Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
May 7th 2003, 4:25 pm
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
On Wednesday 07 May 2003 17:15, bigbrian wrote:
> How many of the passengers actually pay it? I've never paid more than
> c £100- £120 for a return on Eurotunnel on any of the dozens of times
> I've travelled.
I'm curious: how did you do that? Was it for a decent period holiday (a
week or so)?
> How many of the passengers actually pay it? I've never paid more than
> c £100- £120 for a return on Eurotunnel on any of the dozens of times
> I've travelled.
I'm curious: how did you do that? Was it for a decent period holiday (a
week or so)?
May 7th 2003, 4:36 pm
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
> "A.Melon" wrote in message
> news:3058406054de1040c956014d82d1e0f...raffickers.com...
>> >> I'm inclined to agree with you (after pursuing this question into
> realms
>> >> of thought so tortuous my head still hurts).
>> >>
>> >> ISTM that Eurotunnel can argue they did not sell the customer two
> trips,
>> >> of which he chose not to take one, but sold him only one trip; and
>> >> he then unilaterally decided to take a different trip. The fact
>> >> that the different trip was identical to a portion of the
>> >> originally-purchased trip may be a red herring. This is more or
>> >> less what you're saying, right?
>> >
>> > That would seem to be a fair summary.
>> Here's an analogy. If you placed an order for a set of something to
>> be sent in two shipments, paid for the whole set, and told them to
>> cancel the second shipment after you'd received the first, the
>> company would have no grounds for demanding more money from you. So
>> why should Eurotunnel be able to get away with doing just that?
>
> You are making the mistake of thinking that a single trip is half of
> return trip, rather than an entirely different trip that happens to
> look similar.
>
> Say you go into a furniture store to buy a sofa. You see a sofa,
> priced at £800, that you like and you tell the store that you will
> return to collect that sofa next day. Next day you decide that you
> really much prefer a sofa that costs £400 and take that instead. Would
> it be fair that you pay for the sofa you said you would take, or for
> the one you actually did take?
That's not a good analogy, surely ... How about you go to buy two sofas
for £800. But then you decide to take only one sofa and not have the
other. Now would you like to still pay £800?
>
> "A.Melon" wrote in message
> news:3058406054de1040c956014d82d1e0f...raffickers.com...
>> >> I'm inclined to agree with you (after pursuing this question into
> realms
>> >> of thought so tortuous my head still hurts).
>> >>
>> >> ISTM that Eurotunnel can argue they did not sell the customer two
> trips,
>> >> of which he chose not to take one, but sold him only one trip; and
>> >> he then unilaterally decided to take a different trip. The fact
>> >> that the different trip was identical to a portion of the
>> >> originally-purchased trip may be a red herring. This is more or
>> >> less what you're saying, right?
>> >
>> > That would seem to be a fair summary.
>> Here's an analogy. If you placed an order for a set of something to
>> be sent in two shipments, paid for the whole set, and told them to
>> cancel the second shipment after you'd received the first, the
>> company would have no grounds for demanding more money from you. So
>> why should Eurotunnel be able to get away with doing just that?
>
> You are making the mistake of thinking that a single trip is half of
> return trip, rather than an entirely different trip that happens to
> look similar.
>
> Say you go into a furniture store to buy a sofa. You see a sofa,
> priced at £800, that you like and you tell the store that you will
> return to collect that sofa next day. Next day you decide that you
> really much prefer a sofa that costs £400 and take that instead. Would
> it be fair that you pay for the sofa you said you would take, or for
> the one you actually did take?
That's not a good analogy, surely ... How about you go to buy two sofas
for £800. But then you decide to take only one sofa and not have the
other. Now would you like to still pay £800?
May 7th 2003, 5:18 pm
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
On Wed, 07 May 2003 17:36:14 +0100, News User
wrote:
> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>
>> "A.Melon" wrote in message
>> news:3058406054de1040c956014d82d1e0f...raffickers.com...
>>> >> I'm inclined to agree with you (after pursuing this question into
>> realms
>>> >> of thought so tortuous my head still hurts).
>>> >>
>>> >> ISTM that Eurotunnel can argue they did not sell the customer two
>> trips,
>>> >> of which he chose not to take one, but sold him only one trip; and
>>> >> he then unilaterally decided to take a different trip. The fact
>>> >> that the different trip was identical to a portion of the
>>> >> originally-purchased trip may be a red herring. This is more or
>>> >> less what you're saying, right?
>>> >
>>> > That would seem to be a fair summary.
>>> Here's an analogy. If you placed an order for a set of something to
>>> be sent in two shipments, paid for the whole set, and told them to
>>> cancel the second shipment after you'd received the first, the
>>> company would have no grounds for demanding more money from you. So
>>> why should Eurotunnel be able to get away with doing just that?
>>
>> You are making the mistake of thinking that a single trip is half of
>> return trip, rather than an entirely different trip that happens to
>> look similar.
>>
>> Say you go into a furniture store to buy a sofa. You see a sofa,
>> priced at £800, that you like and you tell the store that you will
>> return to collect that sofa next day. Next day you decide that you
>> really much prefer a sofa that costs £400 and take that instead. Would
>> it be fair that you pay for the sofa you said you would take, or for
>> the one you actually did take?
>That's not a good analogy, surely ... How about you go to buy two sofas
>for £800. But then you decide to take only one sofa and not have the
>other. Now would you like to still pay £800?
Thats no better an analogy.
How about if the sofas are £1000 for one, but you can have two of them
for £800?
You go to buy two sofas for £800. But then you decide to take only
one sofa and not have the other. How much do you think you should
pay?
£400?
£800?
£1000?
Brian
wrote:
> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>
>> "A.Melon" wrote in message
>> news:3058406054de1040c956014d82d1e0f...raffickers.com...
>>> >> I'm inclined to agree with you (after pursuing this question into
>> realms
>>> >> of thought so tortuous my head still hurts).
>>> >>
>>> >> ISTM that Eurotunnel can argue they did not sell the customer two
>> trips,
>>> >> of which he chose not to take one, but sold him only one trip; and
>>> >> he then unilaterally decided to take a different trip. The fact
>>> >> that the different trip was identical to a portion of the
>>> >> originally-purchased trip may be a red herring. This is more or
>>> >> less what you're saying, right?
>>> >
>>> > That would seem to be a fair summary.
>>> Here's an analogy. If you placed an order for a set of something to
>>> be sent in two shipments, paid for the whole set, and told them to
>>> cancel the second shipment after you'd received the first, the
>>> company would have no grounds for demanding more money from you. So
>>> why should Eurotunnel be able to get away with doing just that?
>>
>> You are making the mistake of thinking that a single trip is half of
>> return trip, rather than an entirely different trip that happens to
>> look similar.
>>
>> Say you go into a furniture store to buy a sofa. You see a sofa,
>> priced at £800, that you like and you tell the store that you will
>> return to collect that sofa next day. Next day you decide that you
>> really much prefer a sofa that costs £400 and take that instead. Would
>> it be fair that you pay for the sofa you said you would take, or for
>> the one you actually did take?
>That's not a good analogy, surely ... How about you go to buy two sofas
>for £800. But then you decide to take only one sofa and not have the
>other. Now would you like to still pay £800?
Thats no better an analogy.
How about if the sofas are £1000 for one, but you can have two of them
for £800?
You go to buy two sofas for £800. But then you decide to take only
one sofa and not have the other. How much do you think you should
pay?
£400?
£800?
£1000?
Brian
May 7th 2003, 5:32 pm
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
bigbrian wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> On Wed, 07 May 2003 17:36:14 +0100, News User
> wrote:
>
>> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>> "A.Melon" wrote in message
>>> news:3058406054de1040c956014d82d1e0f...raffickers.com...
>>>> >> I'm inclined to agree with you (after pursuing this question into
>>> realms
>>>> >> of thought so tortuous my head still hurts).
>>>> >>
>>>> >> ISTM that Eurotunnel can argue they did not sell the customer two
>>> trips,
>>>> >> of which he chose not to take one, but sold him only one trip; and
>>>> >> he then unilaterally decided to take a different trip. The fact
>>>> >> that the different trip was identical to a portion of the
>>>> >> originally-purchased trip may be a red herring. This is more or
>>>> >> less what you're saying, right?
>>>> >
>>>> > That would seem to be a fair summary.
>>>> Here's an analogy. If you placed an order for a set of something to
>>>> be sent in two shipments, paid for the whole set, and told them to
>>>> cancel the second shipment after you'd received the first, the
>>>> company would have no grounds for demanding more money from you. So
>>>> why should Eurotunnel be able to get away with doing just that?
>>>
>>> You are making the mistake of thinking that a single trip is half of
>>> return trip, rather than an entirely different trip that happens to
>>> look similar.
>>>
>>> Say you go into a furniture store to buy a sofa. You see a sofa,
>>> priced at £800, that you like and you tell the store that you will
>>> return to collect that sofa next day. Next day you decide that you
>>> really much prefer a sofa that costs £400 and take that instead. Would
>>> it be fair that you pay for the sofa you said you would take, or for
>>> the one you actually did take?
>>That's not a good analogy, surely ... How about you go to buy two sofas
>>for £800. But then you decide to take only one sofa and not have the
>>other. Now would you like to still pay £800?
>
> Thats no better an analogy.
>
> How about if the sofas are £1000 for one, but you can have two of them
> for £800?
>
> You go to buy two sofas for £800. But then you decide to take only
> one sofa and not have the other. How much do you think you should
> pay?
Yep, that's better :-) You take two and sell one on ebay or you keep it in
case the first one gets damaged, or you throw it away or burn it or give
it to charity ... But it's yours and you don't have to use it.
news:[email protected]:
> On Wed, 07 May 2003 17:36:14 +0100, News User
> wrote:
>
>> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>>
>>> "A.Melon" wrote in message
>>> news:3058406054de1040c956014d82d1e0f...raffickers.com...
>>>> >> I'm inclined to agree with you (after pursuing this question into
>>> realms
>>>> >> of thought so tortuous my head still hurts).
>>>> >>
>>>> >> ISTM that Eurotunnel can argue they did not sell the customer two
>>> trips,
>>>> >> of which he chose not to take one, but sold him only one trip; and
>>>> >> he then unilaterally decided to take a different trip. The fact
>>>> >> that the different trip was identical to a portion of the
>>>> >> originally-purchased trip may be a red herring. This is more or
>>>> >> less what you're saying, right?
>>>> >
>>>> > That would seem to be a fair summary.
>>>> Here's an analogy. If you placed an order for a set of something to
>>>> be sent in two shipments, paid for the whole set, and told them to
>>>> cancel the second shipment after you'd received the first, the
>>>> company would have no grounds for demanding more money from you. So
>>>> why should Eurotunnel be able to get away with doing just that?
>>>
>>> You are making the mistake of thinking that a single trip is half of
>>> return trip, rather than an entirely different trip that happens to
>>> look similar.
>>>
>>> Say you go into a furniture store to buy a sofa. You see a sofa,
>>> priced at £800, that you like and you tell the store that you will
>>> return to collect that sofa next day. Next day you decide that you
>>> really much prefer a sofa that costs £400 and take that instead. Would
>>> it be fair that you pay for the sofa you said you would take, or for
>>> the one you actually did take?
>>That's not a good analogy, surely ... How about you go to buy two sofas
>>for £800. But then you decide to take only one sofa and not have the
>>other. Now would you like to still pay £800?
>
> Thats no better an analogy.
>
> How about if the sofas are £1000 for one, but you can have two of them
> for £800?
>
> You go to buy two sofas for £800. But then you decide to take only
> one sofa and not have the other. How much do you think you should
> pay?
Yep, that's better :-) You take two and sell one on ebay or you keep it in
case the first one gets damaged, or you throw it away or burn it or give
it to charity ... But it's yours and you don't have to use it.
May 7th 2003, 6:30 pm
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
fred wrote:
> If they're selling the trip as a loss leader, then they may just be able
> to demonstrate the loss :-(
The additional loss as a result of you not turning up?
> If they're selling the trip as a loss leader, then they may just be able
> to demonstrate the loss :-(
The additional loss as a result of you not turning up?
May 7th 2003, 6:33 pm
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
bigbrian wrote:
> If you complain to the credit card company that the hotel has
> subsequently (after checking out) charged you for items which you
> acknowledge are valid, but which you wish not to pay because they
> didn't include them on the original bill, you'll get pretty short
> shrift.
Acknoledging that they are valid is not the same thing as agreeing that they
may be charged to your credit card.
> If you complain to the credit card company that the hotel has
> subsequently (after checking out) charged you for items which you
> acknowledge are valid, but which you wish not to pay because they
> didn't include them on the original bill, you'll get pretty short
> shrift.
Acknoledging that they are valid is not the same thing as agreeing that they
may be charged to your credit card.
May 7th 2003, 6:35 pm
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
wrote:
> What they are doing is charging you the difference between the fare you
> paid and the fare you should have paid for the service you used. You
> knowingly incur that extra cost by not complying with the conditions of
> use for the ticket issued, which include returning within a set time
> scale. A single trip is not half of a return, but a separately priced and
> different service.
What additional costs do they incur as a result of you leaving the seat
empty rather than sitting in it? That is the basis for any claim for
damages for failing to perform the terms of the contract.
> What they are doing is charging you the difference between the fare you
> paid and the fare you should have paid for the service you used. You
> knowingly incur that extra cost by not complying with the conditions of
> use for the ticket issued, which include returning within a set time
> scale. A single trip is not half of a return, but a separately priced and
> different service.
What additional costs do they incur as a result of you leaving the seat
empty rather than sitting in it? That is the basis for any claim for
damages for failing to perform the terms of the contract.
May 7th 2003, 7:37 pm
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
"Jonathan Bryce" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> wrote:
> > What they are doing is charging you the difference between the fare you
> > paid and the fare you should have paid for the service you used. You
> > knowingly incur that extra cost by not complying with the conditions of
> > use for the ticket issued, which include returning within a set time
> > scale. A single trip is not half of a return, but a separately priced
and
> > different service.
> What additional costs do they incur as a result of you leaving the seat
> empty rather than sitting in it? That is the basis for any claim for
> damages for failing to perform the terms of the contract.
They are not making any claim for damages. Their terms and conditions
clearly state that, if you do not comply with the conditions under which a
particular ticket is issued, then you will be liable for the fare that
applies to the conditions under which you travel. They are simply collecting
a different fare - the one applicable to the journey made, rather than the
fare for the journey booked but not correctly used. If the cheap day returns
were, say, 10% dearer than the single fare, would anyone be complaining
about paying the single fare if they only travelled one way?
Colin Bignell
news:[email protected]...
> wrote:
> > What they are doing is charging you the difference between the fare you
> > paid and the fare you should have paid for the service you used. You
> > knowingly incur that extra cost by not complying with the conditions of
> > use for the ticket issued, which include returning within a set time
> > scale. A single trip is not half of a return, but a separately priced
and
> > different service.
> What additional costs do they incur as a result of you leaving the seat
> empty rather than sitting in it? That is the basis for any claim for
> damages for failing to perform the terms of the contract.
They are not making any claim for damages. Their terms and conditions
clearly state that, if you do not comply with the conditions under which a
particular ticket is issued, then you will be liable for the fare that
applies to the conditions under which you travel. They are simply collecting
a different fare - the one applicable to the journey made, rather than the
fare for the journey booked but not correctly used. If the cheap day returns
were, say, 10% dearer than the single fare, would anyone be complaining
about paying the single fare if they only travelled one way?
Colin Bignell
May 7th 2003, 7:43 pm
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
"devil" wrote in message
news
[email protected]...
....
> I don't believe trhis is quite the correct interpretation. You sign the
> slip *as a guarantee.*
You could equally claim that the person who signs a credit card slip for a
ticket is signing it as a guarantee that they will pay the correct fare for
the journey undertaken.
> Not quite the same as a blank cheque. They can't
> just arbitrarily add stuff.
Neither does Eurotunnel arbitarily add stuff. They make surcharges in
accordance with their published terms and conditions, much as the hotel
publishes a list of prices for the minibar, which will be added to your bill
if you fail correctly to declare your useage at the time of leaving.
...
> Try returning a damaged rental car. They sure will have you sign the
> bill.
They will also charge your card for any traffic fines incurred by you when
using the car.
Colin Bignell
news
[email protected].......
> I don't believe trhis is quite the correct interpretation. You sign the
> slip *as a guarantee.*
You could equally claim that the person who signs a credit card slip for a
ticket is signing it as a guarantee that they will pay the correct fare for
the journey undertaken.
> Not quite the same as a blank cheque. They can't
> just arbitrarily add stuff.
Neither does Eurotunnel arbitarily add stuff. They make surcharges in
accordance with their published terms and conditions, much as the hotel
publishes a list of prices for the minibar, which will be added to your bill
if you fail correctly to declare your useage at the time of leaving.
...
> Try returning a damaged rental car. They sure will have you sign the
> bill.
They will also charge your card for any traffic fines incurred by you when
using the car.
Colin Bignell
May 7th 2003, 7:47 pm
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
In article ,
Jonathan Bryce wrote:
> fred wrote:
>
> > If they're selling the trip as a loss leader, then they may just be able
> > to demonstrate the loss :-(
>
> The additional loss as a result of you not turning up?
which is precisely zero? they save a little fuel by not having to haul
you -- there is no 'loss'.
Jonathan Bryce wrote:
> fred wrote:
>
> > If they're selling the trip as a loss leader, then they may just be able
> > to demonstrate the loss :-(
>
> The additional loss as a result of you not turning up?
which is precisely zero? they save a little fuel by not having to haul
you -- there is no 'loss'.
May 7th 2003, 7:50 pm
#71
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
"Anonymous" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >> >> * Could they legally (in the UK) charge my credit card for the
> >> >> difference, or would they have to sue me for it?
> >> >
> >> > If you have paid with a credit card, charging the debt to the card
> >> > would be the usual way to recover it.
> >>
> >> Is it legal in the UK for a company to make an unauthorised charge to
> >> someone's credit card in order to collect an alleged debt?
> >
> > In this case it isn't an "unauthorised charge".
> So if I think you owe me damages for whatever reason (your dog's
> barking keeps me awake), I can claim it on your credit card as a
> shortcut instead of using the civil courts?
The basic fallacy that keeps cropping up is the presumption that the charge
made by Eurotunnel is for damages. It is not. It is for the difference
between two fares, in accordance with their published terms and conditions,
which were accepted by the act of buying the ticket.
Colin Bignell
news:[email protected]...
> >> >> * Could they legally (in the UK) charge my credit card for the
> >> >> difference, or would they have to sue me for it?
> >> >
> >> > If you have paid with a credit card, charging the debt to the card
> >> > would be the usual way to recover it.
> >>
> >> Is it legal in the UK for a company to make an unauthorised charge to
> >> someone's credit card in order to collect an alleged debt?
> >
> > In this case it isn't an "unauthorised charge".
> So if I think you owe me damages for whatever reason (your dog's
> barking keeps me awake), I can claim it on your credit card as a
> shortcut instead of using the civil courts?
The basic fallacy that keeps cropping up is the presumption that the charge
made by Eurotunnel is for damages. It is not. It is for the difference
between two fares, in accordance with their published terms and conditions,
which were accepted by the act of buying the ticket.
Colin Bignell
May 7th 2003, 7:57 pm
#72
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
"News User" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
...
> That's not a good analogy, surely ... How about you go to buy two sofas
> for £800. But then you decide to take only one sofa and not have the
> other. Now would you like to still pay £800?
That still perpetuates the misunderstanding that a return trip is a
composite of two single trips, rather than a separate service existing in
its own right.
Colin Bignell
news:[email protected]...
...
> That's not a good analogy, surely ... How about you go to buy two sofas
> for £800. But then you decide to take only one sofa and not have the
> other. Now would you like to still pay £800?
That still perpetuates the misunderstanding that a return trip is a
composite of two single trips, rather than a separate service existing in
its own right.
Colin Bignell
May 7th 2003, 8:09 pm
#73
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
In article ,
wrote:
> They are not making any claim for damages. Their terms and conditions
> clearly state that, if you do not comply with the conditions under which a
> particular ticket is issued, then you will be liable for the fare that
> applies to the conditions under which you travel.
Indeed. Here's the standard condition that they duplicate to you when you
buy a cheap day return: "Only valid for reserved vehicle and departures.
Non-refundable and non-amendable. You must complete both outward and
return journeys or be liable to pay the difference between price paid and
the relevant single fare."
wrote:
> They are not making any claim for damages. Their terms and conditions
> clearly state that, if you do not comply with the conditions under which a
> particular ticket is issued, then you will be liable for the fare that
> applies to the conditions under which you travel.
Indeed. Here's the standard condition that they duplicate to you when you
buy a cheap day return: "Only valid for reserved vehicle and departures.
Non-refundable and non-amendable. You must complete both outward and
return journeys or be liable to pay the difference between price paid and
the relevant single fare."
May 7th 2003, 10:05 pm
#74
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
On Wed, 07 May 2003 19:33:13 +0100, Jonathan Bryce
wrote:
>bigbrian wrote:
>> If you complain to the credit card company that the hotel has
>> subsequently (after checking out) charged you for items which you
>> acknowledge are valid, but which you wish not to pay because they
>> didn't include them on the original bill, you'll get pretty short
>> shrift.
>Acknoledging that they are valid is not the same thing as agreeing that they
>may be charged to your credit card.
IME, invariably you agree when you register that all valid charges can
be charged to the card
Brian
wrote:
>bigbrian wrote:
>> If you complain to the credit card company that the hotel has
>> subsequently (after checking out) charged you for items which you
>> acknowledge are valid, but which you wish not to pay because they
>> didn't include them on the original bill, you'll get pretty short
>> shrift.
>Acknoledging that they are valid is not the same thing as agreeing that they
>may be charged to your credit card.
IME, invariably you agree when you register that all valid charges can
be charged to the card
Brian
May 8th 2003, 12:15 am
#75
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Using cheap return tickets on Eurotunnel
"Nomen Nescio" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
...
> Wouldn't the company have to demonstrate that the customer's failure
> to return on the scheduled trip had caused it a loss, relative to the
> company's costs of carrying out the day return contract (not relative
> to the price of a longer return ticket), in order to claim damages?
Yes, but they are not claiming damages. They are enforcing one of the
conditions of sale of the ticket, which is that may require you to pay for
the service you use, rather than the one you book. They even make allowances
for adding a fee for doing so in their terms and conditions.
Colin Bignell
news:[email protected]...
...
> Wouldn't the company have to demonstrate that the customer's failure
> to return on the scheduled trip had caused it a loss, relative to the
> company's costs of carrying out the day return contract (not relative
> to the price of a longer return ticket), in order to claim damages?
Yes, but they are not claiming damages. They are enforcing one of the
conditions of sale of the ticket, which is that may require you to pay for
the service you use, rather than the one you book. They even make allowances
for adding a fee for doing so in their terms and conditions.
Colin Bignell