blase about, when you consider most British people will not usually book holidays without being insured.

Edited April 22, 2020 by tring