No Show Fee?

[opusman]

Clearly it is a breach of contract by the passenger.

On the contrary I still say this is not clear at all. Unless the contract actually says that the passenger agrees to complete all flight segments booked, then failing to show for a flight isn't a breach of anything. Just calling it a return flight doesn't mean there's a contractual obligation to return, and the pricing of the flight is entirely a matter for the airline.

Show me the contract!

 

[harvyk]

Thanks for stating there will need to be some process - the airline ncan't simply bill your credit card.

The above taken into account - I'm still interested to know on what basis the airline can make the claim.

Clearly it is a breach of contract by the passenger.

But what remedy?

Damages could be payable if the airline can show a loss.

But what, exactly, is the loss?

I don't think they can. It'd need to be stated in the terms and conditions, plus they would need to make the traveller aware of the costs they will be charged if they do not complete the return trip.

Companies can't just charge someone any amount they feel like because you didn't use their product in the method they like. Any penalty would need to be pre-agreed upon at the time of booking. I would also dare say that any additional fees like this would need to be specifically brought to the travellers attention, eg a separate form which needs to be signed. Simply hiding such things in a single clause on a random page probably wouldn't cut it if the consumer ever challenged the validity of the airlines claim.

 

[medhead]

On the contrary I still say this is not clear at all. Unless the contract actually says that the passenger agrees to complete all flight segments booked, then failing to show for a flight isn't a breach of anything. Just calling it a return flight doesn't mean there's a contractual obligation to return, and the pricing of the flight is entirely a matter for the airline.

Show me the contract!

In fact the only contractual obligation on the passenger is to pay the fare. The airline offers to fly the pax if the pax pay the airline, the pax accepts the offer and pays the airline. That is how a contract is formed and it only relies on the passenger paying the airline for the service. there is not obligation to say that the passenger actaully has to get value for the money paid, which wsould include not using the return flight, IMO. So as you say it is not a clear breech of contract at all.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Any penalty would need to be pre-agreed upon at the time of booking.

I think you mean damages )) but I'm wondering if a methodology for working them out could also be acceptable rather than the fixed sum?

Penalty clauses are, of course, prohibited in contract and any such clause will be deemed null and void.

Any clause purporting to be an estimation of damages will have to be assessed as to whether it is out of all proportion to the loss acutally suffered (= penalty) or whether it is in fact a genuine attempt to estimate the loss (in which case it will be liquidated damaged).

Asking for $16000 (as in Dave N's example if it were to ever occur) may well be considered a penalty. But there are all sort of issues associated with this, just one of which is establishing the existance of a contract and a clause which says the passenger must pay in the event all flight sectors are not taken.

If there is no such clause then the airline could still bring an action for breach. But again, on what basis would it be doing do and loss could it show?

One way perhaps that this might form part of the contract is if there is a clause somewhere saying that the fares rules form part of the contract and conditions of carriage. That seems possible.

I you can satisfy all of the above, then one of the determining features of a penalty is that is should have the intention of coercing the defaulting party into completing the agreement. You can see how the threat to collect $16000 could be seen as such.

However, what is the benefit/loss to the airline??