AIRLINE passengers bumped due to overbooking can now expect to be compensated, according to the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act.
Lucien Pierce, partner at Phukubje Pierce Maithela Attorneys, says the Act also provides for compensation for any other expenses that the consumer incurs.
Says Lucien: “Section 47(3) is specifically directed at suppliers of goods and services who, in the past would arbitrarily and unilaterally implement changes to what they had promised to supply, without fear of any serious consequences.
“The Act says that where they can find someone else who can provide the same service to you, then they must do that. They must try and put you on another flight, perhaps one of that airline’s competitors or whomever they have an agreement with. That is what they technically should be doing.
“What is interesting is that section 47 provides that a supplier such as an airline can mitigate its failure to provide the service by supplying or procuring ‘another person to supply a consumer with comparable goods or services’.”
Adds Lucien: “In theory, we could see rival airlines using each other to transport their bumped passengers, on a regular basis, only to remain compliant with the Act.”
Lucien advises that in cases where the airline has overbooked a flight, the passenger would not only be entitled to a refund of the cost of the ticket but also interest on the cost until it is repaid.
In addition, a passenger could justifiably claim the reasonable costs of a meal, of calling home, reasonable accommodation costs and basic toiletries.
Overbooking is an industry standard for most airlines to ensure that every seat is filled when a flight departs.
BA Comair says overbooking saves the airline around R60m a year on no-shows. Passengers who are bumped are placed on the next available flight at no extra cost.
Heidi Brauer, marketing director, told BTN that the challenge was that airlines around the world had revenue management models based on a complex set of interrelated factors that were essential for maintaining revenue integrity.
Says Heidi: “The CPA has been formulated as a generic solution. Many industries, including airlines, are working with their bodies (in the case of airlines, the Airlines Association of Southern Africa) to propose a set of considerations or guidelines to ensure sustainability for the industry, whilst ensuring customers are cared for.”
Each airline applies its own policies at present, taking into account the provisions of the CPA, says Chris Zweigenthal, AASA ce. “We are busy working on proposals that could be considered for inclusion in an industry code, should such a code be approved. This is a work in progress but at the moment each airline will manage its own situation with regard to the CPA.”
Stephen Forbes, spokesperson for British Airways, told TNW that it strived to keep overbooking and offloads to a minimum. He says BA meets the stringent standards of compensation required by the European Union.
“The Acts may be different but, as far as I’m aware, the details pertaining to the airline industry have not yet been finalised by the CPA. Our legal advice is that in terms of the general Act, we should be compliant, given the provisions in the European regulations for the moment.”
Chris Hoare, chief revenue officer at SA Airlink, says Airlink has not traditionally overbooked its flights as it operates limited frequencies to remote centres and the consequence of denied boarding can have serious consequences for passengers.
“As a result of a substantial no-show factor of in excess of 15% experienced on some Airlink routes, we implement a no-show forfeiture rule for all tickets and fare classes. The CPA, therefore, did not really have any substantial effect on Airlink and the no-show rule change was implemented some 12 months ago.”
From BTN now
No comments:
Post a Comment