I booked a night in a hotel on the Greek island of Mykonos during July using the website Hotels.com.
Last month, I had a call from a Hotels.com call centre in the Philippines with a question about my reservation on 13 June. I informed the caller there must be an error as my booking was for 13 July.
She confirmed the agent who had processed the booking had made a mistake, agreed to contact the hotel, re-book for July and get back to me.
When she did not do so, I rang Hotels.com and was put through to an agent in San Salvador who promised to look into the matter and ring me back. He failed to do so.
I rang again and was advised that, as the cost of the accommodation had gone up from £74 to £180, I would have to pay the difference then claim a refund.
I did not see why I should pay out more with no guarantee that I would be reimbursed, especially when the responsibility for the wrong booking rested with Hotels.com.
I was passed to a supervisor who told me I could cancel the booking for 13 June (a booking I never made) and be reimbursed the £74 or re-book for 13 July and pay the extra cost which I refused to do.
I now find myself with no accommodation for myself and my children and have since received an email stating that the refund of £74 will not be reimbursed as promised. JJ, London
This is appalling behaviour by Hotels.com, an offshoot of Expedia, and shows the price that customers often have to pay for budget holidays booked through agents which have budget infrastructure.
Was Hotels.com abashed by its failings in your case? Not a bit. It told me it had sorted the problem to your satisfaction: “We have resolved the booking issue for the customer and provided him with a gesture of goodwill in recognition of any inconvenience caused. We wish him a happy holiday.”
This translates as a refusal to pay the difference between the two bookings so you were forced to cancel. The goodwill was a £30 voucher to entice your future custom.
Only when I pointed out this miserliness did Hotels.com up the goodwill to £200 “in recognition of the initial error and inconvenience as well as time spent and costs incurred searching for a satisfactory resolution”.
Quite why you were caused these costs through two months of prevaricating is not addressed and it seems clear that, without the clout of a headline behind you, the company would never have “recognised” what it has put you through.
If you need help email Anna Tims at your.problems@observer.co.uk or write to Your Problems, The Observer, Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU. Include an address and phone number.
