Hello my name is Alex and I will help you with this. Please note that I am a working Solicitor and may be on and offline as I have to attend Court and meet with clients, even at weekends. As such you may not get an instant response when you reply as this is not an ‘on demand’ live service, but rest assured I will be giving your question my immediate attention upon return. There is no need to wait here, you will get an email when I reply.
To confirm the only thing he was asked to do was pay for the extra stay - that's it?
Do you offer package holidays or just offer to book the travel on their behalf?
I confirm that the only thing he was asked to do was pay for the extra stay.
I have offered package holidays to Cuba and have booked travel on behalf of these customers via a third party. Our website says: We can arrange flights from a range of airports including Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol, Newcastle, Dublin & Belfast. Please contact us for more information and prices.
When I book flights via a third party I usually do so in the name of the client but, unfortunately, on this occasion I booked direct through Walk Andalucia.
If you are meant to be licenced there is nothing HE can do about this. He can NOT sue you for that, it would be a matter for the authorities.
But in terms of his loss and compensation if he was only asked to pay to the stay and you offered that back - that is all he can claim for.
There is hardly any stress or inconvenience as a result of this.
But you may wish to take a commercial view - if you were meant to be licenced and you want to keep this quiet you may wish to pay him off.
However if you do not intend to be bullied or blackmailed then give him his actual extra costs back and say see you in Court.
If it went to Court then a Judge would not look at whether you were licenced because he actually got the holiday he paid for.
The Judge would only look at was there a breach and if so what was the loss as a result.
The loss here is clear, the extra cost to the traveller. You said you would pay him for this which is quite reasonable.
He would then have to justify any additional loss to the Judge and I can not see he has one.
Can I clarify anything for you about this today please?