New air passenger rights
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: edinburgh
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New air passenger rights
At last, and about time too!
I'm sure they'll still do their upmost to avoid it though, robdogs that they are...
bug
I'm sure they'll still do their upmost to avoid it though, robdogs that they are...
bug
Listening to the reports on Euronews last night, and then BBC this morning, the penalties seemed at first to be fairly draconian, especially on the LCCs.
However, what I think has really driven this is the overbooking policies of the conventional carriers. Ryanair, Easyjet and the like are never going to be caught out this way, since, I believe they don't have a policy of overbooking. They just don't offer refunds to no-shows, and sell the same seat twice!
As for the delay / cancellation rules, they seem to be riddled with holes. If the delay / cancellation can be construed to be a third party strike, ATC failure, or weather then the carrier can avoid the payments. I imagine therefore that if the aircraft was tech, and a part awaited, the carrier could claim the third party (part supplier or delivery company) was at fault and avoid paying out that way too.
I think in the cold light of day it's only really the majors who are going to get hit with this new legislation, and they could protect themselves by preventing multiple bookings on the same day, on the same route, in the name of the same PAX. It must surely be possible in this technological age.
However, what I think has really driven this is the overbooking policies of the conventional carriers. Ryanair, Easyjet and the like are never going to be caught out this way, since, I believe they don't have a policy of overbooking. They just don't offer refunds to no-shows, and sell the same seat twice!
As for the delay / cancellation rules, they seem to be riddled with holes. If the delay / cancellation can be construed to be a third party strike, ATC failure, or weather then the carrier can avoid the payments. I imagine therefore that if the aircraft was tech, and a part awaited, the carrier could claim the third party (part supplier or delivery company) was at fault and avoid paying out that way too.
I think in the cold light of day it's only really the majors who are going to get hit with this new legislation, and they could protect themselves by preventing multiple bookings on the same day, on the same route, in the name of the same PAX. It must surely be possible in this technological age.
Paxing All Over The World
I am not enthusiastic about this. Because the whole thing is washed over with confusion and counter claim, it will allow the airlines to increase prices under the cover of this legislation. They will increase prices more than they think they will need.
One of their biggest costs is going to be, not the claims, but the staff to check the claims and prove that they were not at fault. Many infrequent travellers will think that they can claim this as if it was insurance and that will load the carriers with more admin work.
Whilst I am normally 100% on the side of us pax, I think that this is not the best solution.
One of their biggest costs is going to be, not the claims, but the staff to check the claims and prove that they were not at fault. Many infrequent travellers will think that they can claim this as if it was insurance and that will load the carriers with more admin work.
Whilst I am normally 100% on the side of us pax, I think that this is not the best solution.
A Runyonesque Character
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The BBC report contains some basic errors.
First, there is no compensation for passengers on delayed flights. There is a statutory requirement to provide meals and refreshments, and hotel accomodation if necessary. In the case that the delay means that the journey serves no purpose and the passenger wants to abandon his trip, he has to be refunded the whole journey cost.
This is what the regionals are upset about. If a passenger flies in from Sydney to Amsterdam with a connection to, say, East Midlands and this flight is delayed, the operating airline has to refund the entire ticket.
The other inaccuracy is that the delay provisions apply to ALL delays, not just those which are in the airline's control. So if the Heathrow firemen go on strike, or Munich is completely snowed-in (as it was yesterday) every affected passenger has to be fed, watered and eventually given a bed for the night
First, there is no compensation for passengers on delayed flights. There is a statutory requirement to provide meals and refreshments, and hotel accomodation if necessary. In the case that the delay means that the journey serves no purpose and the passenger wants to abandon his trip, he has to be refunded the whole journey cost.
This is what the regionals are upset about. If a passenger flies in from Sydney to Amsterdam with a connection to, say, East Midlands and this flight is delayed, the operating airline has to refund the entire ticket.
The other inaccuracy is that the delay provisions apply to ALL delays, not just those which are in the airline's control. So if the Heathrow firemen go on strike, or Munich is completely snowed-in (as it was yesterday) every affected passenger has to be fed, watered and eventually given a bed for the night
If the passenger is travelling on seperate tickets, not a multi trip itinary, it used to be the case that there was nil respnsibility for previous or onward sectors as applicable as they were not part of the same booking. As the locos do not have interlining tickets does this still hold true?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If any of you belong to any airlines' frequent flyer schemes, I would suggest you start thinking about using your mileage this year.
My prediction is that the "mileage award ticket" will be one of the first casualties of this "compensation culture" (except journeys outside the EU where compensation rights are exempt).
I really cannot see airlines accepting rulings that a free ticket-holder receives compensation when they haven't actually paid anything - that's plainly not fair and the airlines are not making sufficient profits to cover such claims! (Indeed, the big 5 US carriers are all losing money hand over fist every day and this piece of legislation may well hasten the demise of one or two!
My prediction is that the "mileage award ticket" will be one of the first casualties of this "compensation culture" (except journeys outside the EU where compensation rights are exempt).
I really cannot see airlines accepting rulings that a free ticket-holder receives compensation when they haven't actually paid anything - that's plainly not fair and the airlines are not making sufficient profits to cover such claims! (Indeed, the big 5 US carriers are all losing money hand over fist every day and this piece of legislation may well hasten the demise of one or two!
Paxing All Over The World
The 'vox pops' at LHR reported on Radio 4 'PM' were predictable. "Oh yes, I think that's fair." "It's about time" and so forth.
The EZY rep speaking from LTN said, "Last year we carried 1 million passengers who paid less than £10 for their ticket. Now we have to pay compensation that is ten times that amount."
Having the compensation as a fixed amount, rather than a percentage of the fare paid, must be the first mistake. This is really not clever. From when it was first proposed, it had the smell of old European carriers about it. Either that, or someone with one heck of a grudge!
The EZY rep speaking from LTN said, "Last year we carried 1 million passengers who paid less than £10 for their ticket. Now we have to pay compensation that is ten times that amount."
Having the compensation as a fixed amount, rather than a percentage of the fare paid, must be the first mistake. This is really not clever. From when it was first proposed, it had the smell of old European carriers about it. Either that, or someone with one heck of a grudge!
This will primarily affect those airlines which either:
1. Overbook and assume no-shows.
2. Operate absurdly optimistic schedules.
3. Fly to/from inadequate secondary airports with minimal navigation aids.
So, properly managed airlines have little to be concerned about. But second rate airlines flying to/from airports in the back end of nowhere which are weathered out when proper airports are still open will perhaps feel the pinch.
Perhaps the cheap and nasty end of the market will now be exposed for what it is. Cheap and undeniably nasty.....
1. Overbook and assume no-shows.
2. Operate absurdly optimistic schedules.
3. Fly to/from inadequate secondary airports with minimal navigation aids.
So, properly managed airlines have little to be concerned about. But second rate airlines flying to/from airports in the back end of nowhere which are weathered out when proper airports are still open will perhaps feel the pinch.
Perhaps the cheap and nasty end of the market will now be exposed for what it is. Cheap and undeniably nasty.....
Oh well BA may be one of the first to put it to the test regarding the delay compensation. BA016 overnighted in SYD yesterday (17Feb). It had a flap actuator problem so not sure if they can blame someone else for it.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA016 overnighted in SYD yesterday (17Feb).
Having said that, BA has always operated a compensation scheme voluntarily so these new regulations won' t affect us much - only feeling it's a bit of a cheek demanding this sort of cash value on free or greatly reduced fares!
bealine I believe you will find that it does apply to BA on flights ex SYD. My understanding is that it applies as long as the airline is EU based according to the link to the BBC article provided in one of the earlier posts above.
BEagle you are not totally accurate in thinking that well run airlines will not be affected. They are going to be hit hard by the act removing their right not to accept responsibility for weather delays, ATC delays, Industrial Action, Apt Closures for any reasons such as a/c stuck on runway etc. Up until now these have been considered 'outwith the airlines own control' or 'an act of god' in the case of fog or other extreme wx conditions, and the airline hasn't been liable for any Hotac, meals etc; and rightly so in my view. Now they will be responsible for the actions of others over whom they have no influence at all.
PLUS............ they will have responsibility on these occassions for passengers who have connected onto a delayed flight having arrived into an EU airport on an aircraft operated by an EU Carrier. It appears to me that if the passenger arrives in on South African Airways then they are a non EU carrier and responsibility isn't accepted........but that is on first reading only!!
In all the delays mentioned above, a well run airline will be hit just as badly as a not so well run airline.
Edited to add..........
Bealine I think the return to the UK is definitely covered as it is an EU carrier returning to an EU airport. The flight into SYD would only be covered if it had departed the UK late?
Well that's my reading of it
PLUS............ they will have responsibility on these occassions for passengers who have connected onto a delayed flight having arrived into an EU airport on an aircraft operated by an EU Carrier. It appears to me that if the passenger arrives in on South African Airways then they are a non EU carrier and responsibility isn't accepted........but that is on first reading only!!
In all the delays mentioned above, a well run airline will be hit just as badly as a not so well run airline.
Edited to add..........
Bealine I think the return to the UK is definitely covered as it is an EU carrier returning to an EU airport. The flight into SYD would only be covered if it had departed the UK late?
Well that's my reading of it
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
quote
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I really cannot see airlines accepting rulings that a free ticket-holder receives compensation when they haven't actually paid anything - that's plainly not fair and the airlines are not making sufficient profits to cover such claims! (Indeed, the big 5 US carriers are all losing money hand over fist every day and this piece of legislation may well hasten the demise of one or two!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is it not fair? Mileage tickets have been paid for, they are not free. They have been paid for by the traveller paying for many a non discounted flight to get the miles as part of the contract when they paid for the tickets. The issuer has used this 'carrot' to get the pax to fly with them on a regular basis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I really cannot see airlines accepting rulings that a free ticket-holder receives compensation when they haven't actually paid anything - that's plainly not fair and the airlines are not making sufficient profits to cover such claims! (Indeed, the big 5 US carriers are all losing money hand over fist every day and this piece of legislation may well hasten the demise of one or two!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is it not fair? Mileage tickets have been paid for, they are not free. They have been paid for by the traveller paying for many a non discounted flight to get the miles as part of the contract when they paid for the tickets. The issuer has used this 'carrot' to get the pax to fly with them on a regular basis.
Another thought.......
In many instances it won't be the passenger who has endured any supposed trauma that benefits from any refunds; it will be their company that has paid for their ticket
In many instances it won't be the passenger who has endured any supposed trauma that benefits from any refunds; it will be their company that has paid for their ticket
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They have been paid for by the traveller paying for many a non discounted flight to get the miles as part of the contract when they paid for the tickets.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is a populist myth - but totally false! In the past year, we've had "Travel to Newcastle and we'll give you Nice etc" (Just tell me how a £125 return fare to NCL covers a return fare to NCE as well!!!) If I go to Kings Cross and buy a fully flexible return to Newcastle on the train it will cost me that - and flying in this day and age is (a) faster and (b) more reliable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have no idea about Newcastle and Nice and its completely irrelevant to the mileage argument.
If you buy a return to Newcastle on a train so what?. They didnt have a contract with you to give you 'rail miles' so to speak so you werent entitled to anything. This is irrelevant too.
Mileage awards are to entice frequent fliers onto one airline (or group)who have to fly in the premium cabins at premium prices in order to get any chance of making enough miles for a decent flight. Not only that but on some airlines awards schemes including BA you can purchase miles for cash!. All paid for as part of the 'contract'.
If at a later date there is no ability to provide the service already earned - then its only right and proper compensation be paid in the appropriate circumstances. If the airlines didnt believe they profited from such an arrangement they wouldnt offer it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is a populist myth - but totally false! In the past year, we've had "Travel to Newcastle and we'll give you Nice etc" (Just tell me how a £125 return fare to NCL covers a return fare to NCE as well!!!) If I go to Kings Cross and buy a fully flexible return to Newcastle on the train it will cost me that - and flying in this day and age is (a) faster and (b) more reliable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have no idea about Newcastle and Nice and its completely irrelevant to the mileage argument.
If you buy a return to Newcastle on a train so what?. They didnt have a contract with you to give you 'rail miles' so to speak so you werent entitled to anything. This is irrelevant too.
Mileage awards are to entice frequent fliers onto one airline (or group)who have to fly in the premium cabins at premium prices in order to get any chance of making enough miles for a decent flight. Not only that but on some airlines awards schemes including BA you can purchase miles for cash!. All paid for as part of the 'contract'.
If at a later date there is no ability to provide the service already earned - then its only right and proper compensation be paid in the appropriate circumstances. If the airlines didnt believe they profited from such an arrangement they wouldnt offer it.
Last edited by manintheback; 18th Feb 2005 at 17:13.
When there was major UK ATC breakdown the other year, BA in Sweden provided transport to/from the hotel they arranged, meals and phone calls. They were a bit light on information, but the rest of it they did OK, although they could have been slightly better organised at the airport in the first place. Mrs Radeng had a BA flight from SFO go tech: BA sorted out the hotel there too, although it took some time.
So it seems to have been SOP for BA to look after their customers....personally, I just see this shoving up the price of air travel (although I firmly believe it's now too cheap). Another load of trouble from the useless bureaucrats of Brussels!
So it seems to have been SOP for BA to look after their customers....personally, I just see this shoving up the price of air travel (although I firmly believe it's now too cheap). Another load of trouble from the useless bureaucrats of Brussels!
