Woman sues holiday firms over 'damp, depressing' £88,000 villa
For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
For Janet Keppel-Palmer, it was the final straw. Not only were the sofas too small and the garden unkempt in her £22,000-a-week Caribbean holiday home, she claimed, but the butler was a "buffoon" whose only talent was making rum punch.
One of the more exotic and costly holiday compensation claims went to the High Court in London yesterday in a legal wrangle over the standard of a four-bedroom villa on a luxury golf resort hired for £88,000 at prevailing exchange rates to celebrate the millennium.
Mrs Keppel-Palmer, the wife of a wealthy anti-fraud expert, entered Court 11 at the Royal Courts of Justice to complain that the Villa Frangipani Five in Barbados had not met her expectations.
A list of shortcomings at the exclusive Royal Westmoreland resort, near Bridgetown, was presented to the court ranging from a leaking roof that soaked her sister in bed to the lack of a working CD player.
The villa - described in Royal Westmoreland's brochure as offering "relaxation of the very highest quality" - had been rented for 32 days by Mrs Keppel-Palmer and her husband, James, who helps governments in developing countries fight fraud, to celebrate the start of the next 1,000 years, after flying to the West Indies by Concorde.
Friends and family with whom the couple had not spent a holiday for 10 years, as well as their two grown-up children, were invited to the hilltop property, which came complete with domestic staff and a free limousine. The brochure was suitably mouthwatering: "Throughout, the ambience is one of lightness, grace, ease, with open-air covered stairways making the most of the visual delights of this fabulous residence."
But Mrs Keppel-Palmer, who told the court she was a housewife in her mid-50s, claimed the dream vacation turned into a nightmare when she found she had in effect hired an expensive wind tunnel. The exposed location and lack of glass in the windows meant that the villa was at the mercy of unseasonable storms that punctuated their four-week stay, the court heard.
Heavy Indonesian-style furniture, "more suited to a beach hut", gave the villa an unwelcoming feel while the equipment, including plastic glasses, had not been up to scratch, Mrs Keppel-Palmer said. She said: "It certainly wasn't the level of comfort you would expect having spent $142,000 on the rent. It was very, very dark and depressing. It was just very cold and stark."
Like many companies seeking to exploit the millennium, Villa Frangipani had been offered at a higher rate for December 1999 and January 2000. Now, it can be rented in high season for $12,500 a week, less than a third of the former rate.
Mrs Keppel-Palmer, from Richmond, Surrey, is claiming half the rental cost, £44,000, and £16,500 in damages from two companies - Exsus Travel Ltd, based in Mayfair, London; and Royal Westmoreland Villas Ltd in Barbados - for her "spoilt package holiday" under legislation covering package tours.
Both firms deny liability.
Alan Saggerson, for the defence, said the holiday was not protected by this legislation: "If you were to ask someone what a package holiday was, I doubt very much that it involves travelling by Concorde at one's own expense and hiring a villa at approximately £90,000.
"To say that this family only got half of what they bargained for is - like some elements of the evidence - exaggerated."
Royal Westmoreland, which bills itself as one of the world's top golf resorts, insists that the villa was not defective, barring a number of minor faults.
But the villa's staff had also failed to meet expected standards. The butler, a drinks waiter from another resort, had been a "buffoon" unable to perform his job, it was claimed. Mrs Keppel-Palmer said: "He was no use at all as a butler, although he could make a good rum and fruit punch."
The court was told that the Keppel-Palmers were used to having staff while travelling in developing countries but were alarmed that the villa's staff did not wash their hands while preparing meals. Mrs Keppel-Palmer said: "I am very nervous about that sort of thing."
Mr Justice Gage was told that features which did not match expectations included damp, draughty and cramped rooms; insufficient seating; an overgrown garden, and incomplete dinner services. In one storm, the court heard, a guest awoke to water dripping on to her bed, and puddles formed in the dining room. The swimming pool was said to be little larger than a plunge pool.
Asked what the villa's worst fault was, Mrs Keppel-Palmer said: "It was everything building up on each other - the wind coming through, the water in the dining room, problems with the staff and the darkness. It was just everything."
Judgment is expected today.
The allegations
* The villa and guest houses were "dark, gloomy, cramped and had very little liveable space". The dinner table was too large to be properly served at, and the sofas were too small to seat eight people.
* Rain came through the windows and the roof, leaving puddles in the dining room and a bedroom. Mrs Keppel-Palmer said: "I can't think of any housewife who would be happy to have her furniture wet whenever it rains."
* Kitchen was badly equipped with too little crockery, plastic glasses and coffee cups for tea. Staff were "untrained" and allegedly did not wash their hands when preparing food.
* A small, exposed swimming pool where gusts swept away hats and furnishings, and it was impossible to converse.
* Lie-ins were not possible. Guests had to rise at 7.30am to open the basement so staff could get cleaning equipment.
* A broken lamp came back after 10 days without a bulb; there were smelly drains, and louvre windows could not be shut, allowing birds to fly in.