5 2
CAA spells out stiffer regime for Atol businesses
Ian Taylor
ian.taylor@travelweekly.co.uk
The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has unveiled its new financial assessment regime for Atol businesses, requiring standard Atol holders to submit audited accounts, and agents with small business Atols (SBAs) to use accountants.
The new rules come into force on June 1. A CAA consultation in 2014 had initially proposed to abolish SBAs, which license holders for up to 500 passengers a year. It reprieved the SBAs following an Abta-led campaign. The CAA said the changes
would “ensure all Atol holders are subject to robust financial tests”, and would “inform licensing decisions”. It has produced an online self-assessment tool to help companies prepare, and will advise on whether they meet the criteria, which involve “a set of financial ratios” based on year-end
accounts, weighted and combined to produce an overall assessment. SBA assessments involve four financial ratios including stability, cashflow and profitability. Standard Atol holders licensed for £5 million to £20 million in annual revenue have seven ratios. Financial statements from
standard Atol holders must be audited, and CAA-recognised accountants must prepare statements for SBA renewals. The regulator can demand more information if it considers the risk of failure to be higher, including where a programme is seasonal, has a limited number of destinations or “a high percentage of flights or accommodation from one supplier”. Andy Cohen, CAA head of Atol,
said: “The existing tests have been in place for more than 30 years and needed updating to reflect risk-based methods for assessing likelihood of failure. “The new assessments will mean we’re better placed to identify companies in, or at risk of, financial trouble.”
3
Joyce Aoun (inset) and the Mandarin Oriental Miami
STORIES HOT
Agent angered by Miami hotel
Jennifer Morris
jennifer.morris@
travelweekly.co.uk
Agents have responded in droves after a hotel refused to pay commission when a customer failed to turn up but had paid the full amount for their stay.
London-based independent
agent Joyce Aoun made a non- refundable three-night reservation for her client at the Mandarin Oriental Miami in December. She informed the hotel that her
client might not turn up and was “unsurprised” when they charged the room total – $1,278 – after the customer did not arrive. After waiting two months for her commission, which she expected to be around 10%, Aoun was told it would not be paid. The Mandarin Oriental Miami
told her the money the guest was charged was a penalty fee cancellation and so she did not qualify for commission. Aoun said: “I have been in the
The CAA is tightening its financial assessments
travel business for 25 years and in my experience hotels have always paid commission for no-shows who pay the full amount.
“Whether my client slept in his
room or not, he has paid the full amount for his stay, which in turn entitles me to my commission as the agent who made his reservation. They may have been able to rebook the room. “I have never had a problem
with Mandarin Oriental before.” More than 65 members of the
Travel Gossip Facebook page said they too would expect to be paid commission in such a case. “On the face of it, it appears
unreasonable for a supplier to refuse to pay commission when the agent has done the required work in making a booking,” said an Abta spokesman, before adding that the agent’s right to it “would have to be clearly set out in the relevant agency agreement”. A Mandarin Oriental Miami
spokesman said: “Due to the fully disclosed restrictions over the stay dates, the cancellation did not qualify for a commission. Industry- wide, each hotel would need to judge whether a cancellation would qualify for a commission as
there is no standard.” › Have you experienced a similar non-payment? Email jennifer.
morris@travelweekly.co.uk
3 March 2016
travelweekly.co.uk 5
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80