Thomas Cook In Financial Trouble

[willman]

14 minutes ago, Chez2 said:

Actually thats not correct, far from it.  Obelix was correct. Why do you say something without understanding the facts? The flights aren't that much cheaper than the package deals for most of the year. In addition to that, there is a levy of £2.50 for the ATOL insurance taken from each booking. Flight only with TC was ATOL protected until a couple of years ago and still is with Balkan. I have been flying twice a year with these two airlines for the last fifteen years. The price difference between them is swings and roundabouts depending when you book. TC certainly aren't "cheap", they are the same and sometimes more expensive than other airlines. We  sometimes went with them because we preferred the flight times even though that sometimes meant travelling from Manchester (an hour and a half away) and going up the night before rather than the flight times from Doncaster which we can travel to in about half an hour or less from our house.

 

Why would someone book a package if they own a property abroad? 

 

Its nothing to do with offering flight only that has been their downfall. Its bad management of the business in lots of areas, one Obelix has touched on;  the increased number of high street shops they have had over the last decade while others are decreasing theirs. 

 

We booked our flight direct wit TC using our credit card so we will get our money back from the CC company. The insurance would cover it if we were already there. 

I understand youre point and agree with you,you're obviously a seasoned and experienced traveller. Thousands of people aren't and do just look for a cheap flight only deal, or no insurance. IIRC at one time you had to have insurance witht the opertator then that was stopped so now people don't bother.

I wasn't claiming that flight only was the reaon for their downfall but the debacle that some travellers now find themselves in.

[Chez2]

Obelix I don't think willman understands ATOL is an insurance scheme and as with all insurance a fee has to be paid to secure that insurance. It has nothing to do with buying a package deal per se. 

 

https://www.comparethemarket.com/travel-insurance/content/atol-protection/

 

I don't know if TC chose not to have ATOL for flight only more recently or if they were not allowed to have it as they had been in financial trouble before. Balkan flight only are ATOL protected. 

[willman]

3 minutes ago, Obelix said:

Well it's not paying for their holiday is it if it's only the flights that are covered.

I fail to understand what your problem is with this unless you are having a go at what you think are  money grubbing people that didn't buy a package because it's not what they wanted.

ATOL as far as I know only applies if the originating flight is in the UK or dependancies like Mann, the Channel Isles or Gibraltar.

You're terminology not mine - i have no issue with people getting a deal. I had a package via Expedia when Monarch went tits up Expedia didn't cover full reimbursement although i got my flights reimbursed but lost the cost of the hotel in Rome i'd booked.If i'd gone on the holiday the insurance would have covered everything.

 

If people wanted to get a cheaper flight and didn't everything else correctly after considering the pitfalls why are they being bailed out.

 

 

[Chez2]

I know what you mean willman. Some people just don't think ahead. I couldn't get over the lady who didn't take extra heart medication with her. I only have hayfever and take extra tablets should the flight be delayed or I drop a tablet on the floor or down the sink and need a spare. 

 

For a long time you have been allowed just to tick you have insurance without any check to see if you have it. Some of the insurance is hardly worth it with the clauses such as not covered on excursions. I could understand if the excursions were dangerous but not just trips out.  

[Obelix]

1 minute ago, willman said:

You're terminology not mine - i have no issue with people getting a deal. I had a package via Expedia when Monarch went tits up Expedia didn't cover full reimbursement although i got my flights reimbursed but lost the cost of the hotel in Rome i'd booked.If i'd gone on the holiday the insurance would have covered everything.

 

If people wanted to get a cheaper flight and didn't everything else correctly after considering the pitfalls why are they being bailed out.

 

 

They are not being bailed out. Whilst those words are mine above it is exactly how you are coming across.

[willman]

4 minutes ago, Chez2 said:

Obelix I don't think willman understands ATOL is an insurance scheme and as with all insurance a fee has to be paid to secure that insurance. It has nothing to do with buying a package deal per se. 

 

https://www.comparethemarket.com/travel-insurance/content/atol-protection/

 

I don't know if TC chose not to have ATOL for flight only more recently or if they were not allowed to have it as they had been in financial trouble before. Balkan flight only are ATOL protected. 

I understand in principle but the point made on BBC this morning was those booking package deals with TC had ATOL protection included,those with flights only didn't however they had booked the flights.

[Obelix]

7 minutes ago, Chez2 said:

Obelix I don't think willman understands ATOL is an insurance scheme and as with all insurance a fee has to be paid to secure that insurance. It has nothing to do with buying a package deal per se. 

 

https://www.comparethemarket.com/travel-insurance/content/atol-protection/

 

I don't know if TC chose not to have ATOL for flight only more recently or if they were not allowed to have it as they had been in financial trouble before. Balkan flight only are ATOL protected. 

Thing is, those without ATOL cover wont definitly be coming back on the repatriation flights, so I really dont understand what the issue is.

[Chez2]

2 minutes ago, willman said:

You're terminology not mine - i have no issue with people getting a deal. I had a package via Expedia when Monarch went tits up Expedia didn't cover full reimbursement although i got my flights reimbursed but lost the cost of the hotel in Rome i'd booked.If i'd gone on the holiday the insurance would have covered everything.

 

If people wanted to get a cheaper flight and didn't everything else correctly after considering the pitfalls why are they being bailed out.

 

 

As far as I'm aware they won't be bailed out if they went flight only. Its down to their insurance, credit card (if they bought the flight direct) otherwise they may may get a flight but have to pay again. The flight are mixed package deal and flight only. 

[willman]

1 minute ago, Obelix said:

They are not being bailed out. Whilst those words are mine above it is exactly how you are coming across.

Being brought home at no cost to yourself is being bailed out. ATOL covered holiday makers according to the Minister for transport would be brought home exactly as they would as per their holiday. Non ATOL covered would be funded by the Govt and CAA.

[Chez2]

1 minute ago, Obelix said:

Thing is, those without ATOL cover wont definitly be coming back on the repatriation flights, so I really dont understand what the issue is.

They may be but paying. Why would someone bring back a part full plane when they can fill it with fare paying passengers?