"Airlines need to comply with consumer law" - ACCC

[TomVexille]

Thank you Tom for the welcome.

That is my argument right there, they DID NOT warn me. Yes they sent emails on the two dates they told me but those emails DID NOT CONTAIN ANY WARNING in them.
Apparently I have been told by some members on some that on occasions they do send a warning and the email is not labeled as WARNING it is just another Qantas email amongst hundreds and the warning is in the smallest type on the page hidden amongst larger type advertising. Fair Trading would consider this in itself to be what they term as NON TRANSPARENT.

On the 22nd December 2017 I forwarded the two emails to both Fair Trading and to Alan Joyce's office for their comment as to where the warnings are? To date no reply. Yes Qantas tell us that they sent warnings but it appears that the system has a glitch because for may that have had their points deleted they all claim that they never received a warning. Most people would have deleted old emails so they have no way of checking if they actually received a warning or it is just Qantas telling us this speil. I was fortunate enough to have the two emails in question still in my inbox and when i opened these emails I discovered that there was no warning. The proof of this lack of warning is in these two emails that I still have. The point I was making in my original post is that iif Qantas use the breaking of the terms as reason to delete the points should it not also take into account that they broke their own terms by not sending a warning. Placing that clause in the terms and conditions would give members a peace of mind knowing that if they were a bit lax they will get a warning. So in fact, Qantas is misleading us into a false sense of security.

Then you should have a good case. I'll have a look for a thread of another member who had the same situation.

Edit: Starting here is probably a good start @annoyed. Let us know how you go with QF

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Thank you Tom for the welcome.

That is my argument right there, they DID NOT warn me. Yes they sent emails on the two dates they told me but those emails DID NOT CONTAIN ANY WARNING in them.
Apparently I have been told by some members on some that on occasions they do send a warning and the email is not labeled as WARNING it is just another Qantas email amongst hundreds and the warning is in the smallest type on the page hidden amongst larger type advertising. Fair Trading would consider this in itself to be what they term as NON TRANSPARENT.

On the 22nd December 2017 I forwarded the two emails to both Fair Trading and to Alan Joyce's office for their comment as to where the warnings are? To date no reply. Yes Qantas tell us that they sent warnings but it appears that the system has a glitch because for may that have had their points deleted they all claim that they never received a warning. Most people would have deleted old emails so they have no way of checking if they actually received a warning or it is just Qantas telling us this speil. I was fortunate enough to have the two emails in question still in my inbox and when i opened these emails I discovered that there was no warning. The proof of this lack of warning is in these two emails that I still have. The point I was making in my original post is that iif Qantas use the breaking of the terms as reason to delete the points should it not also take into account that they broke their own terms by not sending a warning. Placing that clause in the terms and conditions would give members a peace of mind knowing that if they were a bit lax they will get a warning. So in fact, Qantas is misleading us into a false sense of security.

While I agree with you that Qantas can do better to notify people that their points are about to expire, this is not really the focus of the ACCC's investigation.

The ACCC is looking at the contract of carriage. Frequent Flyer membership is governed by a completely separate set of terms and conditions, and the two are not related.

FWIW, in taking away your points Qantas is not saying you have broken the terms and conditions of frequent flyer membership. They are simply saying they will delete points on inactive accounts after 18 months. You haven't done anything wrong, you just haven't used your account.

Now, whether or not that is fair (why *should* points be deleted after 18 months and not 36 months?), or whether sending notice (or not) buried in the fine print is fair are good questions. But nothing to do with the contract of carriage. In fact I wouldn't want the ACCC's limited time and resources for this particular project being side-tracked with those sorts of issues when the contract of carriage is a much bigger matter requiring attention.

 

[CPMaverick]

The EU laws would be a great place to start. Yes in theory fares could rise, but fares are also based on what people are willing to pay and what fills planes. Fares in the EU are competitive with the world (if not on the cheap side), so it is a failed argument to say the passenger rights have ruined fares there.

Besides, it isn't just a case of passenger fare increases redistributed to disrupted passengers (like insurance). It's a financial incentive for airlines to do the right thing.

 

[Musongman]

If airlines are basically retailers, so could you imagine a shop or department store selling you a product with all those negative and restrictive conditions? Sadly, the ACCC has proved to be a bit of a toothless dog on many issues, let's hope they do better this time.

 

[CPMaverick]

If airlines are basically retailers, so could you imagine a shop or department store selling you a product with all those negative and restrictive conditions? Sadly, the ACCC has proved to be a bit of a toothless dog on many issues, let's hope they do better this time.

But airlines are so much more complex than retailers. If you walked out with a brand new iPad and got home, opened the box, and there was just a note saying 'this iPad has been canceled' or 'this iPad has been rescheduled to a Kindle' you'd have a case with your retailer legally.

If the product or service you purchased is not as advertised the seller should be held accountable.

 

[siri]

It will be interesting to see what will happen since in Australia, its Qantas Chairman's lounge, there to bribe polies so that Qantas get away with bad contracts with the consumer.. You have no idea how polies are treated in Qantas planes and they bend over backwards to please them.
I remember long time ago upgrade to US was accepted but last minute cancelled and NEVER refunded the points...(they stopped that now)
Worst part is giving 3 months valid vouchers for their cough ups which are useless... Hope ACCC get their act and not visit Chairmans lounge ..(lol..)

 

[Dr Ralph]

Sadly, the ACCC has proved to be a bit of a toothless dog on many issues, let's hope they do better this time.

THIS!

Usually a lot of filibustering from the ACCC and not much practical benefit.

 

[UP4014]

It will be interesting to see what will happen since in Australia, its Qantas Chairman's lounge, there to bribe polies so that Qantas get away with bad contracts with the consumer.. You have no idea how polies are treated in Qantas planes and they bend over backwards to please them.
I remember long time ago upgrade to US was accepted but last minute cancelled and NEVER refunded the points...(they stopped that now)
Worst part is giving 3 months valid vouchers for their cough ups which are useless... Hope ACCC get their act and not visit Chairmans lounge ..(lol..)

I sat in the row in front Tony Burke and his staff on a QF flight two months ago and in Y I should should add. He wasn't treated any differently on board than anyone else. I'm sure he did come out of the CL but no big deal.

I had a cousin who was a federal Lib MP and it was the worst thing catching up with him as he treated everyone, including family, like the next election was just a week away and even stood up and waited by the door (restaurant, pub, home made no difference) to shake our hands as we left the lunch or dinner table. What a relief when he was voted out after 8 years.

I have no problem what so ever with not having them in the same space as me.

Matt

 

[timster]

Perhaps the ACCC could hear from Emily's Parents. IIRC we never heard the final outcome of that disgraceful debacle. As an exempler case of the downgrade compensation problem, I'm sure that QF would hate to see that one aired in a wider court of public opinion.

 

[JessicaTam]

Any semblance of EU261 would be welcome!

 

[JessicaTam]

ACCC should be congratulated for taking on the airlines in this way IMHO. We have all experienced the inequality of negotiating power that is a feature of dealing with airlines. I suggest something similar to the European compensation scheme (EC261/2004) could be introduced into Australia to re-balance the competing interests. AFF should consider making a submission (when the public are invited) including details (links) of the nightmares that are so often played out here. Compensation for downgrades is a topic that must be addressed.

There probably won't be any public submissions. The report was based on consumer complaints over the last 2 years. It is not the precursor to a wider enquiry.

From the last paragraph in the report:

In 2018 we will engage with the Airlines to discuss our expectations for change.

My bolding.

 

[ethernet]

ACCC should be congratulated for taking on the airlines in this way IMHO. We have all experienced the inequality of negotiating power that is a feature of dealing with airlines. I suggest something similar to the European compensation scheme (EC261/2004) could be introduced into Australia to re-balance the competing interests. AFF should consider making a submission (when the public are invited) including details (links) of the nightmares that are so often played out here. Compensation for downgrades is a topic that must be addressed.

The first thing ACCC should do is that airlines have to honestly report the real reason for any flight cancellations or delays in a timely visible manner. No generic excuses, with a huge fine for being inventive. I was on a Tiger flight once, and it was delayed. Certain time rules/breaks meant the planes hostie would be slightly over the allowed limit when landing. Of course they had no spare hosities so last flight canned.

The next this is global BENCHMARKING of fees and terms. As the EU had to step in, there is no way Australian airlines will play nice. I also believe airlines should be protected form AWOL gate passengers, who cost them a motza. I doubt ACCC has any expertise with revenue yield engines and incremental fleecing. That is opportunity costs of delayed actions need compensation.
And in the mix, severe penalties for customers who lie.

 

[Newtothegame]

A personal experience with this investigation - I had a poor experience flying Jetstar when they cancelled my flight, I rebooked with Virgin then I couldn't get a refund from Jetstar. Of course they didn't give me a refund, instead they gave me a travel voucher with 6 months expiry for the value of my airfare, and only then after hassling them via web chat. They specifically said I wasn't entitled to a refund or a travel credit, and that they were giving me the travel voucher only because they were being nice.

This was the first time I'd come across a company not providing a refund when they didn't provide the service so I complained to the Airline advocate - didn't receive a reply, then Fair Trading who said they couldn't help with airline complaints, and finally to the ACCC who simply replied with their generic 'we've received it and may do something if lots of ppl complain.' In the meantime I requested a chargeback with my bank - that went through so I ended up getting my refund despite what Jetstar wanted.

A few months later I got a call and someone from the ACCC wanted to talk through my experience...must be part of what the news release is referring to! My issue was minor in the scheme of things, I was just shocked that a large company would not comply with consumer law! Anyway, the ACCC people I talked to also appeared to share the view that airlines weren't treating consumers according to the law...

I hope they do clean up the industry's behaviour - it's well out of line with community expectations and most other industries!

https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Airlines Terms and Conditions Report.pdf

The ACCC released on 20 December a preliminary discussion paper on terms and conditions in airline contracts, although mainly in the area of refunds for delays and cancellations.

But they also have some thoughts on unfair cancellation fees, particularly where the customer has to pay large fees for cancellation, but the airline can do so without penalty.

The ACCC will talk with airlines in 2018 to better understand the issues.

The scope is slightly limited... it doesn't cover things such as refunds for downgrades. But the implications could mean that the way those refunds are calculated could also be in for a change.

Over all this is a step in the right direction I think, provided airlines don't give the ACCC the run-around!

 

[JessicaTam]

Welcome to AFF @Newtothegame. Appreciate the first hand input.

 

[Danger]

. . . A few months later I got a call and someone from the ACCC wanted to talk through my experience...must be part of what the news release is referring to! . . .

So the ACCC ignored your request for assistance but then when the tides turned the mob wanted you to assist them? Yep, money well spent.

 

[Newtothegame]

Well, they were the only ones out of the 3 bodies I contacted who actually were willing to engage with me and recognise that the airlines behaviour wasn’t acceptable!

I was happy after having vented to them

So the ACCC ignored your request for assistance but then when the tides turned the mob wanted you to assist them? Yep, money well spent.

W

 

[oz_mark]

So the ACCC ignored your request for assistance but then when the tides turned the mob wanted you to assist them? Yep, money well spent.

Pretty common for the ACCC not to involve itself in individual cases - they typically take action when the see an ongoing problem.

In my experience, the state base bodies are better for dealing with individual cases.

 

[burmans]

Would love to see the ombudsman given similar sort of teeth as FOS has.

 

[CMA222]

The Complaints Register maintained by NSW Fair Trading for March has been released and QF only had 12 issues. Jetstar does not get a mention for March which is a reduction from the prior couple of months.

NSW Fair Trading - Complaints Register

Click on the entry for QF and it should provide the breakdown.

 

[Quickstatus]

The Complaints Register maintained by NSW Fair Trading for March has been released and QF only had 12 issues. Jetstar does not get a mention for March which is a reduction from the prior couple of months.

NSW Fair Trading - Complaints Register

Click on the entry for QF and it should provide the breakdown.

Unfortunately not very granular about the details