PSA: Qantas Hotels drip pricing

[Captain Halliday]

A word of warning about drip pricing I've observed on Qantas Hotels.

Here's an example for a random date in February. For this example I'm selecting the flexible rate.



On the next screen, the price jumps significantly.



I called Qantas hotels and the agent referred the issue to their IT team.

Two days later I received an email saying the displayed price was only for two adults and that "...this is a know behavior of the system".

I replied asking if QF Hotels would honour the first displayed price and also pointed out that:
- My search was for 2 adults and 1 child and the first displayed price (as in the example above) was clearly listed as being for 3 guests.
- While this may be a known behaviour for the QF Hotels IT department, is is materially misleading for customers and amounts to drip pricing.
- Drip pricing is unlawful under Australian Consumer Law.

QF hotels replied refusing to honour the first displayed price. They said they do not have direct control over the pricing on their website and even blamed the hotel.

For the record this drip pricing is not happening with all properties I've searched, but it shouldn't be happening at all.

 

[Cloud9]

Bless. We expect any arm of QF to behave honestly.

Get rid of VH and half the execs and we stand a chance.

P.S. Accor? Think most of us on here would book direct via ALL

 

[ChrisMars]

Would be interesting to check is the same behaviour (for same hotel, date and guests) happens on other ota. Isn't Qantas using expedia inventory? If same happens with expedia, then Qantas would inherit from that.

 

[Captain Halliday]

P.S. Accor? Think most of us on here would book direct via ALL

Normally, yes. But I have a $100 voucher expiring soon and there's virtually no benefits with Mantra anyway.

 

[markis10]

Save $100 and book direct

 

[Flyfrequently]

Normally, yes. But I have a $100 voucher expiring soon and there's virtually no benefits with Mantra anyway.

Checked Accor + @Captain Halliday - somewhere in between QH & ALL
But understand wanting to use $100 voucher

Save $100 and book direct

View attachment 470615

Your ALL pricing is cheaper than A+ @markis10

 

[offshore171]

ACCC page on Drip Pricing.

Price displays

Businesses must display clear and accurate prices, and must not mislead consumers about their prices. There are specific laws about how businesses must display their prices.

www.accc.gov.au

Extra charges that can't be quantified​

The total price does not need to include extra charges that can't be quantified (converted into a dollar amount) at the time of stating the price of a product or service.

Example​

Holiday serviced apartments provider advertises its rooms as ‘from $117 per night’. The business also charges a $7 per person cleaning fee. Until someone makes a booking, the business doesn’t know how many people will be staying under that booking. As such, the business is unable to calculate the per night charge inclusive of the cleaning fee when making general advertisements of the apartments’ prices.

However, given at least one person would be staying under any booking, the business should include one $7 cleaning fee in the advertised price. As soon as the business becomes aware of how many people are staying under a booking, the business must inform the customer during the booking process of the full total price. The full cleaning fee will be able to be calculated at that point.

 

[Daver6]

ACCC page on Drip Pricing.

Price displays

Businesses must display clear and accurate prices, and must not mislead consumers about their prices. There are specific laws about how businesses must display their prices.

www.accc.gov.au

Extra charges that can't be quantified​

The total price does not need to include extra charges that can't be quantified (converted into a dollar amount) at the time of stating the price of a product or service.

Example​

Holiday serviced apartments provider advertises its rooms as ‘from $117 per night’. The business also charges a $7 per person cleaning fee. Until someone makes a booking, the business doesn’t know how many people will be staying under that booking. As such, the business is unable to calculate the per night charge inclusive of the cleaning fee when making general advertisements of the apartments’ prices.

However, given at least one person would be staying under any booking, the business should include one $7 cleaning fee in the advertised price. As soon as the business becomes aware of how many people are staying under a booking, the business must inform the customer during the booking process of the full total price. The full cleaning fee will be able to be calculated at that point.

Surely that example wouldn't apply if in the search criteria you've entered 3 people and it shows 3 people when the price is displayed, just like for the OP?

 

[offshore171]

Surely that example wouldn't apply if in the search criteria you've entered 3 people and it shows 3 people when the price is displayed, just like for the OP?

I posted it for context without comment either way.

If you want my opinion, I think it likely supports OP's position.

 

[TripleB]

Sadly drip feed pricing is rife across the travel industry. Just look at the Sydney airport parking website.

I'm sure that their IT system can't quote the all in price including card surcharge on the first screen and they don't want to lose the card surcharge margin ... So the compromise they have reached is to just slap disclaimers about the surcharge over the web page.

It's patently unlawful and I'm sure they know it.

 

[MELso]

I just had a play around with that hotel. It seems that the site shows the 2 person rate but the next screen includes the child too, as the correct price is quoted with 2 people.

 

[offshore171]

I just had a play around with that hotel. It seems that the site shows the 2 person rate but the next screen includes the child too, as the correct price is quoted with 2 people.

I guess the most important thing is that there is an option to back out before you commit after the "final" price is displayed.

But still, people do their price comparisons off the price shown on the first screen.

This may lead you to click a particular hotel because the price looks better than the other options.,

Then they up the price on the next screen (despite already having all of your search parameters at the previous screen). I guess they would argue that it says "from" and the user still has the option to change things like dates, # of pax, breakfast, parking, refundable, rollaway bed etc.

 

[sudoer]

Sadly drip feed pricing is rife across the travel industry. Just look at the Sydney airport parking website.

I'm sure that their IT system can't quote the all in price including card surcharge on the first screen and they don't want to lose the card surcharge margin ... So the compromise they have reached is to just slap disclaimers about the surcharge over the web page.

It's patently unlawful and I'm sure they know it.

While I don't want to defend Sydney Airport, I'm not following the logic on this.

The surcharge isn't fixed - it's 0.9% for Visa/MC, 1% for PayPal, and 1.6% for Amex. How are they supposed to quote an all-in price until they know what payment method you'll use?

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see how it's unlawful.

 

[TripleB]

While I don't want to defend Sydney Airport, I'm not following the logic on this.

The surcharge isn't fixed - it's 0.9% for Visa/MC, 1% for PayPal, and 1.6% for Amex. How are they supposed to quote an all-in price until they know what payment method you'll use?

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see how it's unlawful.

Because the lowest price you can buy the parking for is 0.9% more than that shown on the first screen.

 

[sudoer]

Because the lowest price you can buy the parking for is 0.9% more than that shown on the first screen.

So they should increase the fee shown on the first page by 0.9%, then levy an additional 0.1% and 0.7% at the next screen for PayPal and Amex?

 

[TripleB]

So they should increase the fee shown on the first page by 0.9%, then levy an additional 0.1% and 0.7% at the next screen for PayPal and Amex?

Exactly.

Or if they were to offer a single (but generally accessible) fee free payment option then that would be ok too.

If you can't get the good or service for the first price shown to you then it's drip feed pricing.