Complaints and enquiries - Air Transport Users Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

12 Representing passengers Consumer protection issues This section looks at issues where the AUC has carried out proactive advocacy work on behalf of consumers. Much of our work on consumer protection issues is generated from complaints. Schedule changes Last autumn we carried out an online sweep of the conditions of carriage of a sample of airlines to find out if their condition on schedule changes complied with the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (UTCCRs) (see box). The results of our sweep shows that policies on schedule changes vary between different carriers (see table on page 13). Most carriers that belong to the International Air Transport Association (IATA) offer passengers a refund for a significant change. Following a 1999 complaint from the AUC to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) about airlines’ conditions of carriage, the OFT forced IATA to amend its Recommended Practice 1724 (RP1724) on airlines’ Conditions of Carriage to bring it into line with the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. One of the amendments was to give passengers the option of choosing a refund if the schedule change was “significant”. This amendment has helped many passengers get a refund following a schedule change. One airline even offers refunds following all schedule changes. However, a number of airlines do not offer passengers the option of a refund of their tickets, or only do so under strict criteria. The clauses on schedule changes in these airlines’ conditions could therefore be considered unfair under the UTCCRs. We are pleased to say that as a result of our discussions with two airlines following our sweep, one airline has changed its condition on schedule changes so that passengers can now get a refund following a “significant” schedule change. The other carrier has made a commitment to do so. But other airlines continue to not offer refunds. We therefore plan more work on this issue this year.
13 Clauses on schedule changes in the conditions of carriage of selected airlines EasyJet Ryanair British Airways BMI Flybe Jet2 Airline Policy (as of August 2008) Fly Globespan Aer Lingus Thomsonfly Monarch Bmibaby Virgin Continental Airlines KLM Emirates Air Southwest Eastern Airways Air France Online booking errors No refund Refund if change is more than three hours Refund if change is significant (RP1724) Refund if fail to operate “reasonably according to schedule” Refund if change is significant (RP1724) RP1724 but only refund return fare if return is within 48 hours of outbound No refund (except for general refund policies) Refund if change is more than two hours Refund if change is significant (RP1724) No refund Refund if change is significant (RP1724) Refund if change is significant (RP1724) Refund but not at passenger option No refund Refund for all schedule changes Refund if change is significant (RP1724) Refund if change is significant (RP1724) “If change is not convenient for passenger and is not in a position to offer a more suitable reservation, the passenger may benefit from a refund” Taken from AUC research, October 2008 In June, we published a report on the potential pitfalls to passengers when booking tickets online. We published the report because we were becoming increasingly disappointed by the way that some airlines handled complaints where passengers had encountered problems booking tickets on the internet. We felt that the risk of something going wrong was being loaded too much onto passengers. Too many times they were left out of pocket following problems with bookings. We accepted that an error would sometimes be the fault of the person making the booking and the airline, under its ticket conditions, could then insist that they buy a new ticket. But we wanted airlines not to penalise passengers unduly for innocent mistakes (or seek to profit from the errors). In a number of the complaints we received, the airline had not lost out financially and the passenger had not gained any advantage (for example, if an error had caused a passenger to have more than one booking for a flight, the person could not use this ticket twice).
Page 1: AIR TRANSPORT USERS COUNCIL ANNUAL
Page 4 and 5: 2 CHAIRMAN’S INTRODUCTION There h
Page 6 and 7: 4 REVIEW OF THE YEAR Complaints and
Page 8 and 9: 6 Telephone enquiries in 2008/09 Ty
Page 10 and 11: 8 compensate a number of passengers
Page 12 and 13: 10 Schedule changes Last year we re
Page 16 and 17: 14 Besides, we suggested that it wa
Page 18 and 19: 16 Financial protection Last year t
Page 20 and 21: 18 to change the date or the name o
Page 22 and 23: 20 two-thirds of the standards and
Page 24 and 25: 22 Consultations and Inquiries Civi
Page 26 and 27: 24 Guest speakers at AUC Council me
Page 28 and 29: 26 She has written several text boo
Page 30 and 31: 28 Secretariat (as of March 31 st 2
Page 32 and 33: 30 • The AUC shall consist of a C
Page 34: 32 GLOSSARY APD Air Passenger Duty

Complaints and enquiries - Air Transport Users Council

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?