CASE seeks guidelines on cancellation of hotel wedding packages
Reuters file photo
SINGAPORE — When they decided not to go ahead with their wedding four months before the big day, Mr Ken Chong and Ms Ngia Hui Na were dealt another blow: The hotel they had booked to hold their banquet asked them to pay up.
A dispute ensued, with the couple saying they were not informed about the cancellation policy and the hotel standing firm.
The February deadline given to them to pay 50 per cent of the charges — amounting to more than S$10,000, including the S$3,000 deposit they had paid — has passed and the hotel has threatened legal action.
The consumer watchdog here wants to put such disputes to a stop by asking the industry association to come up with guidelines to deal with cancellation of wedding packages.
In a survey last year, the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) received responses to enquiries about cancellation policies from only 18 out of 100 hotels.
One hotel, which CASE did not name, charged couples in full upon cancellation, if notice was given less than eight months from the banquet date, for instance.
Among the 23 complaints it received relating to such disputes in the past four years, couples in two cases had to forego their deposits even though other couples had taken over their slots.
Highlighting the disparities in practices on World Consumer Rights Day yesterday, CASE president Lim Biow Chuan said: “Could you not have found alternative customers to take up the time slot, if we’re quite some time away from the actual booking?”
Most hotels said they had rejected potential customers, because the couples had signed a contract with them, and hence, there was a need for compensation, said Mr Lim.
He acknowledged, however, that most couples fail to read the fine print in their contract. “Most couples, when they book a wedding venue, the last thing they have in mind is that they’ll cancel,” he said.
Talks have been held with the Singapore Hotel Association (SHA) since last year for hotels to issue fairer contract terms for the cancellation of wedding packages, said CASE, but little progress has been made.
“We’ve been negotiating with the SHA to see if they’ll come on board. If they don’t, then we’ll have to consider legal action,” said Mr Lim, without elaborating. “We will consider (this) later if hotels are totally uncooperative and they insist on charging that kind of fees that we feel are unreasonable.”
Legal action can be taken against hotels that enforce a penalty, such as cancellation charges, despite not having suffered genuine losses, said lawyer Daniel Chia of Stamford Law Corporation. But hotels can also sue customers who default on paying the penalty if they have lost business due to late cancellation, he added.
