Action threatened over air fares

[Hookerbot 5000]

The Office of Fair Trading has threatened to take action against airlines in an attempt to tackle what it says is misleading pricing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6759197.stm

The BBC has found that several low-cost airlines are still quoting fares without including extras such as taxes.

In February, the OFT gave carriers and travel companies three months to include all fixed non-optional costs in their basic advertised prices.

Easyjet, Ryanair and Thomas Cook say they are working towards compliance.

Price presentation

The extra costs which concern the OFT include items such as air passenger tax and fuel surcharges, all of which can significantly change the price of a flight.

The OFT now says a minority of airlines have failed to comply, although it will not name them.

However, the BBC has found that several low-cost carriers are still quoting flight prices without including those extras on their websites.
Leeds-based budget airline Jet2 says it is talking to the OFT about how best to present its prices.

If the OFT is not happy with progress, it can take companies to court to make them change.

[RAT 5]

Sounds like classic delaying tatics. The more dialogue you have , and the more questions you ask, for clarification etc. etc. the longer you can put off the implementation of legislation. You hide behind the smoke screen of apparently preparing compliance using the excuse that you want to get it right from the start and not have to amend things due to misunderstanding. This dance could go on for many months/years. Notice of such advertising practice was issued long ago. It would seem to have been ignored by a few.

What is equally gaulling are the sneeky tricks which some Loco's website booking engines apply. You cancel insurance, you cancel priority booking, you cancel as many extras as you can; youa rrive at the final page. It then invites you to check back through all details to see if there are any mistakes. However, you only check back as far as the flights/dates. Low & behold you now arrive at the final confirmation of booking page to find that all the extras have been added on again. Attempted theft, nearly. But what a con.

And does anyone know what the compulsory insurance is in RYR's ticket price? It is included with the absurd wheel chair charge. It is impossible to cancel or to find out what is being insured. I have tried via normal channels, to find out. No success.

[judge11]

Perhaps the first nail in the coffin of LOW Cost, RIP? However, its epitaph, should it ever get that far, will read 'The Greatest Market Coup (Con) of the 20th Century'

[eastern wiseguy]

'The Greatest Market Coup (Con) of the 20th Century'


What bolleaux......it isn't that long ago that a "cheap" fare entailed booking three months in advance and it still cost an arm and a leg. I remember the KLM BFS-AMS fare used to come in at around 250 quid. those days are gone(mind you so are KLM ex Ireland....so someone got the prices correct)

[Rainboe]

So are we as fed up with ISPs advertising broadband at 19.99/month, then when the bill arrives, they add VAT? Or utilities advertising standing charges which attract VAT?
I happen to think the present pricing structure is just fine. It is the airports and governments that have imposed varying charges buried under camouflage like
'Passenger Security charge' (different for airports)
'Passenger Tax' etc.
'Green taxes' etc
What we have is authorities wishing to disguise their charge and tax take within the airlines costing and advertised fares. I believe it is only fair that the airline should make it plain that it is only taking say 59.99, and the authorities are bleeding another 50% or even 200% of the stated fare in direct charges that are not going to the airline itself. We should all be aware what charges are levied on top of what we are paying the airline itself to travel so when we join the mile long queue at Gatwick South Terminal, we can see what value for money the airport itself is giving us!

What should be examined is when you don't travel, it seems to be regarded that you forfeit not only your ticket fare, but also the charges above which by right should be returned to you (in full!)

[rmac]

Not only the low costs following this route. Most airlines have major differences of "taxes" and "surcharges" on the same routes. Surely a tax imposed by the government cannot be different from airline to airline, can it ?

So how about the a basic audit and enforcement of what airlines claim are taxes, and as for the rest (fuel, security, etc etc) those are a cost of doing business and should be part of the basic price. :confused:

[judge11]

'The Greatest Market Coup (Con) of the 20th Century'; I stand by what I say. The laws of economics with regard to aircraft operating costs have not altered. Yes, the headline price (the low-cost) of flying has reduced but only for those who have picked up the initial issue of low fares. For everyone on an aircraft paying £10 for a seat, someone else is paying £200. It is the £10 bait that gets a punter to the website and usually keeps them there irrespective of the ensuing increasing fares. The 'low-cost' revolution caused the 'majors' to radically alter hteir pricing - no bad thing - but 'low-cost' is a misnomer. Many 'low-cost' fares are considerably more than some of the 'legacy' fares and, rest assured, if there was still a service from NI to NL you would still be able to find a fare of £250 from a 'low-cost' con artist.

[eastern wiseguy]

was still a service from NI to NL you would still be able to find a fare of £250 from a 'low-cost' con artist.

There is ...and I am sure you can HOWEVER in the good old days of the Legacy carriers they started at the HIGH ripoff fares and moved up...at least now there is a potential to travel for less.

[boogie-nicey]

Rainboe has hit the nail on the head. This is an exercise by the authorities to limit the ambarassment of their tax hike on travel. When you get fare quotes that come out like £98 Incl. £48 tax, etc it doesn't take a professor to realise that the fare is very cheap and the government is getting free money for doing nothing. The tax component should be a small 'extra' not a massive chunk of your hard earned cash. Transparent pricing should reflect what the company gets and what the wretched governments are stealing.

Of course the locos are also trying to sell you all manner of things but so do most companies i.e. mobile phone companies, gym membership that runs for minimum 12 month, etc.... Aviation is merely a fashionable target yet government whose own ideas have edged them towards bankruptcy are siphoning from the succesful i.e. the airline business.

Nothing to do with pricing if it were they deserve to have a grace period to put things in order and now be lectured to do like some idle school boy caught by the headmaster.