Downgraded from Business Class.

[Danger]

i don't believe there is a Senator Branson, and if that is what he would say then I'm glad he doesn't exist.

Maybe Sir Richard has got a new gig. :sly:

He could possibly be referring to Attorney General - Senator George Brandis.

[url]http://m.watoday.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/george-brandis-not-threatened-by-david-hicks-heckling-20141211-125cvx.html
[/URL]

"Lord George" as he is 'affectionately' known by those on the other side, would be horrified to learn he'd been confused with someone less important.

 

[Jack_OC]

Yet you keep including the compensation in as part of the refund. You can't have it both ways. The couple in this case have not received a fair refund. That is not changed by you trying to pretend the $700 cash and $500 voucher are part of the refund.

No, I have done no such thing. I have never said the total was a refund. Read my posts again (or perhaps I should say, read them properly for the first time). I have consistently referred to the total compensation. I have included the refund of $1,250 as part of the total compensation (which is reasonable, is it not?); but I have not attempted to describe the total compensation as a refund. See below.

So I came to this late and just read the entire thread today! Firstly, with parents who are getting on a bit, and who travel in paid J when they come to visit us in Aus, I can really empathise. I know that the same situation would be extremely upsetting for my folks (and by extension, for me).

I have to say though, I'm surprised that people think the compensation ultimately (if belatedly) provided was inadequate. I suppose it's a great example of the importance of getting customer service responses right as soon as an incident occurs. Once the customers get really upset, there is often no way of retrieving the situation, and it looks like that's what's happened here.

Just to explain why I think the compensation was fair: the affected flight constituted about 40% of the flying time on the itinerary, and the fare for the whole lot ticket was $7,500. As such I'd say it's reasonable to put a price of $3,000 on the fare paid for the affected flight. If I understand correctly, the cash compensation provided was $USD700 + AUD$1,250 = about AUD$2,100, or 70% of the fare paid. That in itself would probably have been seen as reasonable if it had been offered up front. Add to that a $500 voucher and 50,000 points (worth at least another $500), and the total value of the compensation is more than the cost of the fare paid for this flight.

I realise these people are now so irate with QF that they don't plan to use the voucher or points. I really hope they reconsider though, as if they don't use them, the only winner is Qantas.

But what is a reasonable fare difference between a very deeply discounted J fare and Y? As it is, he flew in Y for about $900 (ignoring non-cash compensation). That's about as cheap as Y gets. When you include the non-cash compensation he flew for free (or even less than free, actually).

Genuine question, what compensation do you think was warranted?

Those are sale fares though, aren't they? I thought saver fares start around the $1800 mark rtn. In any case, the point I'm making is this:

If QF had handled this properly and offered this compensation up front, and the first post read like this:

"They've been offered (a) J seats tomorrow, plus hotel, plus $700 or (b) the option of flying Y today, plus $2,100 in cash, plus 50,000 QFF pts plus a $500 voucher"

Would there have been a lot of outrage? I think not. But because QF handled it so badly, now they would need to offer something pretty dramatic to placate everyone.

I understood that perfectly well, thanks - they were given a total of about $2,100 in cash compensation.

Of course it was part of their compensation. So what if it was given to everyone similarly affected? Why shouldn't it have been?

I know in QF semantics it was two different payments, but so what? All I've referred to is the total amount of cash they received.

 

[medhead]

No, I have done no such thing. I have never said the total was a refund. Read my posts again (or perhaps I should say, read them properly for the first time). I have consistently referred to the total compensation. I have included the refund of $1,250 as part of the total compensation (which is reasonable, is it not?); but I have not attempted to describe the total compensation as a refund. See below.

As I have said repeatedly, the refund of $1250 is separate to the compensation. So no they have not received a fair refund of their fare. Giving someone compensation for another issue is not a refund for services not provided. The refund is not compensation, despite your attempts to label it as such, it is a refund of money owed.

What you are clearly doing is trying to pretend that they should just look at the total money received, your compensation, and ignore that they have not received a proper refund for the service not provided. If anyone is playing semantics it sure isn't me.

Lets try an analogy. Someone crashes into your car. They pay you $700 compensation for the inconvenience caused by not have your vehicle. The cost of repairs is $2100. They give you $1250 and say the total amount of money received is fair compensation. You're still $850 short of fixing the damage that they caused.

 

[amaroo]

<snip>

"OMG we got Amaroo that dreaded anti-downgrade crusader

A quest worthy of a crusade

This thread is approaching siege status ... will probably hit 100,000 views and 1,600 posts before hump day.

 

[Jack_OC]

As I have said repeatedly, the refund of $1250 is separate to the compensation.

I've also said repeatedly that I know the inconvenience payment and fare refund are two different things. Why do you keep repeating this point as if you think I'm disagreeing with you about it?! Talk about arguing for the sake of arguing.

What you are clearly doing is trying to pretend that they should just look at the total money received, your compensation, and ignore that they have not received a proper refund for the service not provided. .

I'm not "pretending" anything. I'm quite openly saying that the only important thing to me would be the total compensation provided (including refund, for the avoidance of doubt). If I was in this situation, it would be of no interest to me whatsoever how Qantas chose to categorise various components of the cash they gave me.

If I understand you correctly, you believe the passenger should have been given USD$700 as compensation, plus a larger fare refund - making a total of about $3,000. Is that correct? If so, IMHO there is not a huge difference between that and what they actually got (approx $2,150 plus a $500 voucher plus 50,000 QFF points). As it happens, if I was offered a choice between those two options, I'd choose the latter.

I fully accept that a voucher and points would be of less value to some people than they are to me, and therefore what you are suggesting would be preferable to others, so I'm not saying you're wrong to believe they should have got more cash, I guess I'll just reiterate what I said a few pages back as this is really the point I was trying to make:

If QF had handled this properly and offered this compensation up front, and the first post read like this:

"They've been offered (a) J seats tomorrow, plus hotel, plus $700 or (b) the option of flying Y today, plus $2,100 in cash, plus 50,000 QFF pts plus a $500 voucher"

Would there have been a lot of outrage? I think not. But because QF handled it so badly, now they would need to offer something pretty dramatic to placate everyone.

 

[medhead]

That's great to know. I do not agree that the refund is adequate. And I don't agree that they should suck it up. That is the fundamental problem that I see with your position.

As for arguing for the sake of it, no one is asking you to keep repeating yourself. Yet again you've agreed with my outline of the difference between the give refund and compensation. Telling me again that you think they should "suck it up" is not going to change my view that they haven't received a fair refund.

So do mind if the thread moves on now?

 

[EmilyP]

...

I am going to request Admin close this thread until I have some more updates. I will be happy to answer any queries via PM in the meantime.

 

[mannej]

...

No need for the personal attack. PF's background is in the Medical industry, so she does have some background knowledge.

 

[QF WP]

In line with EmilyP's request, I am closing the thread in case admin is unable to in a timely manner.

EmilyP, Princess Fiona's comment was given with her knowledge based in medicine - as an Emergency Department doctor. I don't think you took it in the way in which is was meant.


*** Note from Admin ***
Given that much of this thread is about the specific situation of EmilyP's parents, I believe that it is appropriate to close the thread at the poster's request.

I realise that this subject is of interest to many of our members, so for a general discussion on the adequacy of Qantas refund/compensation policy, please feel free to open a new thead.

We will re-open this thread if/when new information about this specific situation is available.