Qantas Promises to Fix Ongoing Reward Flight Ticketing Failures

[kangarooflyer88]

So @kangarooflyer88 have you actually used the Montreal Convention yourself in a claim? If so did you succeed?

Asked already:

Judging by the amount of time you mention the montreal convention in this forum, one can only assume you are an expert on this mater. Would you mind telling us your personal experience using it with airlines to get a favorable outcome?
Give us details, i.e. which category of the convention, which airline, did you have to start some sort of formal/legal action, or did you just mention it while discussing with an airline representative? Also, for my curiosity, can it be used on passengers too, i.e. when queing in a lounge?

And answered:

I have been fortunate enough to not need to use the convention in travel as airlines have generally done the right thing during irregular operations. But just because I personally haven’t used it doesn’t mean it didn’t exist and cannot be used by international travellers. The point I’m trying to make here is that travellers believe (incorrectly might I add) that they are at the mercy of the airline when disruptions occur. When in truth it is the passenger who holds most of the power by way of consumer law and protections be it EU261 and Canada’s APPR to more broad legislation like Montreal Convention. Certainly I was happy last year when Qantas delayed my Singapore to Sydney flight by 14 hours as that was an easy €600 entitlement under EU261

 

[Danger]

I don't see any proclamations there that AFF "would get it done". They contacted Qantas and prodded, with apparently some reaction, but I don't think they've ever said that Qantas has "fixed it" because of that contact.

I mean, it took the ACCC and court to get Qantas to admit its ghost flights etc. I don't think Qantas is going to do much in response to anyone below that level.

My comments were largely in relation to the most recent AFF article and the fact this saga has been long ongoing, despite AFF's apparent involvement but, yes, I take your point.

 

[PineappleSkip]

An ordinary citizen doesn't go to court and sue for breach of an international convention. That is just an agreement among countries that they will rule in accord with the convention (There are about 60 countries that haven't ratified it). In Australia the enabling legislation is in amendments to the Federal Civil Aviation (Carriers Liability) Act 1959 - see Part 1A which came into effect in 2009.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

An ordinary citizen doesn't go to court and sue for breach of an international convention. That is just an agreement among countries that they will rule in accord with the convention (There are about 60 countries that haven't ratified it). In Australia the enabling legislation is in amendments to the Federal Civil Aviation (Carriers Liability) Act 1959 - see Part 1A which came into effect in 2009.

It’s Australian law. Yes, it is an international treaty but it has the same force of law in Australia as any other law such as unfair dismissal under Fair Work Regulations. Now again, maybe it’s an Aussie thing not to take businesses to court when they are wronged, but in a good chunk of the world like the U.S. and Canada it’s actually quite common. And the legal system over there has realized that justice should be open for all, not just companies that can afford to hire high powered lawyers. This is why they have venues like small claims court to pursue these matters in an economical and efficient manner