Issue on Azura

[scottie99]

Some people will have seen my post below on the P&O website.

 

My wife and I are currently on Azura.

 

On the first evening we had a lovely meal in the Italian restaurant in Verona dining room.

 

I had ordered a large glass of Chianti which I thought I had seen on the menu at £4.50. When the bill came. I was charged £6.65.

 

I assumed I had not noticed a more expensive Chianti on the menu and I had been served this. I duly signed the tab.

 

Last night we returned and I noticed the only Chianti on the menu was priced was priced at £4.50 and duly ordered again.

 

When the bill came, I was again charged the higher price. I asked the wine waiter if there was a mistake. He went away to enquire.

 

On his return to the table he told me that his superior had told him the lower price was what was charged on the Trans- Atlantic cruise immediatley prior and the higher price was the correct price.

 

I asked to speak to him. When he came over he told me again the higher price was correct. They had changed prices at the computer but not yet on the menu.

 

I tried to explain although it may be the current price, he could not advertise it on the menu at one price and then charge something else. At this point I think my point was lost in translation ( I think he was an Indian gentleman)

 

Rather than cause a scene, I gave in and signed the bill.

 

I have reported the matter to reception and as yet I have had no response.

 

I accept it is only a couple of pounds, but I think there is a matter of principle here (not to mention that I find it interesting that P&O have differebt price stuctures on different cruises. Adding VAT could only add 20% to the total!)

 

On board I tried twice to reply to some of the replies I received but somehow my new posts were blocked

[tring]

Mmmmm.....

 

That would certainly be illegal in the uk, but one wonders what sort of contols,if any, are used at sea.

 

It is certainly not the way to treat any consumer.

[tring]

If the same thing is happening when you reach our territorial waters, you could contact Trading Standards in Southampton!

[dsrdsrdsr]

As was pointed out on the other thread, cruises which leave the EU have duty as well as VAT on alcohol - hence the different price structure. But I agree, if the menu quotes a price, it should be charged, (and then they should change the menu before anyone else gets lucky).

[jeanlyon]

Definitely, if the menu quotes a price, then that is the price you should pay. I would have refused to sign.

[wharton450]

The price quoted is only an offer to buy, mistakes can happen on pricing. But when ordering your drink you should have been informed of the incorrect price, giving you the option to say yes or no. At this point you cant demand to buy the item at the lower price, this is a mistake many people make. But in your case it is against the law to offer a price and then charge extra after the event.

[Denarius]

On some P&O menus, wine is priced per 175ml glass - this would once have been classed as large but is now regarded as stardard. If I ask for a large glass, not always on the list, I am given a 250ml glass at a correspondingly higher price. Could this be what happened to the OP, who perhaps thought that 175ml was still regarded as large? £4.50 for 175ml and £6.65 for 250ml are roughly proportionate. Another factor which tends to favour this view is the actual price. £4.50 for a large 250ml glass equates to only £13.50 per bottle; Chianti is not cheap and you are unlikely to get a bottle at this price in the restaurant. £19.95, equivalent to £6.65 per 250ml glass, seems more realistic.

[William Dean]

The price quoted is only an offer to buy, mistakes can happen on pricing. But when ordering your drink you should have been informed of the incorrect price, giving you the option to say yes or no. At this point you cant demand to buy the item at the lower price, this is a mistake many people make. But in your case it is against the law to offer a price and then charge extra after the event.

 

Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd [1953] EWCA Civ 6

 

It is set out rather well below.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Society_of_Great_Britain_v_Boots_Cash_Chemists_(Southern)_Ltd

 

WD