Aerlingus fuel surcharge

[finbar]

as per indo today
A CONSUMER watchdog has claimed Aer Lingus passengers are entitled to a full refund for fuel surcharges paid on upcoming long-haul flights despite the airline's insistence they still apply.
Amid a growing clamour for refunds from irate travellers, Consumers Association of Ireland chairman Michael Kilcoyne said passengers who have not already used their tickets have a very strong case to make against the airline if it ignores its own 'Conditions of Carriage' policy published on its website which appears to contradict the fuel surcharge policy.
Section 4.2 of the policy statement states: "Applicable taxes, fees and charges imposed by a government or other authority, or by the operator of an airport, shall be payable by you. At the time you purchase your ticket, you will be advised of taxes, fees and charges not included in the fare, most of which will normally be shown separately on the ticket.
"Similarly, in the event of any taxes, fees or charges which you have paid to us at the time of ticket issuance are abolished or reduced such that they no longer apply to you, or a lesser amount is due, you will be entitled to claim a refund."
The policy is part of the contract between the airline and the consumer and it clearly states passengers are entitled to a refund, Mr Kilcoyne told the Irish Independent last night. "These people are entitled to a refund. If they don't, they should ring the National Consumer Agency (NCA) and the NCA should make a complaint to Aer Lingus," he said.
The airline announced on Friday it is dropping its fuel surcharges on all long-haul flights booked from December 12 onwards. However, the airline said it would not refund the surcharge on future flights booked prior to December 12.
Complaint
In one complaint yesterday, a man who paid €950 in fuel surcharges for a flight he booked in August to Florida with his wife and three children asked if he would get a refund if he rebooked the flight; he was told no, because he had agreed to the terms and conditions of his original booking and "agreed to no refund on fuel surcharges".
Aer Lingus said in a statement last night: "Aer Lingus's terms and conditions provide that changes in taxes, fees or charges imposed by a government or other authority after the date of purchase may result in a refund to or an additional payment from a passenger.
"In contrast, fuel surcharges are set by the carrier to take account of the additional costs incurred as a result of increased fuel prices and so are part of the air fare. As a result they are subject to the applicable fare terms and conditions and are not subject to change after the date of purchase."

[lemonhead]

I can't imagine Aer Lingus simply refunding money so I wonder should one first contact them and ask for a refund and then go to the NCA if/when they refuse or ignore. I have flights to NY tomorrow and I paid quite a chunk on fuel surcharges.

[Bob_tg]

Originally Posted by finbar

as per indo today
imposed by a government or other authority, or by the operator of an airport

I actually don't logically follow Mr. Kilcoyne's position. Clearly, this policy does not extend to the airline itself.

As much as we may all think the situation is ludicrous, there is still not a basis for Aer Ligus to refund these charges. They can do what they want within the parameters of their terms. We can also do what we want and shop elsewhere the next time.

By the way, I am flying with Aer Lingus this Friday and paid around €200 in fuel surcharges (for the two of us) last September. I won't be asking for this surcharge to be returned - as much as I'd like to, I think I'd be wasting my time.

[Padraigb]

There seems to be a media feeding frenzy on this one (I heard Liveline yesterday, and Joe was encouraging disgruntled callers).

I think Bob_tg reads better than Michael Kilcoyne. It is disappointing that somebody who represents himself as a consumer advocate is wrong about the basis for a major public statement. Frankly, I'm not surprised that the Indo picked it up and ran it that way: stirring things up can help sales.

Aer Lingus did something that I thought right: effectively, they subsumed fuel costs into basic ticket price (if they would do the same with all the other charges, I'd like it even better). Then they presented it badly. Either they are short in PR/marketing expertise, or they by-passed their experts.

[mcaul]

When Aer Lingus imposedfuel surcharges did they ask those who hd already booked but not yet flown to pay the charges?

If they didn't then they would be coorect in not refunding charges already applied, if they did then they have to make refunds.

I don't know the answer 100% but I'm guessing that they did not back date the charges when they were imposed - so unfortunately their argument would win out in any legal challenge.

[bond-007]

Originally Posted by mcaul

When Aer Lingus imposedfuel surcharges did they ask those who hd already booked but not yet flown to pay the charges?

They did not. I was in that group myself, the fuel surcharge came in a week after I had booked. They did not demand anything extra from me.

It is mad for the CAI to think that AL should have to refund anyone.

[jhegarty]

Originally Posted by finbar

"Applicable taxes, fees and charges imposed by a government or other authority, or by the operator of an airport, shall be payable by you.

Now all he has to do is find out which government , authority or airport imposed the fuel surcharge.....

[ubiquitous]

Kilcoyne isn't even CAI chairman any more. That post has been held by James Doorley since 2007

http://consumerassociation.ie/press271107.html

[Padraigb]

Kilcoyne is currently Vice-Chairperson or Vice-Chairman (depending on which CAI document you read). I did a brief trawl through the Irish Independent, and some of their writers seem to know that.

It looks to me as if both Doorley and Kilcoyne issue press statements on behalf of CAI.

[ubiquitous]

Originally Posted by Padraigb

I did a brief trawl through the Irish Independent, and some of their writers seem to know that.

Not the guy who produced the effort quoted above.

[Padraigb]

Originally Posted by ubiquitous

Not the guy who produced the effort quoted above.

Obviously. It was a journalist named Allison Bray. She made the same mistake in at least one other piece. She is not the only one to get his role wrong.

[parsi]

Originally Posted by finbar

as per indo today
A CONSUMER watchdog has claimed Aer Lingus passengers are entitled to a full refund for fuel surcharges paid on upcoming long-haul flights despite the airline's insistence they still apply.
Amid a growing clamour for refunds from irate travellers, Consumers Association of Ireland chairman Michael Kilcoyne said passengers who have not already used their tickets have a very strong case "

Typical Indo.

Big difference between "entitled" and "have a strong case".

Also the CAI isn't a "watchdog" - it's a magazine publisher who only ever seems to take issue with headline-grabbing items such as fuel-surcharges or Aer-Lingus selling 1st class tickets rather than bread and butter stuff such as why haven't prices gone down since the Groceries Act was removed , why doesn't the NCA prosecute retailers who conssitently flout pricing regulations ?

[Bob_tg]

Originally Posted by parsi

Also the CAI isn't a "watchdog" - it's a magazine publisher

Interesting observation. Maybe somone should investigate whether the CAI delivers good value for money??