My understanding of the logic supporting policies limiting refunds of deposits is that they provide working capital to tour companies and allow them to make commitments to their providers.
Providing refunds to clients who cancel close to the tour date does affect the company adversely, making it difficult to book new tour members on short notice.
We have just completed (October 2025) our fifth, very successful tour.
Some months ago, we had anticipated repeating the Sicily tour in September/ October2026.
At the end of our tour this week we were forced to recognize that our age (75) and its related infirmities will preclude any more tours.
When requesting a cancellation of our 2026 tour, which is still almost one year in the future and has currently only one open slot remaining, the response from Rick Steves was to refuse to refund the deposit.
SO...Given the popularity of the tours, the long standing reputation of the company as customer friendly, the high likelihood of this tour being fully populated within the next year, the low cost to the company of creating a reservation and the fact that the company retains $800.00 forever while providing no services, it seems that in order to maintain its well deserved reputation, perhaps a modification of the current refund policy should be considered ?
In short, does the company really wish to foster a sense among customers that their business policies are inequitable ?
Perhaps a sliding scale of refund percentages would be far more palatable than the current "no refund beginning 30 days after initial reservation".
It also seems that the current policy creates incentives for people who are unable to participate in their reserved tour to merely not pay the balance as the date approaches, rather than provide the courtesy of cancelling in advance. In this scenario, the company must then scramble to fill vacancies close to the tour date.
Any thoughts on this ?