Charged for twin-sharing room, given triple-sharing

Don't want to miss the best from Business Standard?

When a customer is charged on twin-sharing basis, a tour operator cannot cut costs by giving accommodation on triple-sharing. Heena Devi had booked a vacation package for herself and her son for Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore conducted by Guidelines Travels Private Limited. The tour was planned from September 9, 2011 to September 23, 2011.

At Singapore, Heena and her son were allotted a room to be shared with Pallavi Shah, another member of the tour group. Heena protested as she did not want to share her room with a stranger. She rang the travel company's office for the same.

In return, the tour manager asked Heena and her son to wait in the hotel lobby till an alternative arrangement could be made to allot an independent room to the two. After two hours, the tour manger informed them that independent rooms are the given only to couples, and Heena would not qualify for one as she was travelling with her son and not with her husband.

He threatened to drop them out of the tour unless they co-operated and agreed to share the room with Shah.

Heena and her son's vacation was spoilt by the treatment meted out to them. After returning, Heena sent a written complaint to the tour operator with a copy to the Indian High Commission in Singapore. Since the tour operator did not respond, she filed a complaint before the South Mumbai Consumer Forum, relying on the brochure which stated that rooms would be provided on twin-sharing basis.

Guidelines Travels contested the complaint, claiming that they were a reputed tour operator and were in business for 15 years. They claimed that a lady named Pallavi Shah had approached them and booked the tour for herself, Heena Devi and Vaibhav Gandhi on triple-sharing basis. The total cost of the tour was around Rs 2.64 lakh inclusive of the cruise charges. They occupied the room on triple-sharing basis at Pattaya, Bangkok, Genting, and Kuala Lumpur without any objection.

Heena disputed this, pointing out that she had not been made to share the room with Shah at any of these places. On the contrary, Shah had shared the accommodation either with another single lady or had been allotted a single room.

The problem arose only in Singapore where they were asked to share their room with Shah. The arguments became heated and the hotel management had to summon the police to control Heena.

Later Vaibhav Gandhi behaved in a similar way, because of which the tour leader had to lodge a police complaint. Guidelines Travels said the complaint was frivolous and ought to be dismissed as the only grievance was in respect of triple-sharing accommodation.

The Forum found the booking form produced by Guidelines Travels to show the joint booking was a false document. While Shah had done her booking at the tour operator's Kandivali office, Heena's booking was done by the head office at Kalbadevi. The Forum found that the rate charged was on twin-sharing basis as stated in the brochure.

The Forum indicted Guidelines Travels for deficiency in service and an unfair trade practice for charging on twin-sharing basis and then giving accommodation on triple-sharing basis. The Forum awarded Heena a compensation of Rs 30,000 and another Rs 8,000 towards costs.

Heena ensured that the tour operator did not get away with cost- cutting at the cost of the consumer.

The writer is a consumer activist