We have had an ongoing dispute with Thomson. We think we paid £159/person for premium seating (which was not an optional extra) for a holiday to Cape Verde Islands this January. Thomson wrote to us before the holiday and informed us that this would not be available on the return flight, and when I enquired about a partial refund I was told that they were entitled to change the plane and there would not be a refund. (Incidentally, we had exactly the same plane outbound and for the return, but with te number of Premium seats available reduced on the return flight)

We brought the matter up with the rep at the hotel, but to no avail and on our return began lengthy correspondence with Thomson. Thomson maintain that we did not pay for premium seating but that we were charged £140 because we had a double bed for the week. Thomson will not supply a detailed cost breakdown. Our cost makeup, including Premium seating for two and £6/day x 7 days = £42 for the double bed supplement comes to the exact total we were charged for our holiday. However, if we were not charged for the Premium seats but were charged £140/week for the double bed, there then has to be an additional £220 that we were charged for something, to bring the total to what we paid. There is no mention in their brochure of an additional charge of £140/week for a double bed. Thomson refuse to explain this.

I have tried writing to ABTA, but the reply said that they would not advise taking this particular complaint further.

Although there is not a huge amount of money at stake for us, I wonder how many others may have also been charged the £159/person but not received the facility they had paid for. In the winter brochure there was a yellow line (indicating not an optional extra) through the fare structure including the £159/person.

One of the reps at the hotel told us that the original planes intended for this route were being used to go to Hong Kong. It appears to me that Thomson's original intent was to have a single class plane on the Cape Verde route, printed the brochure accordingly and set the on-line charging accordingly, and then changed the plane. So why did Thomson then write to us to tell us that the facility would not be available on the return flight?

If this was going on for the 6 month duration of the winter brochure, with one return flight/week and say 150 people a week paying the £159 but not being provided with the facility, that would be a problem cost in excess of £0.5million. I wonder if this is why Thomson are refusing to clarify what we did actually pay for.