Reimbursement/refunds due to disruptions caused by volcanic ash

[Ikara]

I received a $750 reimbursement for hotel expenses within a couple of weeks of submitting the claim.

Thanks - I'll need to chase it up then. That should be fun!!

JB

 

[Austman]

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)

The Qantas website covers this too in Terms and Conditions of Carriage. 9.1 Schedule Changes and Cancellations by us. The reimbursements for a jouney that has not yet commenced seem similar to that what the OP was offered - get a refund or rebook.

If the OP had cancelled the whole trip a full refund should have been made. Even if just the WGN-LHR part was cancelled, something like 50% would have been refunded - because the original fare is priced in two parts: 1. WGN-LHR and 2. LHR-WGN. The WGN-SYD and SYD-WGN sectors of the ticket are not separately priced. If they had been separately priced, the refund amount might have been more straight forward.

Edit: Not even a multi-city WGN-SYD, SYD-LHR, LHR-SYD, SYD-WGN separately prices the sectors.

 

[Austman]

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.

Interesting. Could you give some more details? What your original ticket itinerary was and what Qantas re-booked you to?

 

[Austman]

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

I had MEL-WGN-MEL. Stranded in WGN, I eventually took the cancel/refund offer. Even though I had partly used my ticket, because it was separately priced MEL-WGN and WGN-MEL, I got a full refund of the WGN-MEL cost. That agreed with Qantas CoC which states "the refund will be equal to: 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." i.e. I had to pay for MEL-WGN travel I had taken. Qantas waived any refund fees. I also was compensated for meals and a hotel. All the details are earlier in this thread.

 

[medhead]

Interesting. Could you give some more details? What your original ticket itinerary was and what Qantas re-booked you to?

Yep. It has actually just been ticketed in the last few hours after sitting there for a few weeks. Originally booked as ADL-SYD-ADL with the return leg 2 days after the outbound. Ended up putting the outbound leg on hold and flew with DJ. Then flew the return leg. Then called to rebook the held leg. They agreed to make it SYD-ADL. So it has become SYD-ADL, SYD-ADL.

I guess it was treated as a credit, with fees waived, by being on hold. But manual intervention was required to get a ticket issued. Both flight are in the same fare class.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The Qantas website covers this too in Terms and Conditions of Carriage. 9.1 Schedule Changes and Cancellations by us. The reimbursements for a jouney that has not yet commenced seem similar to that what the OP was offered - get a refund or rebook.

If the OP had cancelled the whole trip a full refund should have been made. Even if just the WGN-LHR part was cancelled, something like 50% would have been refunded - because the original fare is priced in two parts: 1. WGN-LHR and 2. LHR-WGN. The WGN-SYD and SYD-WGN sectors of the ticket are not separately priced. If they had been separately priced, the refund amount might have been more straight forward.

Edit: Not even a multi-city WGN-SYD, SYD-LHR, LHR-SYD, SYD-WGN separately prices the sectors.

Once again... just because QF purports to limit contract law doesn't mean that it has been successful in doing so.

The reason for the breach of contract needs to be examined. If Qantas was just to cancel a flight on pure whim, it is unfair and unreasonable to only offer a refund when to purchase a ticket (at short notice) on another airline might cost hundreds of dollars more.

QF's claim that they cancelled flights because of safety, which is a valid argument, needs to be examined against their continued profit taking on code-share flights. If they had truly believed it was for safety, they should have off-loaded all pax on QF codeshares. They owe a duty of care to their passengers, and if something had gone wrong, then I believe QF would have had a duty of care to its code share pax.

I really don't know how that would pan out but it is unlikely to ever get tested in court because an airline just wouldn't let it go there.

 

[Austman]

If Qantas was just to cancel a flight on pure whim, it is unfair and unreasonable to only offer a refund when to purchase a ticket (at short notice) on another airline might cost hundreds of dollars more.

Which might be why the EU brought in EC Regulation No 261/2004.

 

[Austman]

Yep. It has actually just been ticketed in the last few hours after sitting there for a few weeks. Originally booked as ADL-SYD-ADL with the return leg 2 days after the outbound. Ended up putting the outbound leg on hold and flew with DJ. Then flew the return leg. Then called to rebook the held leg. They agreed to make it SYD-ADL. So it has become SYD-ADL, SYD-ADL.

I guess it was treated as a credit, with fees waived, by being on hold. But manual intervention was required to get a ticket issued. Both flight are in the same fare class.

Yes but these "simpler" fares are really two one-ways. That's the difference - the price is separately quoted so the refund/credit is known.

Do you know... is your new SYD-ADL flight priced at more then the cancelled ADL-SYD flight?

For the OP they could have probably done the same. Trouble is the WGN-SYD cancellation ended up have nil refund/credit value. Thanks to fare structures.

 

[Austman]

Just to add - I had to fork out an exta NZD 865.30 to get back home!!

But I felt I was reasonably fairly treated by Qantas. I claimed the fare difference on travel insurance but ended up still being out of pocket due to the insurance excess.

It's the refund based on fare structure that's the issue here I think. I got something back (about AUD 180.00) but some, e.g the OP, got nothing.

EU type regulation needed? Or is this the area for travel insurance?

 

[medhead]

Yes but these "simpler" fares are really two one-ways. That's the difference - the price is separately quoted so the refund/credit is known.

Do you know... is your new SYD-ADL flight priced at more then the cancelled ADL-SYD flight?

For the OP they could have probably done the same. Trouble is the WGN-SYD cancellation ended up have nil refund/credit value. Thanks to fare structures.

But the thing is my fare was described as a hold and rebook. So the refund/cancel value shouldn't be a consideration, in theory; if the OP was able to say I'll take the rebook option on the flight you've cancelled. Noting that qantas cancelled one flight and not the entire trip to LHR. Sure we can go back to CoCs and all. But the situation is that qantas said they would waive the fare conditions for cancelled flights and allow them to be rebooked to a later date. I just think it would be interesting to know what would have happened if they asked to rebook that one cancelled flight.

As for my flights. Certainly they are simpler and can be treated as 2 one way flights. But they are still on one PNR and qantas has bypassed 2 fundamental rules due to the volcanic ash cloud in relation to my booking. That indicates these things can be done given the will.

Price wise, I'm not totally sure. Both were sale fares and I recall expecting a small fare difference, $5/$10. But no charge was made.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Just to add - I had to fork out an exta NZD 865.30 to get back home!!

But I felt I was reasonably fairly treated by Qantas. I claimed the fare difference on travel insurance but ended up still being out of pocket due to the insurance excess.

It's the refund based on fare structure that's the issue here I think. I got something back (about AUD 180.00) but some, e.g the OP, got nothing.

EU type regulation needed? Or is this the area for travel insurance?

To the greatest extent possible, this should not be a matter for travel insurance.

All our premiums go up if we allow companies to breach contracts without good cause. (not saying they didn't have a good cause in this case... but my i have outlined possible counter arguments previously).

Just interested in what way you think you were 'fairly treated by qantas'? Everyone else was honoring their contracts except one - the Qantas Group.

QF's continued mucking aroound caused me inconvenience and several hours worth of bookings and rebookings. I'm still waiting for a refund myself (promised 6 weeks ago).

I seem to be missing the whole 'fair' thing somewhere...

 

[Austman]

I really don't know how that would pan out but it is unlikely to ever get tested in court because an airline just wouldn't let it go there.

Do you have evidence that this is actually happening?

This whole situation is like when airlines re-schedule their ticketed flights. That has happened to me many times with many airlines. The re-schedule (for me by sometimes by >6 hours) can mean missed onward flights and extra nights in hotels etc. If you are not on a single initerary, they don't care about the missed onward connections. But the compensation that has been offered (if any) is a free re-book or a refund (to the airline refund rules). It seems to be airline industry practice . And sometimes even travel insurance or even EC Regulation does not cover this... as I've found out.

"Fairly" treated means that Qantas offered a free re-booking/refund and to cover my incidental costs (meals and hotel) until the new flight. I elected to cancel and take another carrier.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Do you have evidence that this is actually happening?

This whole situation is like when airlines re-schedule their ticketed flights. That has happened to me many times with many airlines. The re-schedule (for me by sometimes by >6 hours) can mean missed onward flights and extra nights in hotels etc. If you are not on a single initerary, they don't care about the missed onward connections. But the compensation that has been offered (if any) is a free re-book or a refund (to the airline refund rules). It seems to be airline industry practice . And sometimes even travel insurance or even EC Regulation does not cover this... as I've found out.

"Fairly" treated means that Qantas offered a free re-booking/refund and to cover my incidental costs (meals and hotel) until the new flight. I elected to cancel and take another carrier.

All depends on what, where, when, how and why!

Damages for breach of contract are claimable, even under the warsaw convention, for breaches that are reasonable forseeable (an onward connection might not be, unless it was linked, but certainly lost accommodation might be if you were travelling out of your home city). And as long as the airline is responsible...

you can see the issues already starting up.

It would be interesting, for example, to see how the court would now see the issue of overbooking. In the good ol' days (1950's-1990's or so) when tickets were flexible there may have been a good argument for overbooking.

But these days, if you are flying on a non-refundable and non-changeable fare, the argument runs pretty thin. There is no 'lost revenue' to the airline by you not turning up... One could even use that argument to say that a passenger with a non-refundable fare has more right to a seat on an overbooked aircraft than does a passenger on a fully flexible fare!

 

[nlagalle]

I just used my Amex Plat travel insurance for the emergency cover. Just waiting for the assessment to go through.. Never bothered with QF as the hotel cost way more than they were offering..

 

[Austman]

I just used my Amex Plat travel insurance for the emergency cover. Just waiting for the assessment to go through.. Never bothered with QF as the hotel cost way more than they were offering..

My CC travel insurance needed a letter from the travel provider detailing the event and reimbursements offered. Might yours pay the hotel minus the $250.00/night that Qantas offered?

 

[nlagalle]

My CC travel insurance needed a letter from the travel provider detailing the event and reimbursements offered. Might yours pay the hotel minus the $250.00/night that Qantas offered?

I haven't heard back yet, but I don't believe I will need to as I activated the emergency fund the day it happened, it was some time after QF came out and offered claims.

 

[Ikara]

Thanks - I'll need to chase it up then. That should be fun!!

JB

Sent in another application for refund with the message that I was still waiting for my refund from my original application. Well, Qantas rang me today and told me that they had credited my Amex back in June. With a bit of prodding on my part, they discovered that it had been credited to someone else's card. So now they've gone away to think about how they're going to handle that one.

So, one of you lot has got my credit. Hands up - who is it? (Only joking)

JB

 

[Stuser]

Sent in another application for refund with the message that I was still waiting for my refund from my original application. Well, Qantas rang me today and told me that they had credited my Amex back in June. With a bit of prodding on my part, they discovered that it had been credited to someone else's card. So now they've gone away to think about how they're going to handle that one.

JB

That's kinda funny (ok, not for you), as well as being incredibly stupid of Qantas!