Gold status, got bumped from flight to Bangkok. Colleagues who are Bronze status / not even QFF members are still on flight.

[RooFlyer]

It's here as well: Reddit - Dive into anything

So it should be - on Facebook etc too, I hope. Here on AFF, we may get a bit blase because of the number of times something like this nonsense comes up.

Dumped off the flight, not notified but just ejected via the app, lied to by the Qantas call centre and offered a completely inferior product.

 

[RichardMEL]

This is pretty rubbish.

I'd also focus on the fact that you appear to have had NO communication from QF (or JQ) regarding this. It was only your proactive efforts to look at the app and see cancelled and YOU calling QF multiple times (with probably inaccurate info given in response.. certainly seems conflicting at the very least) and that is so very very poor.

Now we don't know if you would have gotten anything from QF in the meantime - maybe? but imagine you didn't and turned up for your original connection and been given the bad news.

Communication. it's not that hard. Or at least for most. QF seem to find it a struggle at times.

(having said that, I assume contact info has been properly put in the booking)

I agree though with above - it's an involuntary change made my QF to you. Why you as a Gold, who had checked in with a low sequence number, were bumped? I don't know. were you on a solo booking and the other colleagues on a booking together? that could be a factor? if they were also in separate bookings then it makes no difference. Fare type? You'd assume employer paid the same type for all.. so it's curious as to how this was determined, but guess you'll nevr know.

Just really poorly handled. so frustrating for you - I'm so sorry.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

I would expect at a minimum Qantas is on the hook for providing cash compensation for the involuntary denied boarding along with reimbursement for any out of pocket expenses incurred (e.g. hotels, lost wages, etc.) the latter is covered by the Montreal Convention and the former is covered by the Australian Consumer Guarantee.

As for rerouting that’s an option. I’d open up google flights and find an alternate flight that is suitable for you and have QF book it. If they push back ask them who it was that bumped them off the flight.

-RooFlyer88

 

[dajop]

TBH, it’s not optimal, and you should pursue compensation,, but JQ 787 service isn’t quite as bad as many make out the worst feature of these services is punctuality. However if they won’t make alternative arrangements (such as putting you on TG or on QF 35 to SIN connecting to TG to BKK, which they are selling on their website) I would expect that QF should at the very minimum reimburse you for IFE and meals and beverages on the JQ flight. And of course Original Routing Credit (unless it is higher on the JQ flight; which it may be depending on fare class).

 

[Hvr]

If this was booked through your employer's TA get in touch with them immediately.

 

[TheInsider]

I would expect at a minimum Qantas is on the hook for providing cash compensation for the involuntary denied boarding along with reimbursement for any out of pocket expenses incurred (e.g. hotels, lost wages, etc.)

Qantas will not provide any cash compensation for lost wages and there is no hotel involved.

 

[Quickstatus]

I was connecting from Melbourne on QF416

Were your colleagues starting from SYD?

Also interested to know if your ticket seller was different to your colleagues?.

QFF SG

Is the new Bronze

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Qantas will not provide any cash compensation for lost wages and there is no hotel involved.

Well it's not up to Qantas to decide. These are international treaties they are obligated to follow to have the privilege of providing international service. The Montreal Convention makes it clear that these aren't optional things they can offer, it is an obligation. And it would be hard for Qantas to make the argument that denied boarding was an issue outside of their control since **checks notes** Qantas is responsible for selling tickets for that flight.

-RooFlyer88

 

[dajop]

Well it's not up to Qantas to decide. These are international treaties they are obligated to follow to have the privilege of providing international service. The Montreal Convention makes it clear that these aren't optional things they can offer, it is an obligation. And it would be hard for Qantas to make the argument that denied boarding was an issue outside of their control since **checks notes** Qantas is responsible for selling tickets for that flight.

-RooFlyer88

But the OP has been put on a same day service on an alternative carrier that arrives 3.5 hrs later than original service - no hotel involved. OP has indicated they are travelling for work - so no loss of wages. Pretty straightforward I would have thought that hotel and lost wages are not something Qantas would compensate for in this instance, irrespective of them not compensating for lost wages ... ever.

 

[Quickstatus]

Montreal Convention

Even if there were such damages as lost wages, article 19 gives the airlines a big out.....

 

[kangarooflyer88]

But the OP has been put on a same day service on an alternative carrier that arrives 3.5 hrs later than original service - no hotel involved. OP has indicated they are travelling for work - so no loss of wages. Pretty straightforward I would have thought that hotel and lost wages are not something Qantas would compensate for in this instance, irrespective of them not compensating for lost wages ... ever.

If Qantas was able to provide a suitable replacement flight than that should be fine, I suspect. It's a real pity that Australian consumers have to rely on the Consumer Guarantee to receive compensation for delayed flights rather than having some hard and set rules like EU261.

Even if there were such damages as lost wages, article 19 gives the airlines a big out.....


View attachment 351319

Well in the case of denied boarding it would be difficult for an airline to make that argument. After all, they could have accommodated the passenger on the flight they booked. Whether the airline would fight this and it having to go to court/tribunal is something open for debate but certainly I wouldn't say that article 19 gives the airlines a big out.

-RooFlyer88

 

[JohnK]

Airlines (yes honourable Qantas) need to stop overbooking flights immediately.

Displacing one person to accommodate another displaced person is not the answer.

I'd also love to know which Qantas staff member thinks they are doing someone a favour by putting them on direct JQ flight MEL-BKK instead of QF flights MEL-SYD-BKK? It's chalk and cheese. By the way I dud this flight last year as I got it for around $700 return.

 

[TheInsider]

Airlines (yes honourable Qantas) need to stop overbooking flights immediately.

If it wasn't for an aircraft switch, then it wouldn't have been overbooked. It's not an intentional oversale, it happened to be an operational one. No, neither is good enough, but that's what has happened. So, do you sell potentially 23 less seats, just in case another a/c has to be used?

So it looks like VH-EBV was used today, so a A330-200. And a short turn coming in from MEL-SYD QF414, so highly likely an a/c swap. To add even more evidence it was an a/c swap, EBV hasn't been used on a BKK sector for easily over a year.

Could have gone from any of the below to another one of the below:

 

[aikman]

With JQ29 leaving soon I wonder what the outcome was.

 

[huge.k]

Hi all, thanks for the lively discussion and advice.

I spoke to a supervisor at the service desk in Melbourne. It turns out they had an aircraft change and had fewer seats available. As a result at least 10 people connecting to QF23 from Melbourne got bumped because there was this Jetstar flight.

A lot of the frustration would’ve been solved with clearer communication up front. I’m now on board the JQ flight surrounded by screaming children.

I was told to pursue some sort of recompense via Qantas customer care. Will see what they come up with.

 

[Quickstatus]

To what extent is an aircraft change like the issue of selling tickets on cancelled flights?
The question is when did QF know about the equipment change - which allows them to deliberately oversell then bump pax over to another lower service aircraft in order to maximise loads.

 

[TheInsider]

To what extent is an aircraft change like the issue of selling tickets on cancelled flights?
The question is when did QF know about the equipment change - which allows them to deliberately oversell then bump pax over to another lower service aircraft in order to maximise loads.

I understand why you're frustrated, but I'd rather a downgraded or changed aircraft, than one that's not going at all. It's nothing about maximising loads, it's about minimising disruption.

 

[drron]

To what extent is an aircraft change like the issue of selling tickets on cancelled flights?
The question is when did QF know about the equipment change - which allows them to deliberately oversell then bump pax over to another lower service aircraft in order to maximise loads.

And did they change the plane because of a technical issue or because the original flight had light bookings . A bit suspicious as only 10 “overbooked “.

 

[TheInsider]

And did they change the plane because of a technical issue or because the original flight had light bookings . A bit suspicious as only 10 “overbooked “.

You really think they would initiate an aircraft swap because they hadn't sold about 15 seats? C'mon.

10 'overbooked' in MEL.

EBV has 224 Y seats
The original a/c probably had 243 Y seats or if the A333, then 269 seats.
@jb747 can maybe explain a bit more.

 

[Quickstatus]

It's nothing about maximising loads

My point was not about operational issues. Rather whether the airline like the issue about the cancelled flights were also doing something dodgy here. If they can sell seats on cancelled/nonexistent flights as accused of by the ACCC, then they can also... (well the airline is contesting that in court)