Comments on: Double trouble: Travel agent goes bust, taking Cayman vacation with it http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-goes-bust-taking-cayman-vacation-with-it-now-what/ Consumer advocate Christopher Elliott's site. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:25:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Joe Farrell http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-goes-bust-taking-cayman-vacation-with-it-now-what/comment-page-1/#comment-15177 Joe Farrell Thu, 23 Oct 2008 21:56:37 +0000 http://www.elliott.org/?p=5283#comment-15177 Who was the travel agent the agent for? Did the company pay a commission to the agent for the booking? Seems like that should be a simple question to ask. If the company paid the travel agent a commission then the travel agent is the travel company's agent. Thus, once the travel agent received the funds, under the law of the Caymans, the US, Britain, Canada and many other western societies deriving common law from Britain, the travel COMPANY HAS BEEN PAID. Paying their agent is the same as paying the company. Look - if you pay a discounted travel agency or inside rate - then they discounted the regular rate to the agent for the bookings. It is very hard to contract this away without the clear disclosure to the third party - it cannot be buried in paragraph 353 of the agreement. Who was the travel agent the agent for?
Did the company pay a commission to the agent for the booking? Seems like that should be a simple question to ask.

If the company paid the travel agent a commission then the travel agent is the travel company’s agent. Thus, once the travel agent received the funds, under the law of the Caymans, the US, Britain, Canada and many other western societies deriving common law from Britain, the travel COMPANY HAS BEEN PAID. Paying their agent is the same as paying the company.

Look – if you pay a discounted travel agency or inside rate – then they discounted the regular rate to the agent for the bookings. It is very hard to contract this away without the clear disclosure to the third party – it cannot be buried in paragraph 353 of the agreement.

]]> By: Nanci Moll http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-goes-bust-taking-cayman-vacation-with-it-now-what/comment-page-1/#comment-15174 Nanci Moll Thu, 23 Oct 2008 20:39:11 +0000 http://www.elliott.org/?p=5283#comment-15174 Actually I sent MasterCard all the verification they needed once the dispute was filed (within the 60 days post billing received as stated on the website). They then lied and said I had not followed that protocol and reversed the credit given during the dispute period. When I contacted CItiCard again, a supervisor re-opened the case for a review but not a dispute. Therefore, meaning we still had to pay the previously disputed charge. The review is still pending! Actually I sent MasterCard all the verification they needed once the dispute was filed (within the 60 days post billing received as stated on the website). They then lied and said I had not followed that protocol and reversed the credit given during the dispute period. When I contacted CItiCard again, a supervisor re-opened the case for a review but not a dispute. Therefore, meaning we still had to pay the previously disputed charge. The review is still pending!

]]> By: Carver Clark Farrow http://www.elliott.org/blog/travel-agent-goes-bust-taking-cayman-vacation-with-it-now-what/comment-page-1/#comment-15169 Carver Clark Farrow Thu, 23 Oct 2008 18:31:48 +0000 http://www.elliott.org/?p=5283#comment-15169 I wish Ms. Moll luck. Unfortunately, the hotel is 100 percent within its right. Whenever you check into a hotel you agree that if the responsible person doesn't pay up, then you, the person who received the service will pay. This is true whether it's your credit card company, your employer, or even the airline that stranded you. Basically, the hotel's position is that it doesn't want to be in the middle of your dispute with the third party. It provided the service, you received it, end of story as far as the hotel is concerned. That being said, I suspect that Ms. Moll could probably negotiate a substantially reduced rate with the hotel given the circumstances. I wish Ms. Moll luck. Unfortunately, the hotel is 100 percent within its right. Whenever you check into a hotel you agree that if the responsible person doesn’t pay up, then you, the person who received the service will pay. This is true whether it’s your credit card company, your employer, or even the airline that stranded you.

Basically, the hotel’s position is that it doesn’t want to be in the middle of your dispute with the third party. It provided the service, you received it, end of story as far as the hotel is concerned.

That being said, I suspect that Ms. Moll could probably negotiate a substantially reduced rate with the hotel given the circumstances.

]]>