Australia's 4 major airlines forced to make changes to refund policies in significant win for travel

[oz_mark]

This reminds me of the time Jetstar tried to tell me that all extras on Starter fares were non-refundable. So even though I paid for some additional services that I did not receive, I was not entitled to any compensation due to the fare rules. The guy I spoke to seemed to think that Jetstar's terms & conditions made Australian Consumer Law redundant (and even tried to make me feel like I was being unreasonable in asking for a refund).

Which is why Jetstar has been singled out for extra attention.

But, if you have been paying attention to booking engines in the last month or so, you would have seen evidence of all this.
See for example text when selecting a red-e-deal on Qantas

 

[JohnK]

This won't make too much difference to general cancellation fees. With Qantas that cancellation fee is now $400 on some cheap international sale fares.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

This won't make too much difference to general cancellation fees. With Qantas that cancellation fee is now $400 on some cheap international sale fares.

I thought there was a separate investigation underway regarding the fairness of cancellation fees? If that has finished I'm not sure of the outcome... but they were arguing that cancellation fees were excessive.

 

[JohnK]

I thought there was a separate investigation underway regarding the fairness of cancellation fees? If that has finished I'm not sure of the outcome... but they were arguing that cancellation fees were excessive.

Excessive? Outright ludicrous! I don't buy this rubbish about flexibility in airfares needs to make the airfares expensive. Not that long ago the change/cancellation fee on a Qantas $95 airfare was $99 yet a much cheaper airfare on JQ can be moved around for free as long as there is availability.

 

[CMA222]

The ACCC has added a guide to its website:

Flight delays & cancellations

and announced the decision:

Jetstar in court for misleading claims on refunds

 

[GoldCanyon340]

QF website now has a banner announcement regarding this.

 

[CMA222]

This new emphasis will no doubt increase the regularity with which travel insurers say they are not liable, under their terms and conditions, if the passenger can claim compensation or a refund from any other source, and it is their assessment that the insured party should seek redress from the airline under the ACL. The ping pong exchanges over who is responsible will be exploited by both, to their inevitable advantage.

 

[N860CR]

All the airlines are gulity of this. In my recent experiences;

Friend booked SYD-BNE on an 8pm service during storms. Cancelled, and rebooked at 7am 2 days later. They ended up getting the train. Virgin refused to refund and provided a "credit only".

I was booked BNE-ROK during the last flooding event. Flight was cancelled. Qantas refused at length to refund (dealing with their offshore call centre) and offered only a travel credit (however they "generously" offered to waive the fee). Only after sending their own customer charter to them via social media was a refund processed. They did not refund the credit card fee.

The airlines have been getting away with this for far too long.

 

[Mattg]

All the airlines are gulity of this. In my recent experiences;

Friend booked SYD-BNE on an 8pm service during storms. Cancelled, and rebooked at 7am 2 days later. They ended up getting the train. Virgin refused to refund and provided a "credit only".

Genuine question - are airlines within their rights to refuse a refund if the cancellation is due to weather and/or events outside their control?

(I don't believe so, but I can imagine airlines would try this on...)

 

[N860CR]

I believe that’s what all this is about. If they don’t provide the service paid for, they can’t refuse a refund. They all try it on though.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

all this does is make the airlines obey consumer law. Customers have never been able to get refunds, just because they feel like, or they change their mind or they are at fault. That will still apply to the majority of cheap flights.

However you can’t deny a refund where the goods are not fit for purpose. So if the airlines cancel a flight, or there is an unacceptable delay they have to provide a refund. Seems pretty fair really and I have never understood why airlines were able to get away with it.

Personally, I'd like to see it taken a step further. The 'refund' should be based on what seats in that class are being sold for at the time of refund being processed; similar to how Qantas only refund you the difference between your business class fare and whatever the price of the highest full fare economy ticket is; in the event you are downgraded.

The logic is - that pax may have to cough up to buy a ticket on a competing airline, and we all know that last minute fares can cause nosebleeds.

....
How is a cancelled return trip refund calculated?. Half of a return ticket?or as the airline will do- reprice it as 2x one ways and the return leg refund becomes zero plus no obligation to carry passenger back home? ...

Exactly that scenario happened to be on MH last week. Cancelled one leg and the 'refund' was the taxes, as they calculated the outbound fare at 100% of the ticket value, therefore the return leg had no value and thus no ticket portion refundable.

The more time I spend in the airline game the more I realise that the vast majority of airline staff are not customers of their own product. This leads to staff making decisions that are not living and breathing the product because they are only occasional consumers - and even then - they're paying deeply discounted prices.

I regularly saw CX flights which would have XX no-show pax. If those pax were on non-refundable tickets - that's a lot of free cash for the airline. With that in mind, and knowing the direct link between passenger satisfaction and loyalty/group revenue; annoying pax with inflexible rules/loyalty program changes etc creates an instant disengaged customer that takes a while but ultimately reflects on the bottom line. eg: Cathay losses snowball to US$160 million, first back-to-back loss ever

I'm a big believer in investing in the customer, and the customer will invest in you..

 

[UP4014]

This happened to a work mate. A QF weekend away booked to Hamilton Island. Cyclone comes through and QF cancel said weekend.

Two months later still no refund and when being chased about it say they don't have to refund the cash but can issue a credit.

Hold on a minute, QF cancel and then want to kelp the cash.

Got a lawyer to call QF and hay presto 48 hours later money returned. They can do it easily when they want to.

All airlines need to be called out on this type of behaviour.

 

[CaptJCool]

Excessive? Outright ludicrous! I don't buy this rubbish about flexibility in airfares needs to make the airfares expensive. Not that long ago the change/cancellation fee on a Qantas $95 airfare was $99 yet a much cheaper airfare on JQ can be moved around for free as long as there is availability.

So you just bought a new tic ? Probably cheaper.....

I would have liked to check in an empty bag I no longer needed and then did a runner. They can spend the money retrieving the bag. These change fees on top of fare difference are highway robbery. Especially since it’s done online !

You may recall the case of the woman who bought a flex fare to Hong Kong and when the house burnt down was going to be billed $500. I took a look at the fare rules and this applies for phone calls. Online changes were only fare difference

Christmas tragedy house burns down looted mum slugged extra by Qantas get home visiting sick father | Daily Mail Online

 

[MEL_Traveller]

So you just bought a new tic ? Probably cheaper.....

I would have liked to check in an empty bag I no longer needed and then did a runner. They can spend the money retrieving the bag. These change fees on top of fare difference are highway robbery. Especially since it’s done online !

You may recall the case of the woman who bought a flex fare to Hong Kong and when the house burnt down was going to be billed $500. I took a look at the fare rules and this applies for phone calls. Online changes were only fare difference

Christmas tragedy house burns down looted mum slugged extra by Qantas get home visiting sick father | Daily Mail Online

I wondered if this would be covered by travel insurance. It seems this might come under 'emergency travel arrangements' (or similar depending on the policy). For ANZ CC they will pay up to $25K.

 

[ozfflyer]

think about this scenario ...

you book well in advance a SYD/MEL/SYD ticket for $100 each way. The SYD/MEL flight is on time, but the return flight is delayed 5 hours.

Do you ask for a refund of your $100 & then pay $300+ for a last minute ticket on another airline or wait the 5 hours. Imagine if this itinerary is for family of 5, the difference is fare could be $1000.

 

[Flying mermaid]

think about this scenario ...

you book well in advance a SYD/MEL/SYD ticket for $100 each way. The SYD/MEL flight is on time, but the return flight is delayed 5 hours.

Do you ask for a refund of your $100 & then pay $300+ for a last minute ticket on another airline or wait the 5 hours. Imagine if this itinerary is for family of 5, the difference is fare could be $1000.

depends on how desperate you are to get back and there might be compelling reasons that makes the extra fare worth it . At least the $300 is reduced by the refund.

The real question is what is an unacceptable delay - it’s all still very fuzzy.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

think about this scenario ...

you book well in advance a SYD/MEL/SYD ticket for $100 each way. The SYD/MEL flight is on time, but the return flight is delayed 5 hours.

Do you ask for a refund of your $100 & then pay $300+ for a last minute ticket on another airline or wait the 5 hours. Imagine if this itinerary is for family of 5, the difference is fare could be $1000.

That's exactly the problem

At least if you do decide to buy the $300 fare (urgent committments) the $100 back can help ease the pain slightly.

But this is why EU261 is so valuable, with compensation more likely to reflect a walk up fare on another airline.

 

[ozfflyer]

That's exactly the problem

At least if you do decide to buy the $300 fare (urgent committments) the $100 back can help ease the pain slightly.

But this is why EU261 is so valuable, with compensation more likely to reflect a walk up fare on another airline.

in 2019-20 many airlines will fold. Imagine if an airline engineer is put under pressure to get a flight away to avoid massive refunds to passengers. All very dangerous if you ask me. Will surely lead to a crash/incident at some time.

Re EU261, airlines will just delay paying any compensation if they are going broke anyway.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

in 2019-20 many airlines will fold. Imagine if an airline engineer is put under pressure to get a flight away to avoid massive refunds to passengers. All very dangerous if you ask me. Will surely lead to a crash/incident at some time.

There may be an incentive for that. But let's focus on the Australian market. I have no concerns that an airline or engineer would dispatch an aircraft here knowing there is a fault that could affect flight. (Unknowingly - yes - as we saw tith the Virgin ATR.) Same applies for Europe and the USA.

 

[JohnK]

So you just bought a new tic ? Probably cheaper.....

Have done this quite a few times where I've just thrown the ticket away and purchased new ticket.