Every year, countless Holiday Sickness Claimants set out to tackle claims against Tour Operators independently, hoping to keep things simple and save on costs. But many don’t realize that these Tour Operators are all too willing to exploit independent Claimants just like you.

You might assume that a Tour Operator with an international reputation would act fairly, but unfortunately, this is rarely the case.

If you’re thinking about handling a claim on your own to save money, be aware that going solo can leave you vulnerable to tactics by major Tour Operators. As a result, many Claimants end up frustrated, misled, and without the compensation they deserve based on unlawful representations by Tour Operators.

In a recent Holiday claim, our client reported that a significant Tour Operator informed them they couldn’t proceed due to a lack of an immediate stool sample. The Tour Operator falsely insisted that the sample needed to be taken immediately and performed in the resort and misrepresented the standard of proof required to establish a Holiday Sickness claim.

Luckily, you have recourse in this situation.

Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR)

These regulations apply to any ‘commercial practice’ in transactions that can affect your ability to make informed decisions about your rights. A commercial practice is unfair if it contravenes the requirements of professional diligence, and this materially distorts your behaviour when deciding to pursue a claim.

Regulation 5

Regulation 5 CPUTR prohibits misleading commercial practices that deceive you and affect your ability to make informed decisions. A Tour Operator stating that you do not have the right to claim based upon false requirements for evidence is an example of this.

Regulation 6

A misleading omission happens when tour operators leave out important information from which you make an informed decision. If, for example, the Tour Operator fails to inform you of the proper evidential standard required after you ask them, this would be considered a misleading omission. Another typical example is failing to mention that you are entitled to the disclosure of hotel documents.

R -v- X (2013)

This case confirmed that CPUTRs can apply to one interaction. Even a one-time letter can constitute unfair practice, so you do not need to worry about proving this behaviour as a running pattern.

Recourse

1. Reporting your Tour Operator to Trading Standards – They can impose fines and penalties on your Tour Operator.
2. Civil Remedies – Under a 2014 regulation amendment, you have the right to damages.
3. Consider the Common Law – Misleading statements that influence you not to claim can be found as misrepresentation if you relied on these statements not to pursue a claim and you have sustained a loss because of this.

The True Evidential Burden

The Package Travel Protocol provides a helpful specimen list of evidence that should be disclosed to a Claimant.

Pre-action protocol for resolution of package travel claims – Justice UK

Wood -v- TUI Travel PLC clarifies that you must show that the hotel’s fault caused your illness on the balance of probabilities. It also clarified that it is enough for you to prove that the food was contaminated by a pathogen on the balance of probabilities. Alongside this, infection patterns from other guests at your hotel are highly persuasive evidence.

As you can see, the law is clear on this. However, your Tour Operator is banking on you not conducting the research.

Choose Us

We have in-depth knowledge of not only the law but also the nuances of the claims management industry. We are aware of the diversionary and often unlawful tactics deployed by Tour Operators on a daily basis. We know the legal mechanisms to enforce legal compliance and progress your claim. Do not allow a Tour Operator to exploit you; leave an enquiry, and our team will be glad to assist.