7-month Qantas saga

[cove]

Australia needs a “Judge Judy” show so we would get to see the outcome rather than our Small Claims Tribunal process.
A few thousand frequent flyer points as part compensation would be pretty easy for Qantas to do as a computer operator could have done that in about a minute or two and they say the cost is negligible.
I am glad we are part of the peanut gallery and it didn’t happen to us. Now pass the popcorn please.

 

[offshore171]

We had a similar no show from Brunel, also travelling with kids. This was for the 6am emirates flight out of Sydney.

Booked for 330am. Didn’t show by 4am.

Made the decision to suck it up and get a cab at 405 and arrived at airport a few minutes before checkin cutoff. The idea of driving our own car didn’t even come into consideration.

Would only rely on this car service again if I had plenty of contingency time before the flight. This isn’t feasible for the 6am flight because of the 4am opening time for security and immigration.

 

[rock86]

I do agree that this is not QF's fault (and as such is stated in the T&C's [17] of the Chauffeur Drive's agreed to when booked), so QF's compensation is actually above what they are required to do and I guess they provided it as they never contacted you back after receiving the first call about the no show.

I however would be trying to reclaim the balance of monies from Brunel as they are the supplier who did not provide the agreed upon service, nor did they communicate with the client as to the delay to or cancellation of the service that was agreed upon.

 

[travelislife]

We had a similar no show from Brunel, also travelling with kids. This was for the 6am emirates flight out of Sydney.

Booked for 330am. Didn’t show by 4am.

Made the decision to suck it up and get a cab at 405 and arrived at airport a few minutes before checkin cutoff. The idea of driving our own car didn’t even come into consideration.

Would only rely on this car service again if I had plenty of contingency time before the flight. This isn’t feasible for the 6am flight because of the 4am opening time for security and immigration.

What was the outcome from Emirates? Did they pay for the cab?

 

[travelislife]

I do agree that this is not QF's fault (and as such is stated in the T&C's [17] of the Chauffeur Drive's agreed to when booked), so QF's compensation is actually above what they are required to do and I guess they provided it as they never contacted you back after receiving the first call about the no show.

I however would be trying to reclaim the balance of monies from Brunel as they are the supplier who did not provide the agreed upon service, nor did they communicate with the client as to the delay to or cancellation of the service that was agreed upon.

This is a murky one though. You book the service through Qantas, not direct with Brunel. So how do you know it wasn't QF's fault? Who knows what was in the back end system? Was the booking correctly there?

 

[Princess Fiona]

This is a murky one though. You book the service through Qantas, not direct with Brunel. So how do you know it wasn't QF's fault? Who knows what was in the back end system? Was the booking correctly there?

You usually get a telephone call the day before. At least that’s what has happened every time I have used Chauffeur Drive. Not sure if that happened here or not.

 

[dannnnn]

i agree that qantas managed this situation very poorly (from beginning to now) but sadly i think your response to it was also very poor. i think that you should have either left earlier and parked in the long term parking or taken a taxi. if you did that they should (and probably would) reimburse you for 100% of those costs.

i am a parent with 2 young kids and agree with your attitude to car safety, but you could have legally taken a taxi and you decided not to... that's not their fault. maybe you could have taken a taxi and left the car seat in a baggage locker?? again that'd be a cost that they should/would reimburse. live and learn i guess, i don't think you are an idiot for the decision you made under the circumstances, but i think expecting them to compensate you 100% when there were poor decisions on both sides is a bit much.

i reckon there is a good chance this would have been covered by your travel insurance. that's probably not the outcome you are seeking, but it'd help with your out of pocket. did you have any?

 

[dajop]

One thing, on the math, it seems you had the car booked 2.5hrs before departure, with 45 mins trip to airport? Which in theory gives you 45 mins contingency, before check in closes (1 hr before departure) which was all used up by the failure of the car to turn up and the failure of good advice from Qantas.

I still like to know those advocating taxi fare reimbursement only - how reliable are taxi bookings, that if faced with a tight time line because you were advised the booked car was close by, only for it not to turn up. Do you then wait another 15 mins for a taxi to turn up (perhaps)?

 

[travelislife]

One thing, on the math, it seems you had the car booked 2.5hrs before departure, with 45 mins trip to airport? Which in theory gives you 45 mins contingency, before check in closes (1 hr before departure) which was all used up by the failure of the car to turn up and the failure of good advice from Qantas.

I still like to know those advocating taxi fare reimbursement only - how reliable are taxi bookings, that if faced with a tight time line because you were advised the booked car was close by, only for it not to turn up. Do you then wait another 15 mins for a taxi to turn up (perhaps)?

This is a very very good point. The OP called and was told they would get a call back so waited (never mind the current ridiculous hold times on the Qantas phone lines these days), using up valuable time on Qantas' advice. They in effect contributing to reducing the options available to the OP.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

One thing, on the math, it seems you had the car booked 2.5hrs before departure, with 45 mins trip to airport? Which in theory gives you 45 mins contingency, before check in closes (1 hr before departure) which was all used up by the failure of the car to turn up and the failure of good advice from Qantas.

I still like to know those advocating taxi fare reimbursement only - how reliable are taxi bookings, that if faced with a tight time line because you were advised the booked car was close by, only for it not to turn up. Do you then wait another 15 mins for a taxi to turn up (perhaps)?

The OP says qantas guessed, at best, that the car must be close by. This was not a confirmation. Still, perhaps qantas could have provided the OP with a direct number for the car provider rather than trying to undertake it themselves.

It’s always a tough decision to make when deciding to proceed with a contingency plan. If a taxi had been ordered and the car turns up at the same time i guess you give the taxi driver $10 for their trouble. If the car turns up first you cancel the taxi.

 

[harvyk]

Qantas are squarely in the wrong, for a couple of reasons.

1. As a supplier, if you sub-contract the job to someone else, the buck still stops with you. Unless the agreement was the the pax was going to pay for the chauffeur themselves, Qantas is responsible. Since the chauffeur was being paid by QF, and it's part of the ticket they had purchased QF don't get to pass the buck on this one.

2. If a service fails to meet expectation, the supplier is potentially liable for loss or damages. The costs incurred by the OP are not unreasonable and therefore the OP would be entitled to the full amount of the parking, plus a per KM allowance for fuel and reasonable wear and tear on their own car. Long story short, what is reasonable is very situation dependent, but what the OP did does not seem unreasonable to me.

3. Taken straight from the ACCC website -> "Suppliers must not mislead you about your rights to compensation by stating they are not responsible for any losses you might suffer during or after using the product or service." So QF stating they have offered something, take it or leave it doesn't cut it.

and

4. Compensation for damages and loss
https://www.accc.gov.au/.../compensation-for-damages-loss


All this other talk about child seats and legal issues around such seats in taxi's is irrelevant, as is the talk about what risks you might be willing to take with your own children. The other thing that is irrelevant is the fact that the OP waited 30 minutes before speaking with QF. The fact is that the service was not provided at the agreed time and thus set off a chain of events.

Finally Qantas can have all the T&C's in the world, they can not override consumer law. Reading over their T&C's I'm a little surprised they don't have a severability clause, clause 17.b kind of deals with the fact that section 17 may not be entirely legal. I'm also a little surprised that they don't have a jurisdiction clause, as that can make it kinda messy for QF if something goes wrong.

PS, not a lawyer, but I am someone who personally takes companies to task over consumer law.

So following on from the above, if I were the OP, I would write one final letter explaining that you are not happy with the compensation offered from Qantas, here is the justification as to why, and that they have 14 days in which to comply or you will be escalating the issue to NSW Fair Trading. Also put some links into relevant sections of the ACCC website to emphasize your point. Don't use emotion, just provide a timeline and the facts.

That 14 day cut off is important (provide an exact date), as it gives them a firm deadline in which to respond.

Good luck

 

[mannej]

PS, not a lawyer, but I am someone who personally takes companies to task over consumer law.

It is important to keep in mind that some of the posters who have commented may in fact have legal backgrounds

 

[juddles]

At the end of the day, despite the details, it stinks that as a J pax the QF-arranged transport did not arrive. I would expect this not to happen, and I would expect the airline to make it all good.

 

[Jack_OC]

There is no legal requirement. I too have young ones and we cab/uber it to the airport all the time without infant seats. If not, most families would struggle to get there any other way.

Are you sure that there is no legal requirement in an uber? There 100% definitely is a legal requirement when travelling in an uber in Victoria. From VicRoads:

Does my child need to use a child restraint in a rideshare service such as Uber?Hide
Yes.

It is the law that all children travelling in a motor vehicle who are under 7 years of age, be restrained in a suitable restraint that is properly adjusted and fastened. A rideshare vehicle is just like any other private car and requires child restraints to be installed to transport children under 7.

Frequently asked questions about child restraints : VicRoads

And while it may be too great a risk for some, we are statically subjecting our children to a much greater risk of harm by flying than we are by the short car journey to the airport.

I think you've got that the wrong way around. Everyone (even adults) is at far higher risk of injury and death due to a road traffic accident than an air accident. An unrestrained infant in a car would be at an even higher risk. The fact that the law does not require a child restraint in a taxi does not make it any safer than travelling unrestrained in a normal car.

It's an unfortunate set of circumstances outlined in this case but I believe Qantas' offer is reasonable and proportionate.

I tend to agree with this. I think the first lesson is that they should have allowed much more time to get to the airport in the first place. It's also worth noting that most infant seats can fit inside a large bag/suitcase, so you can simply check them in as standard luggage - especially when flying in J, as luggage allowance is generally not an issue.

EDIT: plus I would never wait 30 minutes after the appointed time to chase up a chauffeur. In my experience, chauffeurs are almost always there at least 5-10 mins early, so if they are not there at the appointed time, there is good reason to believe something is wrong.

 

[harvyk]

It is important to keep in mind that some of the posters who have commented may in fact have legal backgrounds

I realize that very much so, however I am not exactly unskilled in getting companies to come to the party re:my consumer rights.

My best effort was about 6 months ago when I got a company with a "no refunds under any circumstances" to provide me a full refund. This was a large company as well, and it caused them some issues as they did not actually have a documented method for providing refunds.

If the shoe was on the other foot, and it was OP owing QF money, then yes my advice would be to get legal advice, however in this situation the worst that can happen is NSW fair trading / a tribunal states that QF was in the right.

 

[dannnnn]

The costs incurred by the OP are not unreasonable

this is the key bit of your post and i think you glossed over it a bit too quickly. you can wave around your knowledge of the consumer law all you like, but it doesn't provide for unlimited compensation.

 

[kelvedon]

So what is Qantas’s legal obligation if, as a result of the no show of the Chauffer, they had missed their flight altogether?

 

[harvyk]

this is the key bit of your post and i think you glossed over it a bit to quickly.

The costs are not unreasonable, as it achieved the goal in the time allotted, and that's the key words - time allotted.
Whilst "unreasonable" is a bit of a lose term, it basically boils down to "would a normal person consider that a reasonable thing".

It basically means that you resolve the issue without deliberately incurring additional costs. However "reasonable" also takes into account outside factors like time sensitivity. So sure, if the chauffeur had cancelled the day before, and the OP thus had time to make proper arrangements then perhaps the asking amount would not be reasonable. The OP would have had time to arrange a park in the long term parking lot and would not have being risking running out of time for check-in.

However in this case time was a factor not of the OP's making, and last minute arrangements do have a habit of being more expensive, and under the pressure of missing a flight. It's all well and good to say with the benefit of hindsight that the OP should have done this or done that, but under the risk of missing a flight, and a rather unhelpful call to QF, the actions taken by the OP might not have been the cheapest available, but they where certainly something a reasonable person in that situation might have done.

 

[harvyk]

So what is Qantas’s legal obligation if, as a result of the no show of the Chauffer, they had missed their flight altogether?

Their T&C's basically states re-booking to next available flight, however I expect that you would be entitled to some degree of compensation for loses.

 

[Jack_OC]

So what is Qantas’s legal obligation if, as a result of the no show of the Chauffer, they had missed their flight altogether?

Probably none. From the Qantas Chauffeur Drive T&Cs:

11. Chauffeur Drive pick-up times can be scheduled between 5 hours and 2.5 hours before the applicable scheduled flight departure time. It is the responsibility of the person travelling to allow enough time to get to the airport and check-in before check-in closes. Local traffic conditions and unforeseen circumstances can affect travel time, and the traveller accepts those risks when using the Chauffeur Drive service.

.........

17. You acknowledge that Chauffeur Drive services are provided by third party suppliers, and not by Qantas or Emirates. Qantas is not responsible for the acts or omissions of such suppliers, or for any deficiency in the facilities and services offered. In particular, Qantas has no liability for loss, personal injury, or death incurred during the use of such facilities and services unless:

a. such loss, personal injury or death is / are caused solely by Qantas' negligence; or

b. such liability cannot be excluded under law (in which case it is limited to the maximum extent permitted under the law). In some countries, services may come with a non-excludable guarantee or warranty that they will be provided with due care and skill. The nature and application of these guarantees or warranties will depend on the relevant country.