Downgraded from Business Class.

[maninblack]

You what have to prove that QF were in breach of their Contract of carriage which customers accept when they purchase a ticket. Mind you, if you purchase from a travel agent you are not generally asked to accept any terms and conditions nor are they evident on your etickets. There's a case in this somewhere, but someone has to be bothered taking it up.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

You what have to prove that QF were in breach of their Contract of carriage which customers accept when they purchase a ticket. Mind you, if you purchase from a travel agent you are not generally asked to accept any terms and conditions nor are they evident on your etickets. There's a case in this somewhere, but someone has to be bothered taking it up.

Even if we accept overbooking is mentioned in the contract of carriage, and the passenger has accepted that, the issue of refund and refund calculation is not mentioned.

under at least a couple of strands of law (contract and consumer protection) a person would naturally assume they are entitled to receive money back for items or services not delivered.

i really doubt an airline will want to see this progress to any sort of legal proceeding... even something as simple as small claims. I would think they will settle for the full fare difference plus a goodwill gesture, if for nothing else, to keep this issue from being more widely examined.

the other issue worth following up would be the calling for volunteers. US DOT regulations state an airline must ask for volunteers. A short note from the affected passengers to the DOT could start such an investigation.

 

[kitkatff]

I got offered to downgrade from business to eco for HKG-MEL, for around US$550 in cash (well, payment later, not at the counter) or around US$650 in qantas credits. Declined and stayed in business. But that would give you an idea of the prices QF thinks a downgrade is worth

 

[SQ421]

Horse for courses?

Or should that be different people, similar situations, totally different results?

Just saying....

It could well be different airlines, similar situations, totally different results, no?

 

[straitman]

The story of the passenger manifest is interesting and indicates that they were a relatively last minute bumping possibly in favour of persons who were known to, or friends of the LAX ground staff. Something fishy here?

It cannot have been too late in proceedings as the OP has mentioned they were quite early at checking in.

 

[maninblack]

Even if we accept overbooking is mentioned in the contract of carriage, and the passenger has accepted that, the issue of refund and refund calculation is not mentioned.

under at least a couple of strands of law (contract and consumer protection) a person would naturally assume they are entitled to receive money back for items or services not delivered.

i really doubt an airline will want to see this progress to any sort of legal proceeding... even something as simple as small claims. I would think they will settle for the full fare difference plus a goodwill gesture, if for nothing else, to keep this issue from being more widely examined.

the other issue worth following up would be the calling for volunteers. US DOT regulations state an airline must ask for volunteers. A short note from the affected passengers to the DOT could start such an investigation.

We can postulate until the cows come home. Someone with patience has to take it up and run it. Airlines and the like who are involved in conumer "rip offs" rely on people not having the patience or resilience and capitulating for minimal compensation.

 

[SQ421]

Here is the latest published table from QF on Involuntary Downgrade refund amounts.
I have to say it makes for fairly grim reading.
Anyone thinking that the refund is going to be anything like the difference in actual fare paid is in for a bit of a shock
http://www.qantas.com.au/agents/dyn/qf/policies/FareRefundTable.pdf

That's the "refund" Qantas thinks it can get away with. Unless Qantas also starts offering B to D/C/I upgrades from Australia to Europe for $1400 (to make that table "fair" in the other direction), I'd consider that "refund" a compensation for inconvenience and nothing more.

 

[BD1959]

I got offered to downgrade from business to eco for HKG-MEL, for around US$550 in cash (well, payment later, not at the counter) or around US$650 in qantas credits. Declined and stayed in business. But that would give you an idea of the prices QF thinks a downgrade is worth

Call me naive but the "value" QF seem to place on a downgrade really surprises me.

QF have long held the Premium cabins as such, they do not upgrade into them cheaply: they do not simply upgrade Elite Status passengers as some US airlines, they do not automatically confirm points upgrades, paying cash is at the top end of the airlines internationally.

Surprisingly, therefore, that QF value such a small differential when downgrading. As such, we should know the circumstances under which we - the paying customer - can be "short changed".

Regards,

BD

 

[Pushka]

We can postulate until the cows come home. Someone with patience has to take it up and run it. Airlines and the like who are involved in conumer "rip offs" rely on people not having the patience or resilience and capitulating for minimal compensation.

There are several large legal firms who deal with consumer issues. Maybe a disenfranchised previously loyal (and therefore they are not just 'fly by nighters' - anti Qantas - yada yada) older couple might just have to time to do something about this for the wider good? A paltry $550 doesnt cut it. Doesnt even pay the tax.

 

[sweens]

I find this whole episode appalling and really feel for the OP's parents.

The bottom line here is that this situation could happen to any of us and in the past if I had a confirmed J booking I would not have dreamed that I could ever be bumped down to Y...I better start using the OLCI in future specially when flying in J. This is assuming once I have a BP in hand I have a confirmed seat?

The questions I would like QF to answer are

What is/was the process used in selection of the passengers to be downgraded...who trumps who ,was it higher status passengers who got bumped off another flight, staff or a persons with higher PCV who got the nod?
Were other passengers offered the Hotel and a J seat the following day as were the OP's parents who could not take up the offer? (Were they seen as a soft target.)
Are QF CS saying that the process used in this case by the LAX staff was correct...I understand that QF are agreeing the lack of empathy was not acceptable?

Why should the OP's parents be told to take the refund issue up with FC...I would think that as it is a QF overbooking issue that QF needs to get on the front foot and take control.

This type of situation really undermines my confidence in QF in handling an awkward situation but one that under the right person should not be that difficult...they would seam to be trying to nickel and dime some very loyal customers.

 

[Flying mermaid]

Here is the latest published table from QF on Involuntary Downgrade refund amounts.
I have to say it makes for fairly grim reading.
Anyone thinking that the refund is going to be anything like the difference in actual fare paid is in for a bit of a shock
http://www.qantas.com.au/agents/dyn/qf/policies/FareRefundTable.pdf

Unfortunately that makes sense in light of my friend's refund earlier this year. Unbelievable - how can Qantas justify that in the light of what is paid for the original ticket! Particularly looking at downgrading first to business on the North American route - Qantas charges premium dollars for that and the refund is just a joke!

 

[Princess Fiona]

I realise that but the manifest having them both seated together in business class makes no sense.

Did all this happen so quickly they did not have time to reprint the manifest? Did not want to reprint the manifest? Ignored the manifest?

The truth from Qantas would be really nice but I don't think we are going to see that posted online.

I would think that perhaps a long haul flight with over 300 passengers would have a passenger manifest prepared very early prior to departure with a final load sheet being delivered later.
We don't know what manifest the FA was referring to. To be honest he/she made the emotional situation for EmilyP's mother worse by referring to it IMHO.
Since the passengers had pre-selected seats in J and were both initially involuntarily downgraded it's possible that at some point they appeared on a manifest in their original booked seats.

QF16 was overbooked and Qantas staff at LAX involuntarily downgraded a passenger from J to Y after the passengers did not accept re-booking on the same flight in J the next day. Other passengers booked in J on that flight were similarly affected.
The passengers were advised by QF staff that they would receive $700 for the downgrade from J to Y.
The passengers were upset at the personal interactions with the ground staff at LAX.

There are many things that we don't know and will probably never find out from QF's version of events.
We do not know (and never will) what are the QF internal procedures that led to these passengers (EmilyP's parents amongst the group affected) being chosen whilst others were not.
Qantas (or any other airline) are not going to release publicly the algorithm used for bumping passengers.
We do not know how many if any passengers were voluntarily re-booked and accepted this or else were asked to and accepted a voluntary downgrade (probably zero for the latter).


Qantas have offered compensation for EmilyP's father by way of a flight voucher and FF points in addition to the partial refund which must be sought via the TA.
This is so far unacceptable to EmilyP's parents.

EmilyP I wish you well in your efforts to get what you believe is an adequate explanation and compensation for your parents.

They have definitely taught us all a wise lesson :

If at all possible accept being re-booked on the next flight as it will be infinitely less painful.

 

[Flying mermaid]

Just been talking over this with Mr FM who is as horrified as I am. I would agree with Princess F - if it happened to us we would accept a seat the next day and suitable accommodation overnight (however it would have to be in keeping with what we normally book!). However this is a case of the customer being bullied into accepting the best of bad alternatives.

If I was EmilyP's parents I would be running to as many media as I could at this point and also giving them the refund document - this deserves a wider audience. I would also be lodging with whatever consumer protection bodies are appropriate.

 

[serfty]

I can only presume the economy BP's were received at check-in, which was quite early.

I was thinking that manifests are not printed until boarding is complete; while that may still be the case, I am thinking the 'manifest' being referred to is on the CSM's iPad - they appear to be preloaded (when this is done I know not).

As far as EU downgrade compensation in regards to 261/2004, it current simply states "75% of the price of the ticket" (for the longer flights) - which is apparently ambiguous as changes to this are in process. More below, but "Flight Price" and "Ticket Price" are specifically defined and are based on the cost of the entire ticket including all taxes, levies and surcharges.

On a "$7500" ticket in this case the mandated compensation would be ~$2400¹ if such regulation were applied.

Also, for those affected by involuntary downgrades, "Ticket Price" has been removed from article 10 to be replaced by "Flight Price":

(t) ‘flight price’ means the value obtained by multiplying the ticket price by the ratio between the distance of the flight and the total distance of the journey(s) covered by the ticket; where a ticket price is not known, the value of any refund shall be the supplement paid for a premium seat on the flight

Article 10

Upgrading and downgrading

1. If an operating air carrier places a passenger in a class higher than that for which the ticket was purchased, it may not request any supplementary payment.
2. If an operating air carrier places a passenger in a class lower than that for which the ticket was purchased, it shall within seven days, by the means provided for in Article 7(3), reimburse
   • 30 % of the flight price for all flights of 1 500 kilometres or less, or
   • 50 % of the flight pricefor all intra-Community flights of more than 1 500 kilometres, except flights
     between the European territory of the Member States and the French overseas departments, and for all other flights between 1 500 and 3 500 kilometres, or
   • 75 % of the flight price for all flights not falling under (a) or (b), including flights between the European territory of the Member States and the French overseas departments.

"Ticket Price" has been specifically defined as well:

(s) ‘ticket price’ means the full price paid for a ticket, including the air fare and all applicable taxes, charges, surcharges and fees paid for all optional and non-optional services included in the ticket,such as all costs for the check-in, the provision of the tickets and the issuing of the boarding cards and for the carrying a minimum amount of luggage, including an item of hand luggage, an item of checked‑in luggage and essential items, as well as all costs related to payment, such as charges for paying by credit card; . the ticket price published in advance always reflects the final ticket price to be paid.

¹ 75% x $7500 x 7161 / 16798.

 

[amaroo]

If at all possible accept being re-booked on the next flight as it will be infinitely less painful.

IMO - that depends on the class of hotel and details of the booking they make on your behalf for the layover ... I wouldn't be interested in staying in a sh$tbox dump that required check-out by midday. I expect the type of (cheap) hotel booking the airline would want to make would only inflame the situation for me....

The lesson here is to stand your ground and don't accept any compromise that doesn't meet your demands/requirements. Squeaky wheel will always get the most attention.

 

[OATEK]

<SNIP>

This is so far unacceptable to the EmilyP's parents.

EmilyP I wish you well in your efforts to get what you believe is an adequate explanation and compensation for your parents.

They have definitely taught us all I wise lesson :

If at all possible accept being re-booked on the next flight as it will be infinitely less painful.

I know I always allow up to 2 days grace at the end of an overseas trip to allow for a disruption. This first occurred to me during the volcanic eruptions a few years ago.

There is always a trade-off between those few extra days away, and the need for a bit of wriggle room.

However, I agree with many others that there is a suspicion that this couple was unfairly targeted, and I guess for those of us with even less status than the OP's parents it reinforces that we need to assume that QANTAS may not provide the customer service to "loyal" pax that might be expected, and include that in our planning.

 

[Princess Fiona]

IMO - that depends on the class of hotel and details of the booking they make on your behalf for the layover ... I wouldn't be interested in staying in a sh$tbox dump that required check-out by midday. I expect the type of (cheap) hotel booking the airline would want to make would only inflame the situation for me....

The lesson here is to stand your ground and don't accept any compromise that doesn't meet your demands/requirements. Squeaky wheel will always get the most attention.

I think if QF re-booked J passengers in substandard accomodation with an early check-out for a late night flight we'd more than likely have heard either here (or elsewhere in SM) about it by now.
I personally prefer a less confrontational style as you generally catch more flies with honey.

 

[equus]

As mentioned further up (sorry, not trawling back to find the post to quote it), Consumer Protection law precludes reliance on unfair Terms and Conditions, where conditions were imposed unilaterally, and the consumer had no means to negotiate.

What would be deemed unfair would depend on all the circumstances. The terms being repeatedly quoted and relies upon about a confirmed booking not guaranteeing performance with respect to time or date, or cabin need to be considered in the actual circumstances. Where the inabiltiy of the airline to perform is beyond its control - such as weather delays, acts of god, or unexpected equipment failure, reliance on these terms, and their presence may be deemed reasonable. (Take note that under the European regulations, equipment failure due to insufficient maintenance etc is not considered outside the control of the airline). In these circumstances, the airline may be deemed to not be in breach of the contract, and following there procedures (i.e. accepting what is offered). In the case where the airline offers carriage in the booked cabin at a later date, and pays for the accommodation, and the passenger chooses to travel earlier with a downgrade, there may not be much leverage to demand compensation other than what the airline is willing to offer.

However, if the failure is caused by something directly within the airlines control - such as overbooking, the terms may be viewed very differently. Those terms that let an airline bump a passenger at will with impunity may be viewed as unenforceable, leaving the airline libable for damages for breach of contract. In that situation, the damages recoverable may not be restricted just to direct loss, but may include consquential damages. If the passenge in mitigation were to book an alternative ticket in the same class of carriage on another carrier, then the cost should be recoverable directly as damages arising from breach of contract (although in that case, you would not expect to recover a refund of the original fare). Should costs be incurred due to delay - such as having to reschedule appointments, this may well be recoverable as well. Given the situation being discussed here, where the pax had a confirmed booking on a flight, and that flight departed with the scheduled equipment, there is no way for the airline to dispute that the breach of contract was something that was solely within the control of the airline, and thus something they should be prime facie liable for.

The distinction between the two situation is also (as well as other reasons) highly likely to be a factor into why, when a cancellation does occur, passengers are not generally bumped off other flights to make room for the affected passengers, but those passengers can be delayed for much longer waiting for availabiltiy. Bumping someone from a flight by choice would expose the airline to damages for breach, as they know that the Terms and Conditions are of dubious enforceabiltiy, but they are on much safer ground where a force majuere event has affected a flight.

None of the above should be taken as advice. I would suggest that the affected pax may be surprised at what may change as far as offered compensation should QF be approched by either Consumer Affairs or a lawyer acting on their behalf. There are have been many anecdotes about airlines customer relations blustering behind the T&C and attempting to bluff, only for the legal department to be in a great hurry to settle once it becomes obvious that someone is serious about having their rights enforced in a court.

 

[Flying mermaid]

IMO - that depends on the class of hotel and details of the booking they make on your behalf for the layover ... I wouldn't be interested in staying in a sh$tbox dump that required check-out by midday. I expect the type of (cheap) hotel booking the airline would want to make would only inflame the situation for me....

Just said the same thing - if I was going to accept this it would have to be our normal standard of accommodation - I think you and I seem to have similar standards.

The lesson here is to stand your ground and don't accept any compromise that doesn't meet your demands/requirements. Squeaky wheel will always get the most attention.

unfortunately they did just that and all they got was economy boarding passes and a supervisor walking away in the middle of the conversation.

Does anyone here know whether Emirates downgrade people from their premium cabins? North America via Dubai might be looking attractive

 

[Pushka]

<snip>
What would be deemed unfair would depend on all the circumstances. The terms being repeatedly quoted and relies upon about a confirmed booking not guaranteeing performance with respect to time or date, or cabin need to be considered in the actual circumstances. Where the inabiltiy of the airline to perform is beyond its control - such as weather delays, acts of god, or unexpected equipment failure, reliance on these terms, and their presence may be deemed reasonable. (Take note that under the European regulations, equipment failure due to insufficient maintenance etc is not considered outside the control of the airline). In these circumstances, the airline may be deemed to not be in breach of the contract, and following there procedures (i.e. accepting what is offered). In the case where the airline offers carriage in the booked cabin at a later date, and pays for the accommodation, and the passenger chooses to travel earlier with a downgrade, there may not be much leverage to demand compensation other than what the airline is willing to offer.

However, if the failure is caused by something directly within the airlines control - such as overbooking, <snip>

Thats a valid point Equus. The terms and conditions would protect any carrier from non carrier caused delays - like weather, equipment failure and the like. Surely consumer law would ensure those same terms and conditions could not be used as protection when it is the very actions of the carrier (like overbooking) that caused the problem. That would be abusing them.

This thread always has a number of people watching it. It certainly makes the anticipation of all our future J class bookings on Qantas a less relaxing experience. Glad mine are on CX and SQ.