excess baggage - class action lawsuit?

[Happy Dude]

Some interesting discussion here. Like Will, I didn't want it to head down the morality path or get tied down in the done-to-death T&C's/legal contract debate, but was attempting to establish similarities, if any, between the Maurice Blackburn class action and excess baggage "fees". And I believe there are similarities.

Firstly, I defy anyone to accept that they're not being penalised when "purchasing" (as others have put it) excess baggage at check-in. It's a fee imposed for having too much check-in weight. I don't see how this is different than a late fee for not paying a bill by a certain date. In both cases, there's a cut-off and if you're on the wrong side of it, you pay.

Also, I'm forced to pay. Don't pay, don't fly. Although I can choose not to fly, realistically, it's spurious to suggest I have a choice in the matter. Same as a bank fee. I can choose not to pay it or even take my business elsewhere, but I'll be legally pursued until the debt is paid. The airlines will hold your fare as ransom while the banks will do the same with your credit rating.

On the issue of load prediction, distribution, freight off-loading etc and there being a cost to the airline, I would simply suggest that had my luggage been 4kg lighter and I had been 4kg heavier, there is no additonal payment although there is no fundamental difference to the overall weight. [Please, for the love of god, don't see that as an opportunity to veer down the path of discussing a 50kg pax paying the same as 100kg pax etc].

Therefore, how could an airline justify the cost on that basis? What about someone else booking at the last minute? There's an extra 70+kgs they hadn't planned on. Even if there was a cost to the airline, I'd argue that the cost difference/discrepency ($10 for 20kg at booking v $10 for 1kg at check-in), has more than a whiff of "penalty" about it.

Anyway, I'm not a lawyer or concerned about getting my $40 back under my own steam, but I would certainly sign up to a class action law suit that would see an end to opportunistic (IMO) excess baggage "fees".

I gather a fair chunk of respondants here won't be signing up to the MB class action because a) they haven't incurred bank penalties, or b) believe banks, as a company, can charge what they like for doing business with them.

And for those who were interested in the less relevant details:

I booked the flight about 3 hours prior to departure and Jetstar was the only option [1st DJ flight available too late for me, and lets not go there about QF's diminishing routes]. I was on a short work trip and I carry field equipment and personal luggage. I'm a consultant and clients pay all expenses (actually, this was a government job - so that means you and me...eventually). I do know the rules vis-a-vie excess, Jetstar, cabin baggage etc., so there was no surprise, but I couldn't lighten the load, put in hand luggage (was carrying 2 laptops), etc. In my case, I simply had no choice but to pay the excess. In the QC I was reading the paper about the MB action and I had the thought......

 

[nlagalle]

Firstly, I defy anyone to accept that they're not being penalised when "purchasing" (as others have put it) excess baggage at check-in. It's a fee imposed for having too much check-in weight. I don't see how this is different than a late fee for not paying a bill by a certain date. In both cases, there's a cut-off and if you're on the wrong side of it, you pay.

Also, I'm forced to pay. Don't pay, don't fly. Although I can choose not to fly, realistically, it's spurious to suggest I have a choice in the matter. Same as a bank fee. I can choose not to pay it or even take my business elsewhere, but I'll be legally pursued until the debt is paid. The airlines will hold your fare as ransom while the banks will do the same with your credit rating.

On the issue of load prediction, distribution, freight off-loading etc and there being a cost to the airline, I would simply suggest that had my luggage been 4kg lighter and I had been 4kg heavier, there is no additonal payment although there is no fundamental difference to the overall weight. [Please, for the love of god, don't see that as an opportunity to veer down the path of discussing a 50kg pax paying the same as 100kg pax etc].

Therefore, how could an airline justify the cost on that basis? What about someone else booking at the last minute? There's an extra 70+kgs they hadn't planned on. Even if there was a cost to the airline, I'd argue that the cost difference/discrepency ($10 for 20kg at booking v $10 for 1kg at check-in), has more than a whiff of "penalty" about it.

Anyway, I'm not a lawyer or concerned about getting my $40 back under my own steam, but I would certainly sign up to a class action law suit that would see an end to opportunistic (IMO) excess baggage "fees".

I gather a fair chunk of respondants here won't be signing up to the MB class action because a) they haven't incurred bank penalties, or b) believe banks, as a company, can charge what they like for doing business with them.

See this is where you have it all mixed up.

Firstly, you aren't paying a "fee" like the banks charge you for an overdue payment. You are being charged as you are carrying more luggage than the allowed amount. you don't have to take that extra 4kg if you don't want to pay it - you can leave it behind. It costs the airline to transport that luggage

Secondly as pointed out cargo is also freighted (at a larger cost than you paid for your excess baggage) which would be removed to make way for yours. This costs the airline in lost revenue and has a knock on effect.

Thirdly there is a ratio of passenger to luggage. Can you imagine if the charged on your thinking $4 per kg? A very minor amount. So and extra 15kg is $40. Times that 15 by 200 pax who do the same thing. All of a sudden there is an extra 3 tonnes on the plane. That means the aircraft could very close to MTOW, or even over, which means either offloading pax/baggage or reduce fuel load.

I think the airlines have high pricing there to discourage excess baggage as it costs them, and has other knock on effects.

Personally, I won't sign up as I can't see the case getting off the ground. And I hope it doesn't as it could lead to more restrictive baggage, both checked in and carry on.

And really what they charged you I believe was very reasonable. I've been stung much more than that in the past.

 

[ethernet]

1) Its pure revenue - to claw back loss or break even fares.
You knew that when the fare was suspiciously cheap.

2) Price fixing - aka air cargo - would be hard to prove
2.5) Abuse of market power - again difficult - re SACL
3) The banks were in breach of their banking licenses - until someone called it - I hope everyone else signs up
4) I do wish 'sensible and reasonable' would come back.
5) Since 9/11 certain laws - like no ticket transferability in and baggage - was a scheme to save the airlines. The airlines also got lots of big handouts.
6) Time to roll back this protection racket.
7) Offer to take someone elses excess - get even.

I have no idea, why greyhound freight cant set up in the carpark.
Failing that, some big pre-paid post envelopes also work.

 

[ejb]

To put the charge in context.

Today I sent a package of documents from SYD-PER via AAE.

$135 for 5.1 kgs and that is overnight service not next flight, which would have cost around $400.

So the small amount you got charged for excess luggage is a bargain.

ejb

 

[nlagalle]

1) Its pure revenue - to claw back loss or break even fares.
You knew that when the fare was suspiciously cheap.

2) Price fixing - aka air cargo - would be hard to prove
2.5) Abuse of market power - again difficult - re SACL
3) The banks were in breach of their banking licenses - until someone called it - I hope everyone else signs up
4) I do wish 'sensible and reasonable' would come back.
5) Since 9/11 certain laws - like no ticket transferability in and baggage - was a scheme to save the airlines. The airlines also got lots of big handouts.
6) Time to roll back this protection racket.
7) Offer to take someone elses excess - get even.

I have no idea, why greyhound freight cant set up in the carpark.
Failing that, some big pre-paid post envelopes also work.

I have no idea what you are trying to point out here but:

1. if airlines were relying on excess baggage to save their bottom line, they'd be broke by now.
2. as I pointed out, you do not have to carry excess baggage - leave it behind and you don't need to pay. where is the price fixing? and how is it market abuse? you have other options to ship items back. Go to the post office and see how much it costs to send 10kg from overseas.
3. what licence are the airlines in breach of?
4. 20 odd kg of luggage is "fair and reasonable" where do you draw the line????
5&6. the relation of 9/11 to excess baggage and saving the airlines is???
7. And run the risk of possibly being picked up with drugs or something illegal?

Again, excess baggage fees should be at a high level to discourage people from bringing too much to the airport. Consider this scenario. You were allowed 20kg only, anything over had to be removed and left behind. No excess baggage charges. Is that a better option?

 

[ethernet]

I have no idea what you are trying to point out here but:

1. if airlines were relying on excess baggage to save their bottom line, they'd be broke by now.
Never said that. Virgins $10/12 luggage policy -no problems with that.
Note Tigers recent baggage hikes in Terms and Cons - another thread.
It is revenue enhancement, just like a name change costs $50?

2. as I pointed out, you do not have to carry excess baggage - leave it behind and you don't need to pay. where is the price fixing? and how is it market abuse?
The TPA defines abuse of market power. The definition of price fixing was watered down, but most people know what it means.

you have other options to ship items back. Go to the post office and see how much it costs to send 10kg from overseas.

See recent Air Cargo fines going around. Compare AirAsia's per Kg rate with others or TT. Funny how I can't recall a cheap cargo consolidator place at the airport.
Postage rates are a funny thing that can vary 400% by crossing the border.

3. what licence are the airlines in breach of?
I said Banks were in breach of license that specified fees could be charged which represented cost. Some fees were 500:1 - so I guess they had legal opinion that had what i call a 'strained interpretation'.
4. 20 odd kg of luggage is "fair and reasonable" where do you draw the line????
The original poster was complaining cost is not linear - nor is it a GP.
Another test is transparency: how is it calculated? Some people would argue it is the maximum airlines can get away with.

5&6. the relation of 9/11 to excess baggage and saving the airlines is???
No. The airlines said all these 'safety' rules would send them broke. So the regulators stopped the practice of selling tickets in the newspapers, and
some other rules to stop the airport operator going broke too. Now airlines
are complaining about these airport charges. Also the move to ban laptops: Airlines stopped that one, saying business passengers would not fly.

7. And run the risk of possibly being picked up with drugs or something illegal?
Most unlikely on Australian domestic flights, and anyway, the airport cameras should be rolling, and with the proviso the other party looks respectable. On international flights, no.

Again, excess baggage fees should be at a high level to discourage people from bringing too much to the airport. Consider this scenario. You were allowed 20kg only, anything over had to be removed and left behind. No excess baggage charges. Is that a better option?

Last one is easy. Girls went out shopping, and now 1 dress and 3 pairs of shoes over, and a coat because the weather got cold. You tell her to leave it behind! Or tell her in a shop she cant have it. Say it at the airport - not.

So, pencil in a simultaneous equation for best luggage strategy well ahead and carry a portable scale, and weigh before heading to the airport.

 

[nlagalle]

Last one is easy. Girls went out shopping, and now 1 dress and 3 pairs of shoes over, and a coat because the weather got cold. You tell her to leave it behind! Or tell her in a shop she cant have it. Say it at the airport - not.

So, pencil in a simultaneous equation for best luggage strategy well ahead and carry a portable scale, and weigh before heading to the airport.

OK as you embedded your comments into my post here they are:

Never said that. Virgins $10/12 luggage policy -no problems with that.
Note Tigers recent baggage hikes in Terms and Cons - another thread.
It is revenue enhancement, just like a name change costs $50?

You implied it is for clawing back loss. I suggest it it's a deterrent for people overloading at the airport.

The TPA defines abuse of market power. The definition of price fixing was watered down, but most people know what it means.

But how are they abusing power? Each airline charges different amounts as they see fit.

See recent Air Cargo fines going around. Compare AirAsia's per Kg rate with others or TT. Funny how I can't recall a cheap cargo consolidator place at the airport. Postage rates are a funny thing that can vary 400% by crossing the border.

and Post offices still pay a premium for air freighting stuff too. Actually Australian Air Express is at may airports, but maybe not in the terminal.

I said Banks were in breach of license that specified fees could be charged which represented cost. Some fees were 500:1 - so I guess they had legal opinion that had what i call a 'strained interpretation'.

But there is still no relation to airlines charging for freight. Do you know how much it actually costs per KG to freight?

Another test is transparency: how is it calculated? Some people would argue it is the maximum airlines can get away with.

No, it is the same as purchasing a ticket in advance. In general you'll pay less. notify the airline you are overweight and they will sometimes be able to accommodate you. Always remember, there is only a finite amount of weight an aircraft can carry.

No. The airlines said all these 'safety' rules would send them broke. So the regulators stopped the practice of selling tickets in the newspapers, and
some other rules to stop the airport operator going broke too. Now airlines
are complaining about these airport charges. Also the move to ban laptops: Airlines stopped that one, saying business passengers would not fly.

Some rules, yes, could send an airline broke. but still what does it relate to excess baggage charges?

Most unlikely on Australian domestic flights, and anyway, the airport cameras should be rolling, and with the proviso the other party looks respectable. On international flights, no.

But you are still running a risk. Certainly a practice I would not recommend.

Last one is easy. Girls went out shopping, and now 1 dress and 3 pairs of shoes over, and a coat because the weather got cold. You tell her to leave it behind! Or tell her in a shop she cant have it. Say it at the airport - not.

Simple. don't let her go shopping..

In all seriousness, you have more than the amount, you are going to get charged.

It's simple, it costs the airline to carry that excess baggage, has a knock on effect, and an aircraft can only carry so much in it's hold.

 

[medhead]

Some interesting discussion here. Like Will, I didn't want it to head down the morality path or get tied down in the done-to-death T&C's/legal contract debate, but was attempting to establish similarities, if any, between the Maurice Blackburn class action and excess baggage "fees". And I believe there are similarities.

Firstly, I defy anyone to accept that they're not being penalised when "purchasing" (as others have put it) excess baggage at check-in. It's a fee imposed for having too much check-in weight. I don't see how this is different than a late fee for not paying a bill by a certain date. In both cases, there's a cut-off and if you're on the wrong side of it, you pay.

Therefore, how could an airline justify the cost on that basis? What about someone else booking at the last minute? There's an extra 70+kgs they hadn't planned on. Even if there was a cost to the airline, I'd argue that the cost difference/discrepency ($10 for 20kg at booking v $10 for 1kg at check-in), has more than a whiff of "penalty" about it.

Anyway, I'm not a lawyer or concerned about getting my $40 back under my own steam, but I would certainly sign up to a class action law suit that would see an end to opportunistic (IMO) excess baggage "fees".

I gather a fair chunk of respondants here won't be signing up to the MB class action because a) they haven't incurred bank penalties, or b) believe banks, as a company, can charge what they like for doing business with them.

There is a significant difference and that is the cost to the organisation. In the case of the banks they were charging excessive fees compared to their cost and that is what makes it a penalty. A bank might charge someone $30 for being $15 overdrawn, for everyday that they are overdrawn. Compare that to their likely costs, 7% or 8% per annum to get the banks funding - what's that 0.03 cents per day? Then maybe they spent 30 cents per customer in their software to check for the over draw and charge the fee. Charging $30 a day for something that costs 33 cents is excessive and that is why it is a penalty.

Whereas excess baggage has a real cost associated with it for all the reasons that have been mentioned, that is going to be much closer to what is charged. There is also the potential lost income to the airline for carrying excess baggage and not carrying freight. As for the difference between buying luggage before check in and at checkin, clearly this is about planning ability. Clearly the baggage is not going to cost the airline as much in overheads if they can plan in advance.

Oh and I'm option A on the bank question. I know the fees and I arrange my activities accordingly so that I don't have to pay fees. Pretty easy really.