Ryanair - Found Guilty of misleading customers
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanair - Found Guilty of misleading customers
Just announced that Ryanair has been found guilty of misleading customers with pricing on their website. Sentencing postponed to a leter date.
Is any body surprised?
Is any body surprised?
Wow,.......... that's really interesting. If you can fly from one country to another, courtesy of Ryanair, for one penny, then I reckon you can tolerate a fair amount of error in the pricing.
You'll still get people complaining despite the fact that their flight cost less than their in-flight cup of coffee. Each to their own I suppose.
You'll still get people complaining despite the fact that their flight cost less than their in-flight cup of coffee. Each to their own I suppose.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: london
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Langball - (Not so much a full toss but a googly.)
Yeah, but its not the fact that FR provides stunningly cheap seats and fiecely uses this in their adverts, but that they can't leave off manipulating people to screw more our of them. That's bollox and ought to be prosecuted.
Yeah, but its not the fact that FR provides stunningly cheap seats and fiecely uses this in their adverts, but that they can't leave off manipulating people to screw more our of them. That's bollox and ought to be prosecuted.
Last edited by teapea; 2nd Mar 2005 at 16:03.
Maybe Someday Sometime FR will be found to be Corteous,fair have Customer Service, have accurate Advertising on Fares etc or then again maybe I'm hallucinating
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Langball, I can just imagine you at checkin when the bod behind the counter says to you "oh by the way there was an error in the pricing, you have to pay another £30 or whatever" and you say...........yep thats right, you can get XXXXX.
Call me old fasioned but if I say it is x and it ends up being Y, I dont care who they are, they are trying to rip me, you and everybody else off.
Ta
Call me old fasioned but if I say it is x and it ends up being Y, I dont care who they are, they are trying to rip me, you and everybody else off.
Ta
d192049d, from what I have seen on the BBC site it appears the problem is that when they said it would cost x plus tax and insurance, the price did not include tax and insurance - not sure where the problem is there.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having booked flights on other airlines I have not noted anyone giving the price inclusive of tax and charges any earlier than Ryanair does. Does any airline give the full all inclusive costs as the first price given?.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 2nm EGLC
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA do. Go to www.ba.com click on Special offers. 'Prices are return incl. tax'. France from £69 etc.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: North of the border
Age: 71
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From today's Guardian
Ryanair won a "victory for small print" yesterday in a test case for internet advertising when a court decided that it was legal to advertise flight costs without taxes as long as that was made clear.
But the budget airline was fined £24,000 after the jurors at Chelmsford crown court concluded that a page of its website, which did not immediately explain that tax would be added, breached consumer protection legislation.
Ryanair had been prosecuted by Essex county council's trading standards department. The council's lawyers argued that the legal position in relation to internet advertisements should be "the price you see is the price you pay", as it is for newspaper, billboard and television adverts.
Ryanair was accused of breaking the Consumer Protection Act by advertising a flight as "London-Stansted - Pisa £4.99 one way, excluding tax", because the offer did not immediately and clearly spell out the full cost, which would have been £11.87 when £1.88 for insurance and £5 for UK air duty was added.
But the jury disagreed. They found the Dublin-based company guilty regarding six other website adverts which did not feature the words "excluding tax".
Judge Charles Gratwicke fined the firm £4,000 for each charge. But he did not order Ryanair to pay any costs, so the £32,000 cost of bringing the prosecution will have to be met by the council.
Ryanair denied the offences. It said its policy was to always add the phrase "excluding tax". The words had been missed off the six flight advertisements in error, it claimed.
Mike Hill, head of Essex county council's trading standards department, said the council would lobby the government for a change in consumer legislation.
"We have tested the law and it has been found wanting," he said. "In newspapers, television and on billboards, companies have to advertise the true cost of goods. If a petrol company advertised a litre of petrol at 25p - excluding tax, it would be illegal. It should be the same with internet advertising for flights.
"We thought that by bringing this prosecution we would be able to show that the Consumer Protection Act also applies to internet advertising. But the jury's verdict shows that it doesn't, and we will now lobby [the] government for change. Ryanair advertises in this way because it makes their flights look cheaper."
He called the decision a "victory for small print".
Caroline Green, head of consumer services at the airline said: "Ryanair's internet banner headline advertising - eg £4.99 exclusive of tax - was not misleading to customers. Ninety-eight percent of our customers book via the internet. We have 30 million customers a year and we have not had a single complaint about our advertising."
Mr Hill said trading standards authorities around the country had received complaints about the way in which airlines advertised internet prices.
While BA may in the example give give the full costs, go online and make a booking for a journey and see when the full all inclusive costs come up. I think that you will find that it is at the same stage in the processas Ryanair. It is the some for all the airlines that I have flown with.
While BA may have given the full costs in the example given this is not the norm in the booking process. Try booking online and you will find that it is at the same stage in the process that the full cost incusive of all taxes and charges are detailed. It is also the same with all the airlines that I have booked with.
Ryanair won a "victory for small print" yesterday in a test case for internet advertising when a court decided that it was legal to advertise flight costs without taxes as long as that was made clear.
But the budget airline was fined £24,000 after the jurors at Chelmsford crown court concluded that a page of its website, which did not immediately explain that tax would be added, breached consumer protection legislation.
Ryanair had been prosecuted by Essex county council's trading standards department. The council's lawyers argued that the legal position in relation to internet advertisements should be "the price you see is the price you pay", as it is for newspaper, billboard and television adverts.
Ryanair was accused of breaking the Consumer Protection Act by advertising a flight as "London-Stansted - Pisa £4.99 one way, excluding tax", because the offer did not immediately and clearly spell out the full cost, which would have been £11.87 when £1.88 for insurance and £5 for UK air duty was added.
But the jury disagreed. They found the Dublin-based company guilty regarding six other website adverts which did not feature the words "excluding tax".
Judge Charles Gratwicke fined the firm £4,000 for each charge. But he did not order Ryanair to pay any costs, so the £32,000 cost of bringing the prosecution will have to be met by the council.
Ryanair denied the offences. It said its policy was to always add the phrase "excluding tax". The words had been missed off the six flight advertisements in error, it claimed.
Mike Hill, head of Essex county council's trading standards department, said the council would lobby the government for a change in consumer legislation.
"We have tested the law and it has been found wanting," he said. "In newspapers, television and on billboards, companies have to advertise the true cost of goods. If a petrol company advertised a litre of petrol at 25p - excluding tax, it would be illegal. It should be the same with internet advertising for flights.
"We thought that by bringing this prosecution we would be able to show that the Consumer Protection Act also applies to internet advertising. But the jury's verdict shows that it doesn't, and we will now lobby [the] government for change. Ryanair advertises in this way because it makes their flights look cheaper."
He called the decision a "victory for small print".
Caroline Green, head of consumer services at the airline said: "Ryanair's internet banner headline advertising - eg £4.99 exclusive of tax - was not misleading to customers. Ninety-eight percent of our customers book via the internet. We have 30 million customers a year and we have not had a single complaint about our advertising."
Mr Hill said trading standards authorities around the country had received complaints about the way in which airlines advertised internet prices.
While BA may in the example give give the full costs, go online and make a booking for a journey and see when the full all inclusive costs come up. I think that you will find that it is at the same stage in the processas Ryanair. It is the some for all the airlines that I have flown with.
While BA may have given the full costs in the example given this is not the norm in the booking process. Try booking online and you will find that it is at the same stage in the process that the full cost incusive of all taxes and charges are detailed. It is also the same with all the airlines that I have booked with.
Call me old fasioned but if I say it is x and it ends up being Y, I dont care who they are, they are trying to rip me, you and everybody else off.
Most people have enough savvy to enquire about the bottom line, i.e. the total of all charges. And you won't beat Ryanair.
Ryanair aren't the only organisation who try to make their prices look slightly more competitive that they actually are, how many times have you heard 'Terms & Conditions' apply on a radio advert.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanair in the dock again!!
Yes the bad boys have been naughty again! MOL and his gang were fined £24,000 for deceiving their passengers. The court ruled that they had misled the public over ticket prices. The action was brought about by the Trading Standards Commision and the Airline was found guilty of Six breaches of the Consumer Protection Act.
When will this bunch of idiots learn?
When will this bunch of idiots learn?
Guest
Posts: n/a
What do they need to learn....£24,000 is the pocket money which was earmarked to pay the drinks for dinner, unfortunately, now it will be only a pint of Guiness....
You cannot get MOLs attention with £24,000, cattle dealers know there is always a little investment necessary. And I guess he is smiling like no one else, at least this was European-wide advertisement for free...everyone talks about FR and you see it here again, it works!
You cannot get MOLs attention with £24,000, cattle dealers know there is always a little investment necessary. And I guess he is smiling like no one else, at least this was European-wide advertisement for free...everyone talks about FR and you see it here again, it works!
Oh Shazbat!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Leeds, UK
Age: 64
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmm....of course no-one would ever plan from the outset to say:
1) Cost of promoting tickets = x
2) Increased revenue from people hitting the web site and booking = y
3) Cost of reimbursement to disgruntled passengers = z
4) Contingency for possible legal costs = a
If y > (x+z+a) then "go ahead"
1) Cost of promoting tickets = x
2) Increased revenue from people hitting the web site and booking = y
3) Cost of reimbursement to disgruntled passengers = z
4) Contingency for possible legal costs = a
If y > (x+z+a) then "go ahead"
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Both sides of 40W
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it looks like they won again!!!!
Maybe the 24,000 pounds will go to drinks and dinner?
RYANAIR WELCOMES COURT DECISION ON WEBSITE ADVERTISING
Ryanair this afternoon welcomed the Chelmsford Crown Court decision in a case brought by the Essex Trading Standards Authority regarding internet flight pricing. The decision confirmed that the headline banners on www.ryanair.com <http://www.ryanair.com/> are not misleading to the
consumer and therefore there will be no changes to the current website.
The decision ensures that Ryanair can continue to promote the cost of its low fare flights and special offers excluding taxes and charges on its home page.
Commenting on today's decision, Ryanair's Head of Customer Care,
Caroline Green said,
"This was an unnecessary action against Ryanair. This case was brought on the bases of no complaint by a member of the public.
Our website home page clearly shows consumers that prices quoted are exclusive of taxes and charges. The website also includes details of the taxes and charges to be paid by the consumer. Over 30 million passengers travel with Ryanair each year and over 98% of these passengers book via www.ryanair.com <http://www.ryanair.com/> .".
Maybe the 24,000 pounds will go to drinks and dinner?
RYANAIR WELCOMES COURT DECISION ON WEBSITE ADVERTISING
Ryanair this afternoon welcomed the Chelmsford Crown Court decision in a case brought by the Essex Trading Standards Authority regarding internet flight pricing. The decision confirmed that the headline banners on www.ryanair.com <http://www.ryanair.com/> are not misleading to the
consumer and therefore there will be no changes to the current website.
The decision ensures that Ryanair can continue to promote the cost of its low fare flights and special offers excluding taxes and charges on its home page.
Commenting on today's decision, Ryanair's Head of Customer Care,
Caroline Green said,
"This was an unnecessary action against Ryanair. This case was brought on the bases of no complaint by a member of the public.
Our website home page clearly shows consumers that prices quoted are exclusive of taxes and charges. The website also includes details of the taxes and charges to be paid by the consumer. Over 30 million passengers travel with Ryanair each year and over 98% of these passengers book via www.ryanair.com <http://www.ryanair.com/> .".
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
Langball.... You said 'But if X is 1p and even if Y turns out to be £12, then you get to fly across Europe for the price of a meal in McDonalds.'
Agreed, no-one disputes the fact that the prices are still low, even with tax. BUT and a BIG BUT, they should say that the price is higher. To not mention extra cost, even still a good deal extra cost, is fraudulent.
Agreed, no-one disputes the fact that the prices are still low, even with tax. BUT and a BIG BUT, they should say that the price is higher. To not mention extra cost, even still a good deal extra cost, is fraudulent.
Paxing All Over The World
Most people have enough savvy to enquire about the bottom line, i.e. the total of all charges. And you won't beat Ryanair.
Nightrider: I agree 100%. MoL has just had the courts prove that his flights are the cheapest! Fantastic publicity and a real snip at the price, even allowing for the cost of the lawyers. You see, MoL even gets his publicity on the cheap.
--------------------
"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different." Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.