Emirates Ordered To Pay $8468 USD For Failing To Deliver Advertised Quality Of Business Class

[Andy72]

Emirates pays Tauranga man $13,555 over 'misleading and deceptive' advertising of business class seats

Airline's business class advertising 'misleading and deceptive', Disputes Tribunal finds.

www.stuff.co.nz

 

[Quickstatus]

Australia has similar laws here

 

[Andy72]

Australia has similar laws here

Haven't seen the various state bodies (VCAT or QCAT) enforce fare greater transgressions though.

 

[MELso]

She'll be right, mate! It's Straya!

(But yes, NZ and Australian law are similar, but there's nothing like EU261.)

 

[Mattg]

This part is interesting:

Emirates claimed the service he had was only a 5% reduction in quality compared to the service it advertised, and had offered a refund of $786.

It told the tribunal that the seats Morgan and his wife received reclined to 166.1 degrees, rather than lying completely flat, but it said: “To the ordinary air-traveller the seat made available is equivalent to a lie-flat seat”.

 

[justinbrett]

If I recall the NZ covid refund conditions were much less favourable than those here.

 

[Danger]

Thrilled to see an example of the consumer prevailing.

There was a thread (or maybe just a few posts) on AFF many years ago about Qantas's billboard advertising at Perth domestic airport when it was running 747s to Sydney. There was a picture of a passenger fast asleep on what looked to be a Skybed II when the 747s Qantas was running had Skybed I. This Emirates cases seems similar given the article references Emirates saying the fine print gave it the right to sub aircrafts, yet apparently the inferior product was far more common than an odd occurrence.

 

[Gold Member]

Emirates Fined For Misleading Business Class Advertising

Emirates has to pay a passenger over $8,000, after he accused the airline of deceptive and misleading advertising of its business class.

onemileatatime.com

I can’t imagine this ever happening in Australia with the cozy ties between Qantas and the Pollies and the lack of a truly effective and empowered regulatory body.

 

[justinbrett]

Emirates Fined For Misleading Business Class Advertising

Emirates has to pay a passenger over $8,000, after he accused the airline of deceptive and misleading advertising of its business class.

onemileatatime.com

I can’t imagine this ever happening in Australia with the cozy ties between Qantas and the Pollies and the lack of a truly effective and empowered regulatory body.

Already discussed here.

Even the Kiwis seem to have better consumer protection when it comes to airlines

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/131468446/emirates-pays-tauranga-man-13555-over-misleading-and-deceptive-advertising-of-business-class-seats

www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au

NZ with its state owned airline had worse consumer protection during covid than AU with QF.

 

[jpp42]

I suppose this was an issue that would be hard for the airline to claim the matter was part of the Montreal Convention and thus not in the jurisdiction of the Disputes Tribunal, like Qantas has been able to do in Australia's *CAT's in a few recent cases. I did find another case where the Disputes Tribunal's jurisdiction over Montreal Convention matters was denied in a lost baggage case ( Air New Zealand baggage dispute - Insurance law in New Zealand ). So certainly there are situations in which the Montreal Convention can essentially override other NZ law (as the Montreal Convention is legislated in NZ by the Civil Aviation Act 1990).

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I suppose this was an issue that would be hard for the airline to claim the matter was part of the Montreal Convention and thus not in the jurisdiction of the Disputes Tribunal, like Qantas has been able to do in Australia's *CAT's in a few recent cases. I did find another case where the Disputes Tribunal's jurisdiction over Montreal Convention matters was denied in a lost baggage case ( Air New Zealand baggage dispute - Insurance law in New Zealand ). So certainly there are situations in which the Montreal Convention can essentially override other NZ law (as the Montreal Convention is legislated in NZ by the Civil Aviation Act 1990).

An international treaty will usually override local law, if the country is a signatory to the international law. Or sometimes the treaty is incorporated into local laws, and will therefore apply and override other laws.

But Montreal doesn’t cover advertising! So no apparent conflicts there!

While we also have the ‘*’we may substitue aircraft exceptions in Australia, I think the distinction in the NZ case was that the plane with the new seats never flew there… so it wasn’t a case of substitution. It was a case of never being offered at all.

 

[dvb2000]

If "angle flat" was equivalent to the average traveller, then there would be no benefit or advantage to upgrading to lie-flat, so the airlines have been wasting their money doing it and promoting it as an advantage!

Emirates couldn't lie (flat) in bed!

 

[drron]

Well I may be tempted to see how good Australia is with emirates misleading business class advertising. We are flying SIN-DXB-FRA with them this Saturday. We bought business class sale fares which it does say comes without lounge access and only 1 23 KG suitcase -no problem as we have now refined our art and only take 1 such bag for the 2 of us. However it is only after you have bought the fare does it tell you you can't select a seat until 48 hours before flying.
Right on the 24 hour mark I checkede and only 2 J seats available for selection on their 777 300. 8E and 10E. Kept checking hoping something else became available but those have now been assigned to us with a notation Can not be changed.

 

[Danger]

Does the advertising specifically state you can select your seat at anytime? If not, I'm not sure how it's misleading advertising.

 

[Anna]

An international treaty will usually override local law, if the country is a signatory to the international law. Or sometimes the treaty is incorporated into local laws, and will therefore apply and override other laws.

Not how it works.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Not how it works.

How does it work?

 

[dairyfloss]

Luckily, Qantas would never do such a thing…

 

[drron]

Does the advertising specifically state you can select your seat at anytime? If not, I'm not sure how it's misleading advertising.

It does and is also in the description of business class on their website and I have a screenshot of it.

 

[drron]

So as soon as a fellow appeared at enquires at the EK check in we went over and talked to him. First problem was to get my QFF number into the booking. Initially it also told him my number was wrong but I had the card on my app. Finally he was able to get the number accepted

Then Mrsdrron came up with a brilliant reason why we had to sit together. She told him her arm was just out of a sling from her fractured shoulder so I had to do a lot for her. Before looking at the seat map he said that it was a full flight but as soon as he looked he said excuse me I need to get permission for a change so went and talked to a woman in an Emirates uniform. She nodded as he finished talking and he came back and said we are now in 6D and E. So all is well.

 

[justinbrett]

Luckily, Qantas would never do such a thing…

View attachment 319464

This is all getting a bit silly, are we expecting every single mention of business class to have route and aircraft specific versions tailored to the user?

I think some common sense is required.