ACCC action re cancelled Qantas flights

[MARTINE]

Interesting read
….shaping up like a battle between Joan of Arc and (for all those boomers out there & with a little poetic license) ….Joan Jet(Star)…..

 

[Mr H]

Interesting read
….shaping up like a battle between Joan of Arc and (for all those boomers out there & with a little poetic license) ….Joan Jet(Star)…..

Well there are certainly some black hearts on display

 

[Brissy1]

Exactly - so next Friday the same (red e-deal) bundle of rights from Melbourne to Sydney costs between $155 (05:45) and $553 (13:00). QFs current defence seems to be that that is indeed the case as departure time isn't one of the things you are buying so how can you have missed the flight time you had never actually purchased anyway?. So buy the cheapest set of rights and turn up when you want to fly.

Business and consumer having same reciprocal rights? Sounds fair, will never happen.

 

[RooFlyer]

A story in today's Oz (probably paywalled, sorry)

Qantas accused of omitting information from defence of ACCC allegations over ghost flights

I thought this part the most interesting:

[Presiding judge] Justice Helen Rofe indicated it was her preference to send such matters to mediation but asked if there were any suitable dates in 2024 for a trial.

Mr Caleo [lawyer for the ACCC] responded that it would be “premature” at this point in time to block out dates for a trial, heightening expectations the ACCC would seek to settle with Qantas.

... which is the first time I've seen suggestion that the ACCC may wish to settle. If it does, there will probably be a statement from Qantas along these lines :

* "Settled so we can get on with business"

* "No admission of wrongdoing by Qantas and no findings against Qantas by Justice Rofe"

* "Therefore we can pay all our Executive Bonuses as planned"

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Business and consumer having same reciprocal rights? Sounds fair, will never happen.

My understanding is there are some unwritten rules favouring passengers. For instance the flat tyre rule whereby if you are caught up in traffic or literally get a flat tyre enroute to the airport the airline will book you on the next flight free. At least that’s how it is in North America

 

[Mr H]

At least that’s how it is in North America

Well if that's how it is in north America then that's how it must be in the rest of the world.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

My understanding is there are some unwritten rules favouring passengers. For instance the flat tyre rule whereby if you are caught up in traffic or literally get a flat tyre enroute to the airport the airline will book you on the next flight free. At least that’s how it is in North America

In the case of Qantas it's written in clause 7.4 of the CoC, credit voucher only, subject to a reasonable service fee.

(edited to update from 6.4 to 7.4)

 

[Danger]

In the case of Qantas it's written in clause 6.4 of the CoC, credit voucher only, subject to a reasonable service fee.

Section 6.4 of the conditions of carriage relates to currency. There's no mention of a credit voucher.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Section 6.4 of the conditions of carriage relates to currency. There's no mention of a credit voucher.

Sorry, my bad eyesight… let’s make that 7.4!

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Well if that's how it is in north America then that's how it must be in the rest of the world.

Do you know who I am? No seriously I'm asking. The attendant at the First lounge can't help me either and I forgot my name!

-RooFlyer88

 

[MARTINE]

Fear of flying courses from British Airways™

Renowned British Airways™ fear of flying courses from Flying With Confidence

flyingwithconfidence.com

Slightly OTT but BA run a fear of flying course. I have looked at the content and its quite good!

 

[serfty]

Had a surprising result the last couple of days.

Cliff notes:
- Checked in and was Airside for AKL discount economy booking
- Qantas cancelled the outbound flight 3 hours before departure
- I Cancelled online (Desktop) rather than call
- Fully refunded within 36 hours.

---

I was booked on the 11:45pm red-eye MEL-AKL flight Sunday. The flight was cancelled after I was checked in and airside.

They rebooked me to 6am via SYD flight to get to AKL 9 hours late, offering accom/taxi fares.

I chose the option to fully cancel (it was only a day trip) and I was advised to call Qantas do so. They would pay the cab home as I "lived more than 50km from the Airport".

The thought of calling Qantas at 11pm on a Sunday night was too much, so I cancelled online. This despite the indication online I needed to call for a full refund.

Worst case I would have to chase the "cancellation" fee.

Took the cab home and was asleep by 1am.

This morning I could see my CC had been refunded fully, two transactions one being the CC fee.

 

[RooFlyer]

Some movement on this today. Story in AFR on-line (paywalled)

Qantas risks regulator looking for ‘second bite of cherry’

There are a number of angles in the story; try to read it as i can only include a few snippets to give the flavour.

Qantas has responded to ACCC claim that its initial response was inadequate.

Qantas has doubled down on its “bundle of rights” defence and says the customers cited by the competition regulator were not substantially inconvenienced when it chose to keep selling cancelled flights.

But Qantas rejected the suggestion that it has not addressed the substance of allegations that it broke the law by selling cancelled flights, as well as the ACCC’s assertion that its defence was deficient in detail.

“Qantas also rejects the notion that the concise response is vague and unspecific in relation to facts, matters and circumstances on which Qantas relies in support of its defence,” the airline’s lawyers from Johnson, Winter and Slattery said.

Qantas said customers on the flights used by the ACCC to lodge their claim were notified and offered same-day rebooking at least 50 days before their flights, and three of the 10 flights had no passengers.

“Of the remaining seven flights, five had less than 10 ticketed passengers at the time the cancellation was notified and the remainder had 20 and 35 passengers respectively,” Qantas said.

The above seems not to address the 'misleading and deceptive conduct' claim of the ACCC? No matter what the subsequent remedy, the original sale was the conduct in question?


But the nub of the article is that the law upon which the ACC action was based has changed, and may give the ACCC a 'second go'.

“Qantas is saying that it can’t be a misrepresentation, or as the ACCC alleges that you’re selling something that has been cancelled or doesn’t exist because what you’re buying isn’t even a flight, it’s just a bundle of rights,” he [Associate Professor of regulation and governance at the University of Technology Sydney, Rob Nicholls] said.

But he warned this was a risky strategy, after changes to the consumer law aimed at stamping out unfair contract terms came into effect last month.

“Qantas is potentially engaging in a further risk, which is now that the law has changed on unfair contract terms, I would guess that the ACCC is now having a very good read of those terms to work out if anything in them is unfair,” Professor Nicholls said.

“The ACCC has taken this current case on the law that [used to exist] and potentially could have a second bite of the cherry now that the laws have changed.”

 

[kyle]

A reminder the ACCC survey closes 31 January 2024: Qantas - Flight cancellation survey - Australian Competition and Consumer Commission - Citizen Space

Disclaimer: I prefer not to fly QF and wanted to see how QF defends its bundle of rights argument.

 

[TheInsider]

wanted to see how QF defends its bundle of rights argument.

Probably the same way as every other airline.

 

[Mattg]

A reminder the ACCC survey closes 31 January 2024: Qantas - Flight cancellation survey - Australian Competition and Consumer Commission - Citizen Space

Disclaimer: I prefer not to fly QF and wanted to see how QF defends its bundle of rights argument.

Looks like this survey now closes on 31 March 2024?

But yes, it would be helpful if anyone who was affected by this and was booked to fly between May-July 2022 completes the survey.

 

[Mwenenzi]

QF newsroom 6 May 2024
QANTAS REACHES AGREEMENT WITH ACCC AND COMMENCES CUSTOMER REMEDIATION PROGRAM

The Qantas Group has today announced an agreement with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) to resolve court proceedings in relation to flight cancellation processes.

Under the settlement agreed with the ACCC, Qantas will commence a projected $20 million remediation program for impacted passengers, with payments to customers ranging from $225 to $450, and subject to the approval of the Federal Court of Australia, will pay a $100 million civil penalty.

The ACCC and Qantas will shortly seek approval of the proposed penalty by the Federal Court. However, Qantas intends to commence the remediation program in advance of the Court approval process.
<snip>
The ACCC’s case related to flight cancellation practices following the restart of operations post-COVID, which has been extended through to the end of August 2023, when steps were taken to ensure that processing of cancellation decisions occurred promptly.

The ACCC is no longer proceeding with its claims against Qantas about wrongful acceptance of payment, including any allegation that Qantas received payment for a service it did not, and had no intention of, providing.

All affected customers were given the option of a refund or an alternate flight.

Customer remediation program
More than 86,000 customers who made a booking on a flight two or more days after the cancellation decision had been made will be compensated as part of this program. Those impacted customers will receive $225 for domestic/trans-Tasman flights and $450 for international flights. This is on top of any refund or alternative flight already offered to these customers.

Payments will be available through a dedicated online portal facilitated by professional services firm, Deloitte, and will be independently audited. Qantas will be notifying impacted customers via email from next month with details about how they can lodge a claim. Further information can be found at www.qantasremediation.deloitte.com.au
<snip>

As a wild guess QF will still pay big $$$ bonus's to top level staff.

 

[SeaWolf]

The ACCC has put out a press release as well.

Qantas agrees to $20m payments to customers and, subject to court approval, a $100m penalty for misleading consumers

Qantas has admitted that it misled consumers by advertising tickets for tens of thousands of flights it had already decided to cancel, and by cancelling thousands more flights without promptly telling ticketholders of its decision. The ACCC and Qantas will ask the Federal Court to impose a...

www.accc.gov.au

Qantas (ASX: QAN) has admitted that it misled consumers by advertising tickets for tens of thousands of flights it had already decided to cancel, and by cancelling thousands more flights without promptly telling ticketholders of its decision, after court action by the ACCC.
As part of an agreement announced today, the ACCC and Qantas will ask the Federal Court to impose a penalty of $100 million on Qantas for breaching the Australian Consumer Law.
<snip>
“We are pleased to have secured these admissions by Qantas that it misled its customers, and its agreement that a very significant penalty is required as a result of this conduct. The size of this proposed penalty is an important milestone in enforcing the Australian Consumer Law,” ACCC Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said.

 

[FlyingKangaroo]

A slap on the wrist. The real problem here is that these actions are meant to have a deterrent effect, but this settlement simply sends the message to others that the risk is one worth taking; in the occasional event you're pulled onto the carpet, the fine is a manageable and acceptable "cost of doing business."

 

[qaz]

QF actually had ghost flights for 2yrs, not just 2mths!