Holiday cancellation terms

We booked a holiday cottage in Wales in February but due to an impending house move we are unable to go (from a financial point of view) and have just cancelled it. The booking isn't until the start of the summer holidays so is over 3 months away. The company we booked through has replied that if they can rebook it then they'll refund us minus the booking fee and cancellation insurance fee (only covers death, jury service etc so not applicable in our case) BUT if they can't rebook it, we'll be liable for to pay for the whole holiday anyway (which we can't afford to do as that is the whole point of making the difficult decision of cancelling this years family holiday).

Anybody got any experience of this? A quick Google appears to bring up contradictory advice. Some places appear to say that you shouldn't lose more than the booking fee/insurance element of the deposit (roughly £130, we'd be fine with that) but others state that at 90 days before (where we are) then we'd lose the deposit (£270, what I thought was the worst case scenario). Other places are in line with what they are telling us in that the company is entitled to refund IF they can rebook it.

They've framed it as re-advertising at a discount (basically the cost of the {useless} cancellation insurance) so that if they rebook then we get the newly lowered costs (by the cancellation insurance amount) that someone else has paid minus the booking fee. This appears to get them around government guidelines that only the booking fee should be lost. It looks like we could demand that the cottage is put back for sale at the original price in which case we'd only lose the booking fee (£65).

That does sound unfair, though I don't know about the legal position. I would also have thought that any UK holiday availability for this year's summer holidays would be hugely in demand - maybe even at a premium, so the company ought to be able easily to cover any loss.
Good luck sorting it (and with your move).

What were the rental contract terms you signed? Outside of that contract, the rest is just "good will"

The terms are as mentioned above regarding the property being put up for rent again and us getting a partial refund *if* someone else takes it. If not then the owner may ask us for the full balance. This being the first time I've read the conditions in such detail, I'm not sure whether this is standard practice or sharp practice hence the question. What would seem fair to me would be to lose either the whole deposit or the deposit minus booking fee/cancellation insurance, not to have to pay for a holiday we won't be taking despite giving over 3 months notice.

Jim,
You're probably right about it being in demand, there's been a plot twist this morning though....

They've emailed to say that the owner has decided to take that week for themselves. For me that would be the end of it and we should get the balance of our deposit back. However the travel company has asked me to keep an "eye out" for the booking because if the owner subsequently cancels then we would become liable for the whole amount again. They want me to keep this eye out so that I can inform them if this happens and they can offer it up for rent again as a special offer. They are apparently busy and would probably miss the cancellation and don't want to take personal responsibility for it!

My response so far has been polite but brief and to the point.

To top it all, the house chain is hanging in the balance and may collapse tomorrow.

I actually agree with you wrt loosing the deposit only given you have cancelled and given 3 months notice - that is industry standard in the independent holiday rentals market. However you signed a rental contract under the terms you have stated, fairness no longer comes into the equation unless you are prepared to spend a lot more money taking it further. Buyer beware or in other words "read the contract before signing".

A bit of curt but polite email ping pong later and we're getting the deposit back minus cancellation insurance/booking fee.

Amazingly the agent tried to stick to the line that we just get in touch later in case the owner changed their mind. Apparently there was a possibility that they didn't realise that we wouldn't be paying for their weeks holiday! Err.. nope, just refund us the balance please.

You've done well, we had to cancel a holiday cottage last year and were threatened with the loss of the entire cost. Fortunately they re-let it and we lost only our £100 deposit.

Done very well. A lot of good will on the part of the owner.

Just goes to show how careful you need to be these days reading the small print. Glad it seems to have had the least worst outcome and fingers crossed you sale / purchase holds together

That looks like pretty much the same terms and conditions that we have. Putting aside opinions on they are "fair" or not, I don't see how the agent could re-let the week but keep us on leash just in case the people who booked it (albeit the owners themselves) decided to change their minds in the future under their terms and conditions. For me the week has been re-let and the responsibility stays with them, not possibly come back to us at some unspecified time in the future.

In any case, the owners deciding to use that week for their own holiday has saved a load of faffing around for everybody.

Very glad it has worked out ok for you in the end. I hope your house chain withstands the strain. We exchanged last Wednesday after weeks of ridiculous to-ing and fro-ing by solicitors. Ours were fine, but for some reason, the vendor's decided to play at looking dodgy!

Cheers, fingers crossed. The issue is downstream(?) of us so we still should have sold ours and would hopefully just(!) need to find another house.

Almost makes you not want to holiday in England! We given up all hopes of any holiday this year as I take exception to the inflated charges to stay in a caravan/cottage in Wales while it rains.

Well chuffed you got your money mostly back, I thought for a second the venders were going to get a holiday on you

Can I just put another angle on this as a holiday cottage owner. Since March last year (apart from a brief respite last year) the market bombed and we've lost out. No money in but overheads, mortgage, housekeeper retainer etc still needed paying so it's not a simple matter of profiteering but I agree there should be a balance. Having said that though, we're through Sykes and as owners we have no say on the charges which is set by an algorithm based on demand and other factors and suspect this is the same for other companies in the business. Thought best to set the record straight

Understood, we have a rental property too but fortunately as it's residential it hasn't been affected by Covid.


^^ Just this really.

Out of interest I've just had a look at Syke's terms and they are similar except for the offer to re-let it for a refund.

Wishy did the house sale chain hold up?

Nope, we're now looking again. Ours has still sold as it stands but there doesn't seem a lot out there for what we're after (i.e. not a new build). We're considering whether to move into rented as what we like certainly exists in our price range but tend to go quickly when they do appear.

The interim rental option is certainly worth considering as you're an attractive proposition for a buyer that is looking for a quick hassle-free sale.

Hah. We were an excellent proposition for a buyer wanting a quick hassle free sale, but it still took him four months to get himself sorted out...

Neil

Yep, bad luck is queueing up "at the door" when selling houses, but it's one potential gremlin kicked into touch.

Quite, we are considering renting (for the first time for 30 years) for exactly those reasons.

Quite, we are considering renting (for the first time for 30 years) for exactly those reasons.

I can say that again.

We've moved into rented here in Germany, given the utter difficulty in buying a house at the moment. With luck, we can manage the rent and living from income and keep the capital in one chunk, but we'll see. Alternatively, the capital will pay the rent for thirty years or so and by that time I don't expect to be spending too much on wine, women, and song.

Good point, I should think like that a bit more, we'll have twenty years rent sat in the bank which gets me to a pension.