I think inevitably there will always be a percentage of total customers carried by a airline, in this case, Ryanair, who will always be unsatisfied. Everything in some perspective, despite the annoyance and frustration passengers continue to use Ryanair in very considerable volumes. Certainly much much higher volumes than other low cost airlines. At the end of the day, price is the lowest common denomination with the low cost airline business model. The fact Ryanair passenger seat allocation at the checkin desk is a source of frustration for some people is irrelevant to be honest. Ultimately many consumers seem willing to generally accept some if the naff policies. Not saying I agree with the Ryanair position but they are not Europe's No. 1 airline for no reason. Like them or hate them, they are one tightly run business, which many competitors stuggle to competitively attack.

Ryanair seem to be on very dodgy legal ground here, particularly because they are redefining the nature of a contract.

When you make a contract it is assumed that the other party to that contract will act in good faith and not deliberately do something which is to your disadvantage. When you hire a car you do not expect it to be without fuel despite the fact that this may not be mentioned in the documentation.

In this case Ryanair appear to be acting in bad faith and deliberately disadvantaging customers. I would expect some form of legal response fairly quickly.

One would hope so. Because there's a difference between saying you have to pay for something that you don't have and deliberately taking something away so that then something has to be paid for. Deliberately splitting up couples in order to derive more income does cross a line I think

Not sure of that. Contractually I don't believe they've done or are doing anything in breach of contract. They agree to provide 'a seat' on their flight in return for your paid airfare. If you further contract to purchase a specific seat allocation, they provide it (subject to operational safety requirements). I don't believe the legal contract argument carries weight at all, though interesting viewpoint nonetheless.

General Conditions of Carriage

and 6.2 mentions the following:


Also, as detailed under the Ryanair regulations on specific subjects under their General T&Cs the following is clearly stated:

A quick look at Wikipedia produces

"Terms can be implied into contracts according to the custom of the market in which the contracting parties are operating."

I would suggest that seating parties together is a longstanding custom in the aviation market and that it is therefore an implied term of the contract.

Unless expressly stated otherwise which they expressly do state on the T&Cs that random selection applies in certain specific circumstances. Implied meaning is redundant in that case.

The question arises, are the T&Cs any more onerous than the majority of other airlines? [that's a rhetorical question btw].
This is the legal benchmark of proof and in my personal opinion, contractually they are fair and balanced through providing a passenger with choice and alternative which is what is important.

I certainly don't see anything legally questionable about their above quoted T&Cs. It's clear and it's fair. Furthermore, as already stated, for only €2 a seat (standard seats) That's an additional €16 round trip for a family of four (less if the kids are under age 12). I really cannot grasp what the problem is here.

AerRyan reckons he/she paid €6 per seat. The nearest I can see to that figure is the Priority seating although it is quoted in their T&Cs as €7 per seat. That is an extra service. Again, I don't find that particularly expensive. Finally, at €11 per seat for Priority and extra legroom I consider that a very fair price. My airline of choice charges €20 per seat for that (not that I use that option mind).

I suggest your post illustrates the problem.
To discover what will happen the passenger has to read through reams of terms and conditions and even then the terms are only clear to those who already know what they mean. This, per se, is undesirable as it wastes a massive amount of time for the whole community.
To my mind it is time that the authorities (in the UK the OFT) came down hard on these attempts to erode the fundamental basis of contracts for they waste hours of many peoples time.

No, it's from €2/£2 a seat.

You will find relatively few, if any, selectable seats left at that price when you check in online.

As it happens, I've just paid £6 per seat in each direction for a trip with the wife in a couple of weeks time. That's a bog-standard seat (Row 14), no additional legroom or other priority.

Nanny state is what you are suggesting. Citizens are not dumb. Every online airfare booking requires the purchaser to affirm they've read and accept the T&Cs. Most people can't be bothered to read any T&Cs so that's not an airlines problem. That's the laziness on the part of the consumer. The Ryanair approach to clear T&Cs is comparable to all other airlines. In other words it's consumer clear and provides several options and choices to the consumer. However, becoming a Nanny state under a Brexit cluster flup national fallout will be an own goal.

I'm with occasional on the T&C question. The relationship between a person and a company on a retail transaction should be straightforward enough to be understood by both sides in the vast majority of cases without reference to the legal documentation. The legals are substantially there in case of a dispute rather than customers reading them by default - and I imagine most people lack the legal knowledge to undetstand fully the finer points of the T&Cs. It is the responsibility of the company to communicate clearly in easily understood language and in a transparent and obvious manner what a consumer should expect on a retail transaction prior to purchase.

Ryanair will have a few lawyers who have substantial legal training and act once for all journeys sold for the year - making it worth their while. Expecting Joe Bloggs who didn't go to law school to refer T&Cs on a purchase worth £50 to a solicitor who charges £200 per hour might be legally permissible but is utterly unreasonable - it's why we have consumer protection laws in the first place

If I buy a train ticket from London to Edinburgh, I have a clear understanding of what to expect without reading the legals. Same goes for flying with Easyjet or BA. I don't understand why Ryanair should be able to bury things in the legals and get away with it.

Simple solution. Do away with random seat allocation as much as possible. Select your seats at online check in. Earlier you check in online then better your chances to select and pay for seats you prefer. If you fail to online check in time then you go to a check in desk. Ask if your preference seat locations are available and pay by card if a charge is due. Alternatively you should be given a choice - pay the nominal cost for a preferenced seat or waive the charge and take what you're given.

I found a very valid comment on this issue which was:

the journal.ie

However, I do find it ridiculous that people who decide not to buy allocated seats then kick off cause they can't seat together. It's a stupid argument. Is austerity THAT bad that punters can scratch a few bob together to buy seats together. You can be damn certain some of these people are the ones flashing the cards for the exorbitant in flight snacks, beers, duty free products. Complete storm in a tea cup. There's zero legal or contractual implied or otherwise, it's open, fair, balanced. Nuts that people get knickers in a twist on an issue they had choice in purchasing allocated seats but go mental when they can't seat all together. Meanwhile majority of pax on board have actually taken a decision to buy allocated seats.

Nobody's "kicking off" or "getting their knickers in a twist". We're simply having a reasonable discussion about Ryan Air's pricing policies. It seems that those who regularly pay for seats are getting very resentful about the alleged freeloaders who don't.


I'm happy being allocated a random seat. If they want to force people to pay for a seat they should hike the advertised fare to include the cost of a reservation. Until that happens people need to accept the fact that other passengers are content to be seated randomly.


BTW it's never two euros to change seats in my experience. It's often more like 12 euros per seat.

... in all likelihood penned by a Ryanair sockpuppet :O

What a shame that thejournal.ie, like many of the publications reporting on the issue, didn't have the nous or cojones to challenge Ryanair's disingenuous lie that "this policy has been in place since 2014".

Even Ryanair's own crews are now complaining about the grief they have started getting from passengers as a result of the new policy.

Any link to that comment?

Isn't the point actually that if you don't pay for allocated seating then you can't expect a [I]guarantee[I]of seats together. BUT, if there are seats together still, surely the algorithm should seat you together if you're travelling together. I don't pay for a reserved seat on a train so I don't insist that my seats are together. But more often than not they are.

Seventh comment down on the link in my (and your) post.

"I was told that this was a new policy by a crew member on a flight last week. She said it was making things extremely difficult for them as passengers are being deliberately split up"

Cost of total ticket, cost of total trip..................

If you are going to purchase seats why would you not purchase them at time of booking rather than wait until you check in online when the choice may be less? It's a long time since I paid more than £2 for a seat and always done at booking time.

People keep on saying that the T and Cs are clear, but as far as I am aware the same T&Cs applied to both the present policy and the previous policy.
Quite obviously that makes them unclear or irrelevant.