Does Qantas maintain its aircraft??

[Oneworldplus2]

I completely understand where you're coming from.

The most recent similar unacceptable experience aboard a QF flight was on QF11 (SYD - LAX) during A380gate in November last year. We were switched onto a B744 (VH-OJD out of interest before she was punted to SYD-PER duties so no Y+ point upgrade for me ) and the condition / cleanliness of the Y cabin was appalling:

1. The headrest on my seat came off when i tried to adjust it before the flight took off;
2. There was a brown liquid stain down the centre bulkhead under the stairs;
3. The entire toilet was coming away from the wall in the bathroom - it was completely loose and could be moved to reveal parts of the aircraft that shouldn't be seen at 30K';
4. The fluro window side cabin light in my row flickered constantly while on;
5. My IFE screen had at least 100 dead pixels; and
6. The same dust all over the windows, ceiling etc... as in your photos.

Sounds like a familiar story on the QF 747's......

(I had the same in bold above)
+AVOD controls beyond used
+ Armrest stuffed (below)...

View attachment 3398

View attachment 3399

The QF A380's on the other hand, love it! (until they get old...lol)

 

[goldy]

But how is that a breach of contract? Ok so you had an aircraft that had no been cleaned well. has it happened since?

I still fail to see how you can "hold them accountable" what do you expect to get out of it?

it is a breach of contract because despite the general consensus on this forum, the contract of carriage is not simply to get you from A to B. I do accept that this is the fundamental term in the contract, and as it turns out, its not even on the day you book or in the class of travel booked. I have explained the concept of implied terms of contract to death and dont understand what about it is so difficult to understand.

when you book a flight with Qantas, you get:
Travel from A to B, ideally on the day you actually want.
FF points
SC
Lounge access (if eligible)
Food
IFE
Drinks
Use of toilets
Priority luggage (if eligible)...

This list is not exhaustive, but is indicative of what is included in your airfare. NONE of this is in the conditions of carriage, nor is it written in any contract that exists between you and the airline. The reason you get it, is because Qantas tell you you will. The fact that you got it on previous flights "of the same kind" means it is an implied term in the contract, UNLESS you are subsequently advised that X, Y or Z will no longer be provided. When you don't get the things that you ordinarily would, it is a breach of contract. For those who are legally minded, there are a number of remedies at law, for such instances such as orders for specific performance, nullifying the contract ab initio (from the start), or awarding damages for contracts whose terms have not been performed. There is another concept called specific performance, which in this case would mean that qantas has met the majority of the contract but has failed to meet it in its entirety. As an example, if you contract a builder to build you a house, but he doesnt paint the walls, it doesnt mean you get the house for free. Youd pay for the work done, and be compensated for the work not done (in this case, the cost to have someone else paint your walls). Going back to QF, they have not met all of the terms of the contract and therefore i expect to be compensated. I know this might come across as slightly cough, but the fact is airlines in general are quick to pounce when something goes wrong from your end. So now that something has gone wrong from their end, im going to treat them with the same indiffernce. im all for give and take, but the problem is, airlines are all take take take.

As for what i expect to get out of it... that is the million dollar question and to be frank with you, i really dont know. clearly there is more to the story that i wont get into on here, but one way or another, they will pay. financially or otherwise.

 

[goldy]

Sounds like a familiar story on the QF 747's......

(I had the same in bold above)
+AVOD controls beyond used
+ Armrest stuffed (below)...

View attachment 3398

View attachment 3399

those pictures are just outrageous!! If QF are still wondering why they are losing market share, theres your bloody answer!!!!

 

[anat0l]

As for what i expect to get out of it... that is the million dollar question and to be frank with you, i really dont know. clearly there is more to the story that i wont get into on here, but one way or another, they will pay. financially or otherwise.

I don't get this part. You want some resolution from this that mediation cannot provide but litigation will. You've tried to convince us it is not about money; after all, you did reject a compensatory voucher.

But you have no idea what you want and / or expect to get out of this? For a person whose conviction has been clearly exemplified through this thread, your indifferent response here befuddles me.

BTW you're not Tony Abbott, are you?



----------
This anat0l content, if it must be known,
Was sent via Aust Freq Fly app, but not from an iPhone.

 

[harvyk]

The fact that you got it on previous flights "of the same kind" means it is an implied term in the contract,

excellent, i can now sue qantas because i got some j op ups from red-e-deals on transpac services and then one day it stopped...

(we'll ignore the fact all i had paid was for a y seat)

 

[docjames]

goldy - will you please post the finding from your legal action? Would you clarify if you are taking legal action as that's what you seem to be implying?

 

[NM]

[Mod hat]
Robust debate is good, and generally encouraged. But please concentrate on arguing the point and not personally attacking other members. This serves as a general warning and further personal attacks in this thread will result in earning the poster an infraction.

Note that some posts have been edited, and a few deleted, to remove the personal attacks while retaining the arguement content.
[/Mod Hat]

 

[goldy]

I don't get this part. You want some resolution from this that mediation cannot provide but litigation will. You've tried to convince us it is not about money; after all, you did reject a compensatory voucher.

But you have no idea what you want and / or expect to get out of this? For a person whose conviction has been clearly exemplified through this thread, your indifferent response here befuddles me.

BTW you're not Tony Abbott, are you?

Hahahah, no im def not TA....

To briefly explain the situation..... The DFW duty manager promised me a confirmed J upgrade (from Y+) on the flight home. When I arrived at DFW he advised me that he was unable to honor the upgrade due to the flight diverting to AKL and being full in J BUT he was willing to overnight me in DFW and send me the next day via LAX on AA (in Y) and confirmed J on QF94 direct to MEL instead of via BNE on QF8. I saw in my profile that the booking had been amended to confirm the J upgrade with seat 21A allocated. When I arrived at LAX, I was told that I would be flying home in Y because the flight was full. I was not happy with this and was given an ultimatum, to fly in Y or be offloaded, so I offloaded. QF did not cover my expenses in LAX ( as id self offloaded) and confirmed me the next day in Y with a courtesy space available upgrade to J. At the gate, I was upgraded to Y+ as per my original booking, but i turned it down as i was over the whole drama. on the flight, the aircraft was equally dirty as the first flight had been.

so long story short... i wanted the upgrade that was promised. I know that this is no longer possible, but from my perspective, it has been a comedy of errors that QF could have avoided by providing what they had promised. That is why this is not about the money (excluding my expenses in DFW and LAX, which they have subsequently agreed to refund) but rather a matter of principle. the offer is now a $600 travel voucher, that i really dont care for, and a return space available one class upgrade, wheras I want a confirmed J upgrade on my next flight as promised ex DFW. the problem is that i doubt im going to use the voucher or fly Qantas, so what "value" do I put on this upgrade? clearly its slightly unrealistic to expect a credit of $6000 which is the "value" between a Y and a J seat, so what do u propose is a fair settlement??

 

[goldy]

excellent, i can now sue qantas because i got some j op ups from red-e-deals on transpac services and then one day it stopped...

(we'll ignore the fact all i had paid was for a y seat)

surely i dont have to remind you that a j op up is not an ordinary part of your Y ticket, unlike the luggage, food, IFE, toilet use etc as explained in a previous post. I also doubt you got them consecutively, meaning you had no right to come to expect them, like the benefits mentioned above.

I paid for a Y+ seat and was happy with my Y+ seat, but i wanted and believe i had every right to expect a clean aircraft. i have never expected a J upgrade, so please stop being so ridiculous. Having said that, if you want to sue them...that is your prerogative and if you feel like you have a good chance of success, then all power to you!

 

[straitman]

Vaild point. But don't tell me they cant find a few hours in a given month to give the aircraft a bit of a spring clean.

This is no different to you checking in to a hotel room, where the bed sheets haven't been changed and the bathroom hasn't been cleaned. Would you stay in it or hightail it back down to reception and ask to be moved into a clean room?? the only problem with QF is that you are at 37,000ft above the middle of the pacific, but this IMO makes it even more important to get things right!!

Just for a change I am not disagreeing with the principle of your argument but I really think your example is flawed.

 

[harvyk]

I also doubt you got them consecutively, meaning you had no right to come to expect them, like the benefits mentioned above.

i did get them consecutively, a few people may remember that next to ff program in my aff profile I had "QF - and for some reason they really love me" written for quite some time... It was quite a surprise (although not unexpected) the day I was forced to go back to the back of the bus again.

but this is getting way ot...

long and short is i don't think QF have a case to answer, they nevr promised anything beyond transport in the contract, at best you could hope for is a refund of the purchase price of the ticket and the ability to cancel anyother booked tickets without charge, and even then I doubt it as they still delivered in the important part of the contact.

of course the question which must be asked in a case like this, what does your lawyer stand to gain?

 

[Happy Trails]

Goldy,

While I reckon you're pretty much flogging a dead horse, I like the way you've stated your case, stood your ground - and seen off the school bully.
Keep up the good work.

 

[goldy]

i did get them consecutively, a few people may remember that next to ff program in my aff profile I had "QF - and for some reason they really love me" written for quite some time... It was quite a surprise (although not unexpected) the day I was forced to go back to the back of the bus again.

Lucky you!! but like i said, i dont think any reasonable person could expect that the upgrade was a normal part of the airfare purchased. I find it interesting (note: contradictory) that you were surprised, yet expected to to find yourself at the back of the bus eventually. I would have thought youd be surprised every time you got the upgrade rather then when you didnt, but thats just me.....

long and short is i don't think QF have a case to answer, they nevr promised anything beyond transport in the contract, at best you could hope for is a refund of the purchase price of the ticket and the ability to cancel anyother booked tickets without charge, and even then I doubt it as they still delivered in the important part of the contact.

Im not after a full or partial refund as I wouldnt think that was fair. They did meet the bulk of the contract, in getting me from A-B and back to A, but IMO they did not meet the contract in entirety. That is why courts exist, to make decisions on contract "disputes" which are in effect a difference of opinion.

 

[goldy]

Goldy,

While I reckon you're pretty much flogging a dead horse, I like the way you've stated your case, stood your ground - and seen off the school bully.
Keep up the good work.

Thanks very much for your support. Whilst you may be right regarding the "dead horse", if you believe in something, you need to fight for it.

 

[Oneworldplus2]

Thanks very much for your support. Whilst you may be right regarding the "dead horse", if you believe in something, you need to fight for it.

(Priority Boarding...lol)

 

[goldy]

I really think your example is flawed.

How so? Im asking because im interested in trying to understand the situation from others perspective.

 

[goldy]

(Priority Boarding...lol)

Please don't get me started on that too.....lol

 

[drewbles]

If you read the response properly ( read the second line: "you have every right to reject any product that is not as advertised"), you'd have seen that I said in no uncertain terms that any misrepresentation is NOT OK and I went on to explain that the impact of the misrepresentation increases as the value of the transaction increases. I also went on to say that just because misrepresentation appears to be rife in the advertising world, does not IMO, make it ok. for burgers, for cars for airline seats... NOTHING!!

Why do you insist on continually taking things out of context? if you have nothing informative to add, could I politely ask you to keep your opinions to yourself!

With all due respect, you have the right to not frequent Hungry Jacks or McDonalds. They present a product, advertised, and deliver it looking differently. Everyone knows that. You don't have to eat there.

Not out of context, but if you don't like it, spend your cash elsewhere. Simple really. I fail to see how getting a lawyer involved for some dust and dirt is going to do much here (or am I out of line...).

 

[goldy]

With all due respect, you have the right to not frequent Hungry Jacks or McDonalds. They present a product, advertised, and deliver it looking differently. Everyone knows that. You don't have to eat there.

Not out of context, but if you don't like it, spend your cash elsewhere. Simple really. I fail to see how getting a lawyer involved for some dust and dirt is going to do much here (or am I out of line...).

With all du respect, I didnt bring up McDonalds or Burger King.

And yes, after this episode, i will be spending my money elsewhere, but it begs the question.... You buy your ticket in good faith, and in the case of international, you don't actually see what you've bought until you have "left" the country. In my situation, where "some dirt and dust" is not agreeable, what do you suggest? That I offload, ask for a refund (which they'd probably knock back) and then have to book with another airline at the last minute and pay top dollar? or do I attempt to enforce my existing contract with the airline in question?

In any case, I did not enter the aircraft looking out for the dirt and dust and it was not immediately obvious. My attention was drawn to it when i adjusted the reading light and found that my fingers were left feeling sticky/tacky and it was then, on closer inspection that the true extent of the dirt and dust became apparent, approximately 1 hour north of Fiji. So I ask you, what would you have me do? because I couldnt have exactly gotten off now could I??

If the dirt and dust doesnt bother you, thats great news for you. It does however, bother me, and it is not your place to question that.

The logic that seems to be missing in all of this seems to be, were these flights up to Qantas's own standards?? It has been admitted to me both verbally and in writing that they were not, which to me is an admission that I was not provided with what I should ordinarily expect on a Qantas flight, which is therefore a breach of contract. You are entitled to disagree but the consequences are that you will continue to fly in filthy, dirty and dusty Qantas aircraft and I will not.

 

[nlagalle]

The logic that seems to be missing in all of this seems to be, were these flights up to Qantas's own standards?? It has been admitted to me both verbally and in writing that they were not, which to me is an admission that I was not provided with what I could ordinarily expect on a Qantas flight, which is therefore a breach of contract. You are entitled to disagree but the consequences are that you will continue to fly in filthy, dirty and dusty Qantas aircraft and I will not.

What I think is the thing here is that is it an isolated incident? I believe it is as I have not been in a dirty aircraft at all. and I am sure if the a/c were dirty people would have posted sooner.

It should also be mentioned that the 744's are all getting a refit as well starting this year IIRC so they will have new interiors..

and you will still be hard pressed that it is a breach of contract.. i hope your solictor bill isn't too high at the end..