Booked - cancelled - rebooked - same dates...once I had put

[Giddy Goat]

2 weeks before final payment was due I received an email from the him to say he had split from his girlfriend and would have to cancel the booking.

Well, that means that if Sam requests the balance say .... 8 weeks before the start of the holiday, he was given ten weeks to remarket, and if his deadline is 6 weeks, 8 weeks re remarket etc. That's probably not quite long enough notice to fill October, (the ideal for us all!) even in the Algarve though Portugal owners can correct me if I'm wrong.

It does sound like a definite attempt to engineer a better deal.

[greenbarn]

Difficult to guess if they were devious enough to engineer the scheme from the outset, whether the booking was cancelled in a fit of pique and the cancellation regretted (and an advantage then taken) or whatever. What would trouble me is guests with a "ho ho look what a deal we managed to get" attitude. I wouldn't want them.

[pepsipuss]

My guess is 'if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck then there is a good chance it is a duck'.

Sorry can't remember who said it

[Giddy Goat]

If they were not in the business of attempting to deceive they would have contacted Sam and said 'we are now in a position to come, is it possible to re-instate our booking and would you be prepared to refund the admin fee if we do?' Anything else is a transparent try-on which looks to have been deliberately engineered.

I think this is very fair comment GB; this is what I would have done had I been in his potential guest's situation, and were genuine. I agree that he may not have planned this from Day 1, but certainly hoped he might get a better deal if he didn't remind Sam of his earlier aborted booking.

[Sam V]

Sam, how long was the period between cancellation and the arrival of the "new" booking request?

I got an email to cancel on 24/8 from the original bookee Mr S. (originally booked early May) I advertised the reduced rate on 17/8. On 19/9 I received the enquiry from Mr M.

[Lesblancs]

Hi Sam,

I am bit confused about the dates you mentioned, unless of course you are talking about 2009.

Bobby

[Sam V]

If they were not in the business of attempting to deceive they would have contacted Sam and said 'we are now in a position to come, is it possible to re-instate our booking and would you be prepared to refund the admin fee if we do?' Anything else is a transparent try-on which looks to have been deliberately engineered.

I think this is very fair comment GB; this is what I would have done had I been in his potential guest's situation, and were genuine. I agree that he may not have planned this from Day 1, but certainly hoped he might get a better deal if he didn't remind Sam of his earlier aborted booking.

Well this is what set me thinking: Mr 'S' made the original booking in May and then cancelled 24 July. I advertised at reduced rate from 17/8. Then Mr 'M' enquires 19/8, books the same dates at the discounted rate. Then I remembered the name Mr 'M' and confirmed Mr 'M' as having been on the original booking got me thinking me thinking. When I received the forms back yesterday and Mr 'S' and same gf's from previous booking, plus the addition of who appears to be the brother of one gf. Seems they've managed to do a lot of splitting up and getting back together, re-organising with an addition to the group in all in three weeks. Lucky they hadn't cancelled thier flights!

[Sam V]

Taff, I think you are indeed perhaps missing something. A booking was made and cancelled. The result of that was that the dates became available to the world at large, at a discount because of the relatively small amount of time left before the start of the holiday. This is quite different from the scenario envisaged by Sam at the time of the original booking which was that if no booking was made during the intervening period, it might be available at a later date at a discounted price.

The only reason for the present late availability is that a certain group ensured that it was not available to anyone else to book and then cancelled when it was too late for the owner to do anything other than re-advertise at a lower rate. If that group is genuine and wants to rebook, at the very least it appears disingenuous to just apply as if they were new customers and expect to get the rate which has only been discounted because they themselves cancelled. If they were not in the business of attempting to deceive they would have contacted Sam and said 'we are now in a position to come, is it possible to re-instate our booking and would you be prepared to refund the admin fee if we do?' Anything else is a transparent try-on which looks to have been deliberately engineered.

I agree with Jim that gut instinct is usually correct and I would be hearing the warning gong loud and clear in this case.

Great answer, I'll definately be gleaning some of this for my email to them.

[Sam V]

Hi Sam,

I am bit confused about the dates you mentioned, unless of course you are talking about 2009.

Bobby

Booked in May 2010 for a holiday first week in October 2010, cancelled 24 July, re-booked 19 Aug

[pepsipuss]

Great answer, I'll definately be gleaning some of this for my email to them.

Thank you Sam - glad to be of service and no charge!

[greenbarn]

My guess is 'if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck then there is a good chance it is a duck'.

Good quote (I can't remember who said it either!), along with "if it smells like a rat, chances are it is a rat...." (something like that, anyway.)

I think the underlying message here is that it doesn't really matter about the breed of duck, or the size of rat.....

ps Being a very sad individual I had to Google the duck quote to see if it is ascribed to anyone in particular, but seemingly not.
I did find If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands attributed to Douglas Adams. Not his best quote, though.

[Giddy Goat]

I like it. Thanks for the googling - saved me the trouble!

We're sad or wot?

[greenbarn]

A couple of further thoughts:

I can't see any problem with having a policy of not reinstating a cancelled booking to the same guests, without that policy having to be stated in your T&C's, so that's an easy response.

Second thought - this is an open discussion about guests who can very easily recognise themselves. Should the thread be moved to Members Only? (Maybe I'm being paranoid! )

[klompje]

Second thought - this is an open discussion about guests who can very easily recognise themselves. Should the thread be moved to Members Only? (Maybe I'm being paranoid! )

Not if Sam's link doesn't work!!

Back to the other issue. I don't really think these people are being devious. A bit sly, rather clever and taking advantage yes, but to be devious they would have to have expected the return of their deposit which in 9 out of 10 cases would not have been done. So Sam is slightly to blame for this turn of events. Kids fall in and out of love and in and out of relationshsips, splits happen and resplits also happen. They would have given a better impression if they had rebooked in the original name, but only that, a better impression.

Having said all that I wouldn't take them as I believe in gut feelings too and if you are not happy with a booking don't take it.

[Sam V]

They did know they would get their deposit back as it is in the Booking contract that they get it back up to 8 weeks before departure, less an admin fee. However, that is about to be re-written as per others advice!