Re: Dismissed without consultation
Just a question, is there any end to what passengers hold the airline responsible for? If you missed a flight because a booked taxi failed to arrive would you be suing the cab company for the missed business deal that you had planned 7 days and three countries later?
In this case Qantas "assures" that they sent an email to the TA. That the TA "assures" that they didn't get same is IMHO no solid proof that Qantas did not make correct contact with the TA.
I know that to be bumped from one flight to another is a pain, but on the other hand the only reason Qantas could have to do this is to try to get other pax to their destination who otherwise wouldn't have due to the previous days cancellations. Qantas fly a route that is plagued by weather problems - surely a difficult task.
Instead of demanding that the world's sins get rectified from Qantas's pocket, why not seek the same sort of level of compo from the TA? If it really is Qantas's fault, the tA should have no problem of getting that from them.
World travel is susceptible to myriad hiccups - that is why people get travel insurance. In this case, it appears to me Qantas have done the right thing in their area. The real reason that the trip was ultimately impossible was continuing weather problems. Claim against your insurance for the subsequent flights, not the original. May work?
Anyway, although I dislike Qantas always being the entity everyone seeks to resolve everything (and as such I dislike your apparent angle), I also understand that a holiday became a nightmare. I feel for you.
A company should be held accountable when its own actions cause inconvenience. Here QF supposedly decided to move the passengers and notification failed to reach them.
You may argue QF notified the agent, but is that acceptable if it was a sunday and the agent wasn't there? Do you think QF should have realised that and taken the time to go into the booking, get the phone number, and make direct contact? And if direct contact was not possible, not make the change?
If the change was made on a Saturday, or Sunday, or even at any other time 'close in' where immediate and direct contact is needed (rather than relying on someone checking email), do you think a company should hide behind terms and conditions?
If it is the airline's action which has caused this loss, why should the travel agent or insurance pay for it? That just puts up the prices for the rest of us with service charges or insurance premiums.
Qantas (just about any airline) isn't a charity. You would have us believe they are flying as a favour and we should just accept when things go wrong. Sure, if it's weather or ATC there is some leeway. But when it comes to a commercial decision there should be accountability. Airlines make 100s of commercial decisions every day... who they will downgrade (in Qantas' case with little or no compensation), who they will give preferential treatment to (in QF's case CL and P1). But
potentially in this case they decide a notification to a travel agent on a Sunday to non-status pax is ok?
If the facts are as they seem to have evolved, if the pax hadn't been moved they would have enjoyed their full holiday. It all began with the decision to move them to the earlier flight. Why wouldn't the airline, operating in a commercial setting, take responsibility for that?