Didn't expect this to be my breaking point, but it finally came!

[FlyingKangaroo]

\start cathartic rant

I can safely say I've never started a whinge thread, but there's a first time for everything.

Recently on one of many SYD-LAX-SYD return trips in J, I was impacted by a schedule change when QF consolidated its SYD-LAX schedule, resulting in my being moved to the earlier (and under the new schedule, only) flight back to SYD. The earlier time wasn't workable for me. I offered to re-route LAX-MEL-SYD on the same day as the MEL flight left LAX at the original time, but was told that wasn't possible. Instead, I was given the option to fly LAX-SYD the next day and advised by QF customer support to submit hotel and expenses for reimbursement.

Relying on that advice, I accepted the change to the next day but my eventual hotel claim (I hadn't even bothered to submit taxi or meals as I was at my destination anyway and would have had to get back to the airport anyway, so I didn't think it reasonable to ask Qantas to cop that) was denied.

This form letter denial resulted in several back and forth messages, with me referencing the exact date, time and person I spoke with who advised me I was eligible for reimbursement and advising me how to submit that expense.

Long story short: Qantas conceded in writing that their agent had given me "confusing" (read: inaccurate at best, false and misleading at worst) information that they acknowledged "may" have resulted in a "discrepancy" (read: misrepresentation) regarding their policy, but steadfastly refused the claim --- including again even after a polite, unemotional but firm restatement and reminder of their obligations under the Australian Consumer Law and a warning I'd consider both an ACCC complaint and NCAT action if they refused to compensate me for what they admitted was their own mistake.

Yesterday QF again denied the claim. I've already submitted the ACCC complaint, and am genuinely considering a NCAT claim simply on principle. If I don't, who will?

It's simply astounding to me that Qantas continues to operate this way. I'm a mere SG, but maintaining that status still costs several thousand per year, and I just find it wild that Qantas would dig in like this over a measly $200 hotel claim when they've admitted their own mistake. The difference in service standard hits even harder as this final denial also comes just a week after Delta sent me a personalised, substantive apology and dumped 15,000 miles into my account after I completed an automatic survey in which my only negative feedback was that the premium economy meal and service from cabin crew on a LAX-SYD sector felt a bit lacklustre in comparison to competitors.

I've put up with a lot from QF over the years and am one of those weirdos who wants to love them even when I hate them, and stuck in there the last few years through and post-Covid despite all the issues they've had and promises they've made to do better. But at this point, after this one, I suppose I finally hit my breaking point. My membership year starts again in June, and for the first time, I won't just not be trying to maintain status, I'm actively booking away from Qantas on principle --- and they fly virtually nowhere that someone else can't take me.

They don't care, and the irony is, that $200 wasn't material to me --- but the principle is. So, stubborn or not, whether they care or not, I'm out for the foreseeable future, and I've got the (literal) receipts of multiple upcoming trips on other carriers to prove it.

/end cathartic rant

 

[goldenhorn]

I can safely say I've never started a whinge thread, but there's a first time for everything.

Recently on one of many SYD-LAX-SYD return trips in J, I was impacted by a schedule change when QF consolidated its SYD-LAX schedule, resulting in my being moved to the earlier (and under the new schedule, only) flight back to SYD. The earlier time wasn't workable for me. I offered to re-route LAX-MEL-SYD on the same day as the MEL flight left LAX at the original time, but was told that wasn't possible. Instead, I was given the option to fly LAX-SYD the next day and advised by QF customer support to submit hotel and expenses for reimbursement.

Relying on that advice, I accepted the change to the next day but my eventual hotel claim (I hadn't even bothered to submit taxi or meals as I was at my destination anyway and would have had to get back to the airport anyway, so I didn't think it reasonable to ask Qantas to cop that) was denied.

This form letter denial resulted in several back and forth messages, with me referencing the exact date, time and person I spoke with who advised me I was eligible for reimbursement and advising me how to submit that expense.

Long story short: Qantas conceded in writing that their agent had given me "confusing" (read: inaccurate at best, false and misleading at worst) information that they acknowledged "may" have resulted in a "discrepancy" (read: misrepresentation) regarding their policy, but steadfastly refused the claim --- including again even after a polite, unemotional but firm restatement and reminder of their obligations under the Australian Consumer Law and a warning I'd consider both an ACCC complaint and NCAT action if they refused to compensate me for what they admitted was their own mistake.

Yesterday QF again denied the claim. I've already submitted the ACCC complaint, and am genuinely considering a NCAT claim simply on principle. If I don't, who will?

It's simply astounding to me that Qantas continues to operate this way. I'm a mere SG, but maintaining that status still costs several thousand per year, and I just find it wild that Qantas would dig in like this over a measly $200 hotel claim when they've admitted their own mistake. The difference in service standard hits even harder as this final denial also comes just a week after Delta sent me a personalised, substantive apology and dumped 15,000 miles into my account after I completed an automatic survey in which my only negative feedback was that the premium economy meal and service from cabin crew on a LAX-SYD sector felt a bit lacklustre in comparison to competitors.

I've put up with a lot from QF over the years, and stuck in there the last few years through and post-Covid despite all the issues they've had and promises they've made to do better. But at this point, after this one, I suppose I finally hit my breaking point. My membership year starts again in June, and for the first time, I won't just not be trying to maintain status, I'm actively booking away from Qantas on principle --- and they fly virtually nowhere that someone else can't take me.

They don't care, and the irony is, that $200 wasn't material to me --- but the principle is. So, stubborn or not, whether they care or not, I'm out for the foreseeable future, and I've got the (literal) receipts of multiple upcoming trips to prove it.

Sorry to hear about this situation. Just wanted to let you know I had a good outcome last year by lodging an NCAT complaint against QF. My issue was a little different - I had a J award ticket SFO-SYD, and they cancelled the SFO flight and put me on LAX-SYD but wouldn't put me on a flight to get to LAX.

Once I submitted the NCAT complaint, it was resolved within 2 weeks by an ACTUAL human being who had the authority to pay me all my expenses. They were very reasonable about it once I was able to connected with the QF person with authority.

It's a pain to have to do, but someone has to hold them to account!

Good luck with it.

 

[ChrisMars]

This is particularly sad as Qantas current messaging is to improve customer services. It s so easy, so obvious, and so cheap to fix this issue. Really pathetic.

 

[Ouabain]

This goes back quite a few years, but I had to go down the NCAT route for a refund. They called me 24hrs before hearing to offer refund on proviso that I dropped charges.

 

[CMA222]

Did you consider a direct approach to Vanessa Hudson as the new CEO, reminding her of how she has undertaken to do better and providing your example of how they are already failing ? Perhaps a personally addressed letter via registered post, with returned receipt acknowledgement of delivery. Corporate address is 10-12 Bourke Road, Mascot. If there is no response it supports that you gave them every opportunity before going to NCAT - and social media. Voting with your feet they know will not really impact them and that is why they treat their customers with such contempt.

 

[RooFlyer]

I've put up with a lot from QF over the years and am one of those weirdos who wants to love them even when I hate them, and stuck in there the last few years through and post-Covid despite all the issues they've had and promises they've made to do better. But at this point, after this one, I suppose I finally hit my breaking point. My membership year starts again in June, and for the first time, I won't just not be trying to maintain status, I'm actively booking away from Qantas on principle --- and they fly virtually nowhere that someone else can't take me.

(my bolding).

Welcome to the Club That's exactly what I did when I had had enough, maybe 5-6 years ago. Discovered QR. Re-discovered SQ. Discovered TK. Domestic on VA - plat, plat ...

You'll also be liberated from having to choose products and services based on earning QF points.



But I didn't cut my nose to spite my face. Still flew with QF when it suited.

 

[VPS]

You have my sympathy - that is appalling service

 

[justinbrett]

So is their argument that because you elected the later flight instead of the one offered, you are liable for accommodation costs? Was the flight offered the same day as the one you booked?

 

[dajop]

Remember you didn’t book a flight with QF, only a “bundle of rights” to get you from A to B. Not a specific class nor a specific time.

If they offered to get you from LAX to SYD on the same day, even if several hours earlier and you couldn’t make it too bad so sad.

Or that’s their point of view anyway

 

[justinbrett]

Remember you didn’t book a flight with QF, only a “bundle of rights” to get you from A to B. Not a specific class nor a specific time.

If they offered to get you from LAX to SYD on the same day, even if several hours earlier and you couldn’t make it too bad so sad.

Well no, they did accommodate OP on the flight of their choosing.

The question is who pays for the hotel. The policy isn't clear to me, but I'm guessing QF are saying they only pay ancillary expenses based on their offer, not the one chosen by the pax.

Would like to know the specific reason it was denied.

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

Did you consider a direct approach to Vanessa Hudson as the new CEO, reminding her of how she has undertaken to do better and providing your example of how they are already failing ? Perhaps a personally addressed letter via registered post, with returned receipt acknowledgement of delivery. Corporate address is 10-12 Bourke Road, Mascot. If there is no response it supports that you gave them every opportunity before going to NCAT - and social media. Voting with your feet they know will not really impact them and that is why they treat their customers with such contempt.

This idea pleases me. I might give this a go. Consider it a final draft of the NCAT action summary.

So is their argument that because you elected the later flight instead of the one offered, you are liable for accommodation costs? Was the flight offered the same day as the one you booked?

I was only offered one alternative other than the forced schedule change, that being LAX-SYD for the next day. I pressed the LAX-MEL-SYD option on the same day but the agent insisted this wasn't possible even though it showed plenty of availability online.

Since then they've openly admitted their agent gave me incorrect information on the phone and acknowledged that this informed my decision, but are denying responsibility for it anyway.

Irony is knowing what I know about Qantas, getting an alternative at all can be tricky and if the agent hadn't proactively referred to and reminded me to file for the hotel compensation, I may never have even paid it second thought. But the agent did, and confirmed it before hanging up, so it's now the principle of the thing.

 

[justinbrett]

I was only offered one alternative. Or a refund. The only alternative flight Qantas offered was LAX-SYD for the next day. I pressed the LAX-MEL-SYD option on the same day but the agent insisted this wasn't possible even though it showed plenty of availability online.

Since then they've openly admitted their agent gave me incorrect information on the phone and that this informed my decision, but are denying responsibility for it anyway.

Irony is knowing what I know about Qantas, getting an alternative at all can be tricky and if the agent hadn't proactively referred to and reminded me to file for the hotel compensation, I may never have even paid it second thought. But the agent did, and confirmed it before hanging up, so it's now the principle of the thing.

Surely the onus is then on them to provide you with their actual policy and explain why you are not entitled.

So are you saying now their only offer was the next day? Or they offered same day earlier time first - or was it earlier day? I'm a bit confused.

 

[dajop]

Well no, they did accommodate OP on the flight of their choosing.

I stand by what I say. Yes they did offer the OP the next available flight, but because they’d already moved the OP to the earlier flight … their attitude would be too bad so sad in relation to the hotel. They’d met their obligation under their supposed bundle of right to fly the OP back to SYD that day. They obviously don’t care that a few hours earlier might not be possible for OP.

 

[serfty]

Same day does not matter.

Alternative Flights/Route Same Day/Day before/Day After are in their agency policy.

Assuming this was not an award flight (booked in U) then:

Qantas and Other Airline Schedule Change Policy | Agency Connect

This is where the Qantas agent was wrong in the first place- they could have offerred the MEL alternative at the very first step (even the example is somewhat appropriate)

Step 1

Qantas (QF) flights can be rebooked to an alternative QF flight or connecting QF flights
Example: MEL QF LAX changed to MEL QF SYD QF LAX

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

I stand by what I say. Yes they did offer the OP the next available flight, but because they’d already moved the OP to the earlier flight … their attitude would be too bad so sad in relation to the hotel. They’d met their obligation under their supposed bundle of right to fly the OP back to SYD that day. They obviously don’t care that a few hours earlier might not be possible for OP.

That’s the position they appear to be taking now but legally, it ignores the clear representations the agent made when presenting the alternative for the following day, and under Australian Consumer Law, an agent making verbal representations that induced me into accepting the alternative as was done here arguably amounts to false and misleading misrepresentations.

I’m a solicitor - I can easily try to craft an argument here against my own position (though at the end of the day, trying to fight obvious violations of the ACL is risky business), but ultimately the point is the broader issue that QF’s standard operating procedure is to hide behind any excuse they can find to refuse to take accountability even when they openly admit their own mistakes. Forget a customer-first service culture; they do it simply because they think they can get away with it.

It’s a commercial choice and it reflects the culture at Mascot.

 

[justinbrett]

Same day does not matter.

Alternative Fights/Routes Same Day/Day before/Day After are in their agency policy.



This is where the Qantas agent was wrong - they could have offerred the MEL alternative.

I don't know why MEL wasn't an option, unless it was sold out (possible with the SYD cancellation)

Ah wait - was this a schedule change? As in more than 72 hours before departure? If so, I don't think that's covered under any circumstance. Agent might have it confused with the disruption policy (inside 72 hours)

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

I don't know why MEL wasn't an option, unless it was sold out (possible with the SYD cancellation)

Ah wait - was this a schedule change? As in more than 72 hours before departure? If so, I don't think that's covered under any circumstance. Agent might have it confused with the disruption policy (inside 72 hours)

No idea why they didn’t offer me via MEL. As I said, I asked for it, and from my vantage point looking online, it looked available.

And yes - I suspect it was more likely to be innocent misunderstanding on the part of the agent rather than a deliberate misrepresentation, and perhaps that’s what was being confused here. Sounds like QF needs to do more training. But admitting they were wrong after the fact while telling me to wear the responsibility for the mistake is quite the position to take. Yet that’s the one they’ve steadfastly taken.

 

[serfty]

Ah wait - was this a schedule change?

The policy I posted covers schedule changes more than 72 hours in advance of travel.

If you want the policy for IRROPS/Disruption within 72 hours, here it is:

Schedule Change and Disruption Handling Guide | Agency Connect

The reality is that in effect it is the same policy.

 

[justinbrett]

The policy I posted covers schedule changes more than 72 hours in advance of travel.

If you want the policy for IRROPS/Disruption within 72 hours, here it is:

Schedule Change and Disruption Handling Guide | Agency Connect

I'm referring to the hotel (poorly structured post on my part).

I agree MEL should have have been offered for either schedule change or disruption. But there is no mention of hotels for schedule changes.

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

I'm referring to the hotel (poorly structured post on my part).

I agree MEL should have have been offered for either schedule change or disruption. But there is no mention of hotels for schedule changes.

It’s not clear to me either what policy the agent thought was relevant to my situation.

Regardless it’s not relevant: a business cannot hide behind any policy after one of its agents or employees has subsequently misrepresented that policy to a consumer. This is a core feature of the ACL.