ACCC action re cancelled flights

[Pete98765432]

I do agree.

CFO to CEO transitions can be challenging for some, especially if they lack the customer mindset.

Previous mob I worked at, they promoted the CFO to CEO, but they never worked in the commercial or operational parts, purely a rusted on finance person. They got pushed out in a year, and the board appointed the Chief Commercial officer who did 5 years and a very successful 5 years might I add. For simple reasons, the CCO understood the customer and what they wanted, they understood the market and the competitors. They didn’t have a finance degree or ever work in finance, but they understood the customer.

Remains to be seen what will happen here, but I’m certainly skeptical.

I agree we’ll have to wait and see what happens, but it’s worth remembering that she has also served as Chief Customer Officer.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

You are correct here but again, it is unclear whether we have EU261 style laws in Australia. Yes you can make the argument that technically there has been no legislation passed that is modelled after EU261. However, I would point to the fact that we have broad consumer protections like the Australian Consumer Guarantee that do offer this protection. And if enough people go to tribunals to fight for their rights, eventually Qantas will learn that they need to do the right thing at the beginning, especially if some of us are willing to take it to court to seek punitive damages.

-RooFlyer88

I don’t believe we do have anything like EU261.

We have consumer laws that say flight must be operated within a reasonable time (product suitability), but the remedy is a refund.

But that refund doesn’t usually cover a last-minute walk-up fare on another airline. Like Eu261 is supposed to.

qantas’ terms and conditions say they will put you on the next available one of their services. Great. If you are platinum and get one of the last few seats on tomorrow’s flight to LAX.

If you’re non-status and passenger 341, you might not be as lucky. Platinum kids get to go to disneyland. Non-status get told ‘sorry, no mickey mouse for you’

Taking an airline to court when there are very few protections… well… all it takes is one passenger to lose and be saddles with 10k lawyer fees and the rest of the market pretty much dries up.

 

[RichardMEL]

Agree with @MEL_Traveller here - And while the non Platinum Kids may eventually get to see Mickey, it might be in 3 days time, or 8 days - by which time the trip is likely ruined. As P1, I've been incredibly lucky with such things - earlier this year for example, I was on MEL-DFW - it got nuked the day prior (IIRC) due to an engine issue with the aircraft. QF, to their credit, put me on a flight to SYD, and SYD-DFW - in J, and even in a fairly preferred seat(this I did not expect) - on a reward flight no less. I have no doubt there were customers on that MEL-DFW who were only offered the next departure *of that flight* 3 days later. I don't have any anecdotal example of this, but I'd bet it to be so.

See, it all comes down to an interpretation of "next available" - and surprise, surprise - the next available flight for the customer probably doesn't equate to the next available for the carrier (and to a degree, I understand that - I mean in my example above, at short notice, how many of MEL-DFW pax could they shove on to the SYD-DFW? I didn't look at how the loads were looking for that flight til my flight was cancelled, but you can imagine it was already pretty full as is). Plus, they could have thrown some pax on to services to LAX from MEL/SYD/BNE and then onto AA.

And that's the other catch that seems to be a thing in North America, but not here that much but QF naturally would balk at putting their pax on alternate, non partner carriers - eg: maybe they could have put DFW pax on UA or DL ex SYD, or even potentially NZ - but that would cost them bigly, and they'll do anything to avoid that so they might TELL the customer "The next available flight (for you) is in 3 days..." even if there's seats on another carrier. I'm unsure how much one can push on this - probably the more elite one is, the more QF would be willing to do this, but for regular pax would potentially feel quite intimidated to accept whatever QF comes up with as "next available" and they could probably justify it somehow. OTOH, north american carriers seem a little better to - if they an't do anything within reasonable time on their metal, put you on someone else's. Heck, a mate of mine just today told me about an AC *reward* ticket he had booked from YYZ-MCI coming up (in J). AC cancelled the MCI flight. At first they'd put him on a flight to ORD (why? it's miles away.. who knows) but when he contacted them, within a pretty short time that I can tell, they'd rebooked him into DL YYZ-DTW-MCI - in a revenue J fare no less. That's pretty astounding imo (and perhaps kf88 will point to Canadian customer protection law as a reason). I'd expected a reroute on UA - even tacking on a ORD-MCI or something - that would seem the most obvious/easiest for them. Does it happen all the time? nope. It definitely seems to be a thing in North America though way more than here (I do know some QF domestic pax have, in instances, been put on VA, but it seems quite rare imo).

Now, I suppose a pissed off enough person could document that hey trying to get to DFW on so and so date, and QF told me 3 days later, but I could find a seat on United and they wouldn't put me on it - could take QF to a tribunal and argue it out under the notion of "next available flight" but that's probably a messy process most won't attempt (and QF likely would bank on that with some of their decisions).

 

[larrymull]

Is anyone else looking forward to all the free gifts Qantas are going to have to hand out to try to rebuild its reputation?

Here's hoping I'll be able to renew Platinum for 2024-25 at a steep discount with all the SCs coming my way.

The amount of 'Thank You' for your loyalty will be too many to count. Last year it was 'sorry we can do better'

 

[kangarooflyer88]

I see Australia's finest news outlet, The Chaser has a special report on the situation:

 

[drron]

The ACCC wants Qantas to be given the biggest fine in the ACCC's history.

www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/01/qantas-tickets-cancelled-flights-penalty-fine-accc

 

[straitman]

... and here is a link to the Neil Mitchell 3AW interview with the ACCC Chairperson.

 

[oz_mark]

The ACCC wants Qantas to be given the biggest fine in the ACCC's history.

www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/01/qantas-tickets-cancelled-flights-penalty-fine-accc

Maybe they should try to beat the fine Austrac got against Westpac!

 

[BAM1748]

QF or any big business isn’t scared of the ACCC, the ACCC has demonstrated it is weak many times over. Eg it took a royal commission into banks to stop charging dead people when the ACCC failed.

What they are afraid of is a depression in the share price bought on by bad publicity.

QF has lawyers, more highly sought after than the prosecutors legal team I would think.

The issue will be intent, sure there is a stuff up but try proving a 20000 plus person bureaucracy/ business intended to to this and a different story come out.

And finally it hasn’t gone to court yet and some here saying guilty, that’s the talk that gets business off a conviction. Be careful what you say.

 

[oz_mark]

QF or any big business isn’t scared of the ACCC, the ACCC has demonstrated it is weak many time over. Eg it took a royal commission into banks to stop charging dead people when the ACCC failed.

Consumer protection for financial institutions is generally provided by ASIC, rather than the ACCC.

 

[RooFlyer]

The issue will be intent, sure there is a stuff up but try proving a 20000 plus person bureaucracy/ business intended to to this and a different story come out.

Is the issue 'intent'? Intent to do what? I believe the issue would be "did they do it or not". In launching this court prosecution, the ACCC hasn't just done it on a whim. They have sought and received documents from QF - so presumably can demonstrate the scheduling, cancellation selling tickets, and advising customers timeframes.

Not "a stuff up" - but 8 to 10,000 flights - over just 2 months! How many customers? This doesn't seem like a fishing expedition, to me.

Have a read of the ACCC 'Concise statement' filing. Opens a PDF.

https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/ACCC%20v%20Qantas%20_%20Concise%20Statement%20-%2031%20August%202023.pdf

QF undoubtedly has good lawyers, but I think there would have been a tightening of legal rear-ends at Mascot this morning.

 

[BAM1748]

Consumer protection for financial institutions is generally provided by ASIC, rather than the ACCC.

Yes another poor regulation example.

I can’t think of any sector except maybe the state based EPAs that uses its teeth.

 

[TeaKozy]

What the people on the phone or the airport staff tell you does not matter. They are not lawyers. They do not understand Qantas' own policies.

Experiencing this first-hand with my partner whose return LAX-MEL flight was cancelled owing to a mechanical fault and was rebooked via BNE two days later. Called up (using my FF number) and was told explicitly to book any accomodation 'that was reasonable' as she was in no mood to hang around any longer and wait for QF to organise. Of course there is a limit, but when you call you'd expect the phone to be staffed by a representative somewhat aware of their actual policies.

Guessing this one will be going to VCAT as we are currently in the Manilla customer service void and the ACA seems to be of little use (even just retrieving the recording). Part of me wishing it was ex-EU, at least we'd get some compensation...

 

[AIRwin]

Part of me wishing it was ex-EU, at least we'd get some compensation...

Unfortunately it looks like even the DOT does not impose any compensation:

Flight Delays & Cancellations

When planning a trip, passengers should keep in mind that airlines do not guarantee their schedules. While airlines want to get passengers to their destinations on time, there are many things that can – and sometimes do – make it difficult for flights to arrive on time. Some problems, like bad...

www.transportation.gov

 

[justinbrett]

The QF media statement is interesting, it has no immediate defence (other than the vague post-covid excuse, which is not a defence).

Says to me they're either guilty AF or it has genuinely caught them by surprise.

The magnitude of the allegation is staggering (8K+ flights), and I don't understand how it can happen with automated systems, unless the ACCC is treating "intent to cancel" as a cancellation. I also don't remember reading any reports/complaints on this which is strange considering how many flights are in question.

The second part of the claim (10K+ flights) sounds to me like the zeroing out issue, that we've all seen first hand, but the defence of that is easier as flights can be un-zeroed out if external factors improve.

If QF was guilty and pays the fine, hopefully that money is returned to the victims and not just paid to the government, though I assume that is probably what will happen.

 

[Quickstatus]

business practices that could be labelled poor, sneaky, dishonest or mean

The better term is arrogance
...............

free gifts Qantas are going to have to hand out

like the $50 voucher then recoup it by increasing the price of flights by more than $50
..............

especially if they lack the customer mindset

she has also served as Chief Customer Officer.

Hmm maybe already maxxed out on that KPI?
..............


BTW: Anyone in the ACCC got CL?

 

[Cognac]

And that's the other catch that seems to be a thing in North America, but not here that much but QF naturally would balk at putting their pax on alternate, non partner carriers - eg: maybe they could have put DFW pax on UA or DL ex SYD, or even potentially NZ - but that would cost them bigly, and they'll do anything to avoid that so they might TELL the customer "The next available flight (for you) is in 3 days..." even if there's seats on another carrier. I'm unsure how much one can push on this - probably the more elite one is, the more QF would be willing to do this, but for regular pax would potentially feel quite intimidated to accept whatever QF comes up with as "next available" and they could probably justify it somehow.

To Qantas' credit, when we had IRROPS (our flight ex-PER got massively delayed, which meant we missed the connect) on our trip to Canada last year going SYD-YVR Qantas booked us on the next flight that was going direct, which happened to be AC the following morning. I know for a fact that there were other passengers who were booked to LAX on QF and then on AA to YVR instead. This was not a thing that we had to ask/fight for. We lost the J upgrade (points were refunded immediately), which was unfortunate, and the special meal requirements didn't get transferred across (we had to lean on AC staff at the check in counter to make that happen), but as far as disruptions go it was fairly minimal.

 

[Himeno]

In my years of travel, I've only had 2 flights cancelled (other then the 2021 covid related NZ travel bubble popping cancellations). Lots of delays, a number of reroutes, but only 2 cancellations. Both were on Qantas.

The first, back in 2005 or 2006, was a short CBR-MEL. It was an early morning flight which got cancelled overnight prior to the flight. Tech issue IIRC. Qantas claimed that they called me, saying they left a message - which is impossible because I don't (and never have) use voice mail. On every mobile number I've had, I've made sure to disable voice mail when setting up the phone. They had moved everyone on the flight to the previous flight (eg, moved to a 6am flight from a 7am flight).
They put me and the other remaining pax from the cancelled flight on standby for the next few flights. Almost got on to a mid morning flight, but the missing pax turned up at the last second. Then got a confirmed seat on an afternoon flight and they let me into the QP.

The other was in 2019. MEL-SIN to connect to HND. In bound aircraft got a lightening strike and after a number of delays being posted, they cancelled. Everyone else got moved to the EK MEL-SIN flight. Going on that flight would have gotten me to SIN in time to connect. But since I was on a oneworld ticket, which barred the use of non oneworld members (and even though QF could have ignored that rule for IRROPS), they refused to put me on EK and had me go backwards through immigration, then up to SYD for QF25 (which got me to HND 2 hours before the planned flight would have).

 

[RooFlyer]

I can’t think of any sector except maybe the state based EPAs that uses its teeth.

I agree the so-called regulators are pretty weak. ASIC in particular lost some high profile prosecutions in the past couple of years.

The ACCC have pointed to two high profile successes of theirs; AUSTRAC taking the CBA to the cleaners was another - that resulted in massive corporate fine AND the CEO losing his short term bonus in very short order ($millions) (strong Chair).

But as ACCC have said, its not just getting a conviction/findings; its a shot across the bows of all businesses - big ones, especially - wrt ethical trading.

BTW: Anyone in the ACCC got CL?

If they do, I reckon their membership will go the way of the AFR!

 

[Seat0B]

We have consumer laws that say flight must be operated within a reasonable time (product suitability), but the remedy is a refund.

That’s my experience too, but today I heard a radio interview with someone from the Consumer Legal Rights Centre (or similar name) saying that actually there is a right under the consumer legislation to a refund or a replacement at the consumer’s discretion and that both airlines and airline customers seem to have forgotten that. They were encouraging airline customers who could wait for an alternative flight to insist that their cancelled flight be replaced with another flight rather than the palaver that goes on with credit vouchers and the need to spend those on a flight or equal or greater amount, and the reality that once a flight is cancelled, it often cannot be replaced with an otherwise identical flight for the same cost. I for one have suffered from this and I hope it gets picked up somewhere in the current proceeding.

edit for typos