Reimbursement/refunds due to disruptions caused by volcanic ash

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh how i love these posts. To clarify what responsibilities did Qantas have?

You have insurance, use them, that's what it is for?

With all due respect the insured traveller is under obligation to pursue the carrier first for their obligations under the contract of carriage and the appropriate international conventions (warsaw/moscow et al) through ICAO, that specify what is covered under the carriers domain. Your post seems to indicate that "airline" and "customer service" is fast becoming an oxymoron example not to mention "airline" and "obligations" which is not far behind!
 
Surely it was the responsibility of Qantas to get the OP from Wellington to Sydney in the first instance :!:

Exactly.

Then there is the fact that they are out of pocket based on the advice from qantas at the time. Would it have been better to ask qantas to move them to the other flight? Rather than doing it alone.

I also wonder if different advice was given because they were supposed to end up in LHR instead of SYD.
 
Pity we dont have a government that has the guts to put our own Rule 240 into place, even if its been scrapped overseas!
 
I can only repeat that Qantas never advised me nor any of my fellow strandees at the same hotel in Wellington to fly other airlines. In fact they advised against it as they considered it a safety risk. They did offer to rebook or refund without penalty. Eventually I elected to fly another airline. Perhaps if the OP had asked for a full refund of the whole journey (WGN-LHR-WGN?) and booked a completely new itinerary, then claimed any fare difference, they might have felt happier about the outcome?

I suppose it's the pro-rata refund calculation of a single cancelled (and short) sector in a much larger itinerary that's the issue here.

In any event my travel insurance just wanted a letter from Qantas detailing any refund due and then paid the fare difference (minus excess). The OP could perhaps do the same.
 
Last edited:
Qantas did offer to rebook me but it wouldn't be until the following week and they couldn't guarantee they would be flying then anyway - not an option as I had a schedule to keep.

And the advice to find another way to Sydney? It came from a Qantas staff member as an "if it was me" scenario - not a formally stated company recommendation (the staff member was nevertheless representing the employer).

I'm not clear on the legal situation but it does seem sensible to me to seek redress from the carrier before firing off an insurance claim. Apart from anything else it helps reduce the number of borderline claims and helps keep premiums down. Fact of the matter is I expected at least something from Qantas - their press statements at the time suggested that a refund or a rebook would be a given for most affected passengers. I can't see any logic in declining a partial refund just because the ticket didn't terminate in Sydney.
 
Turn business expenses into Business Class! Process $10,000 through pay.com.au to score 20,000 bonus PayRewards Points and join 30k+ savvy business owners enjoying these benefits:

- Pay suppliers who don’t take Amex
- Max out credit card rewards—even on government payments
- Earn & Transfer PayRewards Points to 8+ top airline & hotel partners

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

In fact they advised against it as they considered it a safety risk.

interesting you mention this. i don't doubt what you're saying but it potentially has some legal implications.

Also interesting to note that QF still took profits from code-share flights, and even, according to the CEO of Air NZ, rebooked passengers on NZ flights.
 
I'm not clear on the legal situation but it does seem sensible to me to seek redress from the carrier before firing off an insurance claim. Apart from anything else it helps reduce the number of borderline claims and helps keep premiums down.

My insurance company required it. Qantas will give you the letter if you ask.

Fact of the matter is I expected at least something from Qantas - their press statements at the time suggested that a refund or a rebook would be a given for most affected passengers. I can't see any logic in declining a partial refund just because the ticket didn't terminate in Sydney.

Does seem a bit unfair. But I wonder what the true pro-rata fare refund on the cancelled first sector would be? It may well be $0.00. Qantas did at least allow you to cancel the first sector without loss of the entire ticket, which you might not have been normally allowed to do.
 
Qantas did at least allow you to cancel the first sector without loss of the entire ticket, which you might not have been normally allowed to do.

I never cancelled the first sector though - Qantas chose not to provide the service on this leg
 
I never cancelled the first sector though - Qantas chose not to provide the service on this leg

Qantas cancelled the originally booked flight but you cancelled the first sector of the booking. That was your choice - you could have used it for other dates, but they didn't suit.

But isn't your real gripe the pro-rata fare refund calculation?
 
Qantas cancelled the originally booked flight but you cancelled the first sector of the booking. That was your choice - you could have used it for other dates, but they didn't suit.

But isn't your real gripe the pro-rata fare refund calculation?

Isn't that just semantics? I never cancelled anything at all and I still flew to London on the same ticket. I just never got a chance to use the first leg of the ticket because Qantas failed to produce an airplane.

You are correct though in that this comes down to one's perception of what is a fair pro-rata fare calculation. Qantas say the value of the trans Tasman fare is $0. I clearly feel differently having had to fork out an extra $948. I would happily accept a compromise offer of just a few hundred dollars but I find their current attitude that there is zero value to be a nonsense. If they don't value their own service then they clearly don't value our business.

I did argue that I had done them a favour by making my Sydney onward connection, because if I had not managed to do so I would have instead claimed a refund on the entire trip to London which would have amounted to some thousands of dollars. However this line of reasoning fell on deaf ears.

At least we have competition and I can with very little effort choose to give our future business to another carrier.
 
Isn't that just semantics?
No, unfortunatley.

You are correct though in that this comes down to one's perception of what is a fair pro-rata fare calculation. Qantas say the value of the trans Tasman fare is $0. I clearly feel differently having had to fork out an extra $948. I would happily accept a compromise offer of just a few hundred dollars but I find their current attitude that there is zero value to be a nonsense. If they don't value their own service then they clearly don't value our business.

It's airfare structures. They seem bizzare sometimes but all the airlines do it - I doubt if switching airline loyalty would help. Simply, a fare WGN-LHR-WGN (both legs via SYD) can price much lower than a fare SYD-LHR-WGN (via SYD). You bought the first but flew the second.

What might help in this circumstance is a rule like EC 261/2004 (applicable in the EU). You would get EUR 600.00 if Qantas cancelled your flight and could not give you an alternative that arrived within 4 hours of your original booking. But with Volcanic Ash? There are exceptions even with EC 261/2004: (C) We will also not pay any compensation to you if the cancellation of your flight has been caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.

I suppose a goodwill payment might have been appropriate. But this is also why Travel Insurance exists.

Edit: Just to ask, did you ask or did Qantas tell you at the time you took the other flight to Sydney what your refund would be? I was told how much I'd get when I made the same decision.
 
Last edited:
I doubt if switching airline loyalty would help.

Maybe not with pricing strategy but I won't have to go far to find better customer service.

Did you ask or did Qantas tell you at the time you took the other flight to Sydney what your refund would be? I was told how much I'd get when I made the same decision.

No. I was told how to apply but no specific figures were ever mentioned. I was already aware of the QF press release announcing the availability of a rebook or refund for cancelled flights.

Thanks for the EU information in your post - appreciated.
 
The fact that qantas could separate out the first leg to me is a pretty strong indication that it wasn't an integral part of the onward journey.

Is the NZ- Oz leg totally cancelled? It would be interesting to know the response if you asked to rebook that leg to a later date, sometime in the 12 months following the original booking date.
 
The fact that qantas could separate out the first leg to me is a pretty strong indication that it wasn't an integral part of the onward journey.

Is the NZ- Oz leg totally cancelled? It would be interesting to know the response if you asked to rebook that leg to a later date, sometime in the 12 months following the original booking date.

Now there's an interesting thought!! I could try that. Though given they argue the leg had zero value I would be surprised if they agreed.
 
Now there's an interesting thought!! I could try that. Though given they argue the leg had zero value I would be surprised if they agreed.

Well that's the interesting bit. ;) If they agree to rebook then that says something about the value.

I'm having a bit of trouble getting my rebooked flight to ticket. They're looking now. But they did let me change the outbound leg of ADL-SYD-ADL to be SYD-ADL on a date after my return. So switched the order and same city pair. Very dodgy on my part to ask for it, but they agreed. Will see what happens.
 
The fact that qantas could separate out the first leg to me is a pretty strong indication that it wasn't an integral part of the onward journey.

Is the NZ- Oz leg totally cancelled? It would be interesting to know the response if you asked to rebook that leg to a later date, sometime in the 12 months following the original booking date.

No harm in trying! But have a read of the Conditions of Carriage: Qantas

These circumstances are pretty well covered.
6.6 Coupon Sequence

(a) The fare paid for your Ticket has been calculated on the basis of the sequence of transportation shown in your Ticket. We will not honour your Ticket and it will no longer be valid if you do not use the coupons or take the journey in that sequence.
(b) If you require a change to your sequence of transportation, and your fare allows it, you may request a fare recalculation and further payment may be required.
(c) If you need to change your transportation due to Events Beyond Your Control, you must notify us promptly and we will use reasonable efforts to transport you to your next Stopover or final destination without further payment.

Qantas waived the above conditions. And the refund is here:

13.2 What Refund is Available?

Where a refund is payable in accordance with these Conditions of Carriage, unless otherwise specified in these Conditions of Carriage the refund will be equal to:
  • the fare paid (including any charges and taxes but minus our reasonably incurred administration costs) if no part of the Ticket is used, or
  • if part of the Ticket is used, the difference between the fare paid and the fare that would have been payable if booked for the travel taken,
including any applicable charges and taxes on the amount refunded, less any cancellation fees under the applicable fare rules and any reasonable administration fee.
Depending on the fare type, where a Ticket is partly used, the unused part may have little or no refund value.

Qantas also waived the cancellation and administration fees.

So... the original WGN-SYD sector is now useless because it would be now out of sequence and because the ticket is partly used the refund is a fare difference refund. And in the OP's case that difference probably is, unfortunatley, $0. (well -$ in fact) :(
 
This is an interesting situation and I am not sure what the outcome of the arguments are.

In a legal sense, you had a contract to fly from new zealand to london. QF breached that contract.

Ordinarily there is a get out clause for issues beyond their control.

It is important to note that regular contractual law applies. Qantas cannot override contract law. So their 'offer' to reprice an itinerary may not be the extend of remedies available to you under law... it's just one they have picked to give you.

The interesting thing is that while the ash cloud may have been a valid reason to cancel flights (a matter beyond their control) the counter argument would be that QF still operated flights in terms of its code-shares, and acted as agent to transport its own passengers on flights of other airlines... (as confirmed by the Air NZ CEO).

So... given those elements... was the QF decision to cancel its own metal truly an operation matter beyond its control? If it was so concerned about safety then surely it would have cancelled all its passengers on code shares and refused to rebook on other airlines? At what point did QF become aware that other airlines were able to fly under/around the ash cloud with no damage to their aircraft?

I don't know how those arguments would stack up.

What happened in this case was that QF indicated it was going to breach its contract. If its reasons were not valid, then I believe full damages for the trans tasman sector would be payable. I think a contact to consumer affairs would be a good stat. If nothing there, then possibly a trip to the small claims court. I severly doubt QF would want to have a case like this heard because it could potentially open up a can of worms. I think they would pay you the moeny (although I guess in your case you have insurance for that purpose)
 
No harm in trying! But have a read of the Conditions of Carriage: Qantas

These circumstances are pretty well covered.


Qantas waived the above conditions. And the refund is here:



Qantas also waived the cancellation and administration fees.

So... the original WGN-SYD sector is now useless because it would be now out of sequence and because the ticket is partly used the refund is a fare difference refund. And in the OP's case that difference probably is, unfortunatley, $0. (well -$ in fact) :(

In my case qantas waived the conditions and offered a refund or to rebook at a later date. They have rebooked my leg out of sequence. Sure I didn't check the waiver conditions for NZ flights. But looking at the qantas website it talks about a full fare waiver, whatever that means.
 
Has anyone actually received a refund from Qantas yet? I submitted my claim back in June and received a phone call acknowledging receipt of same, but still no credit on my credit card.

Cheers
JB
 
Has anyone actually received a refund from Qantas yet? I submitted my claim back in June and received a phone call acknowledging receipt of same, but still no credit on my credit card.

I received a $750 reimbursement for hotel expenses within a couple of weeks of submitting the claim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.
Back
Top