Suche
Mein Konto
Vacation on Crete: Court awards repayment due to rodent noise!
A man from Munich successfully sued for a reduction in travel prices due to rodent infestation during his package trip to Crete.
Vacation on Crete: Court awards repayment due to rodent noise!
The Munich District Court made an impressive judgment on November 7, 2024, which is now causing a stir. A plaintiff from Munich had booked a two-week package trip to Crete for 5,326 euros, which took place from August 12th to 26th, 2023. During the stay, there was significant disruption from rodents in his originally assigned hotel room, which severely affected the family's nightly rest. These circumstances meant that the man had to move to another room on August 16th, after he had already reported a defect on August 13th.
The tour operator rejected the allegations of rodent infestation and saw no claim by the plaintiff for repayment or compensation. Nevertheless, the court considered the plaintiff's descriptions to be credible. The man was able to provide detailed reports and pictures of the replacement room, which was also smaller than the one originally booked. Ultimately, the court decided on a travel price reduction of 45 percent for the first four days of vacation, which would correspond to a repayment of 684 euros.
Details about the verdict
The plaintiff had initially demanded a reduction of 50 percent for the first three days and 285.32 euros for the day of the move. However, the lawsuit was only partially upheld because the reduction for the day of the move was not recognized and the hotel's daily services were considered to be free of defects. In addition, the claim for compensation for loss of holiday enjoyment amounting to 855.98 euros was rejected. The court argued that the noise pollution caused by the rodents only occurred at night and that no defects occurred during the day.
In addition, it was found that after deducting a pre-trial payment of 500 euros, a claim of 184 euros remained. This ambiguous decision, arising from case number 223 C 17811/24, highlights the challenges that holidaymakers in similar situations may potentially face.
Although the plaintiff was right on some points, the procedure remains legally controversial and not legally binding. However, the court's clear assessment of the credibility of the descriptions could have a signal effect for future lawsuits due to similar disruptions during vacation.
For further details about the case and the legal background, the reports from Day ticket and Justice Bavaria be consulted.