Strict check in times

[Dave Noble]

Perhaps you've forgotten the example that I gave, to which you replied. In the case where the direct debit is taken from my account on the same day that my pay is put into that same account; NAB would process all debits first, and then process all desposits second. So for a period of about 5 to 10 minutes the account is overdrawn and the overdraw fee is changed.

The fee is charged solely because of the banks actions and is beyond my control. I have made sure there are adequate funds!

If the bank account is that close to issue, then can arrange an authorised overdraft facility and then there will be no penalty fees.

Dave

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Perhaps you've forgotten the example that I gave, to which you replied. In the case where the direct debit is taken from my account on the same day that my pay is put into that same account; NAB would process all debits first, and then process all desposits second. So for a period of about 5 to 10 minutes the account is overdrawn and the overdraw fee is changed.

The fee is charged solely because of the banks actions and is beyond my control. I have made sure there are adequate funds!

no. I was just being cheeky

(of course the argument is that you should have sufficient to cover all debits before any deposits - especially as you know this is how your bank processes payments...)

 

[medhead]

no. I was just being cheeky

(of course the argument is that you should have sufficient to cover all debits before any deposits - especially as you know this is how your bank processes payments...)

Ahh fair enough

I only really understood the bank processes after the first $30 hit.

If the bank account is that close to issue, then can arrange an authorised overdraft facility and then there will be no penalty fees.

Dave

Good advice. I did think this was setup but apparently whatever i signed was only at the banks discretion. So anyone trying to set this up make sure it will work as expected.

 

[ozbeachbabe]

From what I've seen serial offenders appear to be families travelling with infants and small children plus all the associated paraphernalia that goes with it. Saw one family arrive at checkin just as flight was closing with 2 infants and 14 pieces of luggage (they were moving interstate).

They were still accepted however when they were told they needed to get to the airport earlier they retorted "can't you see we're travelling with 2 infants". Narrow minded people that I'm sure wouldn't feel the slightest bit guilty if the flight was delayed because of them and totally oblivious to any inconvenience they may cause other pax.

It took at least 10 minutes to check all their stuff in after which they had to go and drop some of the items at oversize baggage then go and pay excess baggage and were still there when everyone else had boarded the plane. They eventually boarded and the flight just managed to depart on time by a hare's breath.

Other latecomers are people dropping of unaccompanied minors who never have the paperwork completed "I already gave that information to Flight Centre when I booked". Hardly surprising there - FC wouldn't want to spend any more time helping a customer filling out mandatory info.

Then they don't have the address (mandatory info & crew will not board them without this) of the person who's picking up the child at the other end. On numerous occasions when they try to call that person for the details their mobile phone is out of credit.

If they have been booked as a UM they will have been preallocated a seat already however if the parent has done the booking over the internet (disregarding the links to call the airline for UM bookings) they will appear as an adult and invariably end up with a middle seat between 2 blokes.

The end result is pax already checked in have to be moved around so the UM can be sat next to a female or other UM due to duty of care requirement for kids under 15 whether UM or YP (young pax).

The 30 minute cut off time is to allow bags enough time to go down the conveyor belt from checkin to the baggage area and to be xrayed then to be loaded on to the trolleys and taken to the plane to be loaded. If it's a widebodied aircraft eg B767 or A330/320/321 the bags go into containers which take longer to be loaded onto plane.

The leading hand then has to call the load controller or ops to do the readback to ensure a/c has been loaded correctly ie not out of trim. From time to time containers will have to be unloaded from one locker into another for trim purposes so there is absolutely no way you would want baggage close off less than 30 minutes. In some cases 30 minutes is not enough.

 

[NYCguy]

The end result is pax already checked in have to be moved around so the UM can be sat next to a female or other UM due to duty of care requirement for kids under 15 whether UM or YP (young pax).

This could be overcome by reviewing the policy that assumes all men are pedophiles and/or rapists. Just saying is all.

 

[drron]

This could be overcome by reviewing the policy that assumes all men are pedophiles and/or rapists. Just saying is all.

I'm not sure what DJ and QF think i am as both often put me with the unaccompanied kids.

 

[oz_mark]

The end result is pax already checked in have to be moved around so the UM can be sat next to a female or other UM due to duty of care requirement for kids under 15 whether UM or YP (young pax).

Duty of care my a###. Assuming all males are molestors assumes all men are guilty and ignores a number of legal cases where women have been the purportrators.

 

[Dave Noble]

Duty of care my a###. Assuming all males are molestors assumes all men are guilty and ignores a number of legal cases where women have been the purportrators.

Absolutely. This is not a duty of care but a reprehensible presumption of guilt.

Dave

 

[fortymilliondaggers]

Interest is one thing and when an overdraft has been agreed with the bank, the charges are fairly reasonable. The high costs come in when people just decide to use the banks money without approval.

If the option is there not to be able to go overdrawn with payments, then if it has been left enabled, can hardly complain if the fees are charged

NAB did not provide the option to disable overdraft on request. I was caught short once and explicitly asked for it to be disabled. I wonder whether these changes have come about because somebody tested this practice. I saw the oferdraft facility and associated fees and charges as a line of credit with punative interest rate and wondered why I had to sign massive forms na dprovide ID to approve direct debit for a bill, but this practice was (and still is) allowed.

 

[ozbeachbabe]

UM's seated next to males

This could be overcome by reviewing the policy that assumes all men are pedophiles and/or rapists. Just saying is all.

Duty of care my a###. Assuming all males are molestors assumes all men are guilty and ignores a number of legal cases where women have been the purportrators.

Absolutely. This is not a duty of care but a reprehensible presumption of guilt.

Guys don't shoot me I'm only the messenger here but maybe it's time somebody queried that policy with the legal boffins at QF.

I can understand parents not wanting a child seated next to a rowdy bunch of people (irrespective of gender of players) whether they be a footy team or a netball team.

Regardless of what your opinion is of airline policy, there are parents (not just mums, but dads too) who do ask that their child be seated next to a female so I guess you would need to ask them their reason.

I don't want this thread to turn into a slanging match and I'm not expressing my personal opinion here - just telling you how it is that's all.

Cheers Oz

 

[Dave Noble]

Re: UM's seated next to males

Regardless of what your opinion is of airline policy, there are parents (not just mums, but dads too) who do ask that their child be seated next to a female so I guess you would need to ask them their reason.

I don't want this thread to turn into a slanging match and I'm not expressing my personal opinion here - just telling you how it is that's all.

I don't deny that it is policy , nor wanting a slanging match, but the putting it forward by QF as being necessary as a duty of care is wrong and insulting

Dave

 

[drron]

Is it actual policy though to seat unaccompanied kids beside females.As I said before more than once on both QF and DJ I have been seated with the kids.One QF flight SYD-BNE about 12 months ago the 2 back rows consisted of drron and 11 kids.
Never been asked or checked out as far as i know though I do hold a blue card for what it's worth.

 

[ozbeachbabe]

Complaint letter to QF re UM policy

Just googled this on the subject of UM's etc which is a complaint letter to QF about same and the QF's response to it.

Dads on the Air ::

and a related article from a 2005 NZ Herald

Ban on men sitting next to children - National - NZ Herald News

Oz

 

[drron]

Re: Complaint letter to QF re UM policy

Just googled this on the subject of UM's etc which is a complaint letter to QF about same and the QF's response to it.




and a related article from a 2005 NZ Herald



Oz

So QF think i am an old woman :shock:
On not one of the flights have I been asked to move.So the policy is certainly not always enforced.Though those references were 4 years ago.

 

[harvyk]

Yeah, this is one of those policies which really annoys me...

We just know that if the roles where reversed (ie a ban on women but not men sitting next to unaccompanied kids) we've have had just about every feminist group in the world jumping up and down, and putting QF (and NZ \ BA) onto no fly lists.

But because the policy makes bad assumptions against males, but not females, it is accepted as ok.

FWIW, I've also heard of cases where airlines have attempted to stop kids sitting next to their own dad's. I'll see if I can find the article about it.

 

[NM]

Re: Complaint letter to QF re UM policy

So QF think i am an old woman :shock:
On not one of the flights have I been asked to move.So the policy is certainly not always enforced.Though those references were 4 years ago.

Perhaps having Dr in your booking ref is what triggers you as "acceptable" and "trustworthy"?

 

[drron]

Re: Complaint letter to QF re UM policy

Perhaps having Dr in your booking ref is what triggers you as "acceptable" and "trustworthy"?

Could be.reading the papers though you would think it should be a black mark

 

[Flashback]

Re: Complaint letter to QF re UM policy

Could be.reading the papers though you would think it should be a black mark

Hi everybody, I'm Dr Nick

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Given that the strict check-in time has survived this long in Victoria suggests that, maybe, it is not the evil term some here portray it to be

No it doesn't mean this - just no one has yet taken the issue to dispute.

Consumer Affairs does not initiate action in specific cases, but will respond or provide advice (which may mean taking the matter to an appropriate forum) once a complaint has been made.

Again - it's not really the 45 min check-in rule per se, but rather the 'no refunds' which would be challenged.