Ryanair tells widow her dead husband needs to apply for refund
Yvonne Shield, 44, tried to cancel Colin Shield's flight from Edinburgh to Venice after he died in April.
He had booked the flights last year and was due to fly in September to represent Scotland at a powerchair football match.
Mr Shield was tetraplegic after an accident 14 years ago, and required two essential carers to accompany him on the flight, whose tickets he had paid for.
After his death from a brain bleed, Ms Shield contacted Ryanair customer support to get the flights refunded, but she said she was told she could not get the money back for the carers' tickets as Mr Shield had booked them.
She was promised a refund of only £258 for his ticket but said she has not received that either.
When Ms Shield got back in touch to chase the refund, she was reportedly told they could not disclose any information unless they speak to the original booker, despite being informed that the booker had died.
Ms Shield said she provided Ryanair with her husband's death certificate and proof that she is the executor of his will, but that the airline refused to speak with her.
Ryanair apologised and said Ms Shield was 'regrettably incorrectly advised wrongly' by their customer service agent.
Ms Shield, from Glasgow, said: 'Colin passed on April 12 and I contacted them in April. I filled out the form to get a refund for Colin and the carers. They authorised part of the refund but they didn't send it.
'They said their policy is to refund only Colin's ticket, not the carers'. But I've not had it, there's nothing.
She added that when she chased the refund she was told 'they have to speak with the booker', although she, and her sister, had informed them that the booker had died.
Ms Shield explained she cannot get in contact with the carers who were booked as passengers 'because the contract ended', but added that 'they didn't pay for the tickets'.
The Ryanair help agent told her they 'can't disclose any information with someone not tied to the booking' and so ended the chat.
Ms Shield said the 'lack of empathy' from Ryanair has been upsetting, and caused her to 'burst into tears' She added: 'The fact they're not even giving me the money back is infuriating. It's like bashing your head on a brick wall. They're trying to speak to someone that isn't here, it's an unreasonable request.
'It's the lack of empathy, lack of understanding, it's not a bog-standard person going on a flight, it's a disabled person. If you had a family member who died, surely you would think it's all cancelled.'
A Ryanair spokesman said: 'Mrs Shields attempted to submit a refund request on April 26 and was advised to submit a death certificate and proof of executorship.
'On 30 Jun, Mrs Shields was informed that a refund (£257.58) was issued and was regrettably incorrectly advised by a customer service agent who wrongly believed that the other two passengers on the booking were not entitled to a refund.
'Our customer service department would be happy to further assist this passenger to correct this customer service agent's error and assist this passenger with their refund.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Deal or no deal?: world leaders walk tightrope in tariff negotiations with Trump
It was grip-and-grin time for Ursula von der Leyen as she sat across from Donald Trump in Scotland last week, with the two announcing a deal for 15% tariffs on European imports that would avert a transatlantic trade war – but came at a stiff price for the 27-country bloc. After committing to a unilateral US raise on tariffs that came on the heels of a Nato commitment to increase defense spending to 5% of national GDPs, von der Leyen then thanked Trump 'for his personal commitment and his leadership to achieve this breakthrough'. 'He is a tough negotiator, but he is also a dealmaker,' she said, as the US president beamed. The EU was one of just a number of parties to strike a deal with Trump before his temporary pause on new tariffs came to an end this week. And like many others, the guiding principle for the EU appeared to be: it can always get worse. 'This is clearly the best deal we could get under very difficult circumstances,' Maroš Šefčovič, the EU trade chief, said. Others had a far bleaker interpretation of the dynamics, as Trump has wielded the threat of sky-high tariffs to cudgel his trading partners into submission. 'It is a dark day when an alliance of free peoples, brought together to affirm their common values and to defend their common interests, resigns itself to submission,' wrote the French prime minister, François Bayrou. Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán put it another way: 'It was Donald Trump eating Ursula von der Leyen for breakfast,' he said on his podcast. Later, he called her a 'featherweight'. World leaders have been forced to adopt a position of appeasement and pragmatism as they've approached the Trump administration, which has swung between imposing staggering tariffs on imports and then announcing last minute pauses and exclusions that suggest there is little rhyme or reason to the White House's tariff strategy. But the key factor for Trump appears to be taking whatever he can get. Countries across Asia exporting to the US were quickest to begin negotiating new trade deals with the White House. Vietnam was desperate to cut a 46% tariff imposed on the country, and Trump early last month announced that he had negotiated a 20% rate with Vietnamese negotiators. Except, it turned out, they believed that they had negotiated an 11% rate, Politico reported. And treasury secretary Scott Bessent this week admitted that he had never seen the deal, which the Vietnamese authorities have never confirmed. Trump reportedly used the trade threats along with other incentives in order to broker a recent peace between Thailand and Cambodia after fighting broke out along the border between the two countries. He soon announced a 19% rate – a significant cut from 49% for Cambodia and 36% for Thailand – which appeared more motivated by international politics than trade considerations. But while many countries in the region will breathe a sigh of relief as they avert sky-high tariffs, some see a new danger in the arbitrary redrawing of the US's trade relationship with the world. 'What we felt during this negotiation is that the US trade environment is fundamentally changing,' South Korean trade minister Yeo Han-koo said shortly after a deal was made to tariff imports at 15%, down from a threatened 25%. The two sides had made a verbally agreement but had not made a formal draft, he said, because the deal had to be struck so quickly. 'I think we are entering a new normal era,' he said. 'So, although we have overcome this crisis, we cannot be relieved, because we do not know when we will face pressure from tariffs or non-tariff measures again.' Leaders who have stood up to Trump are having the hardest time. Among others, Trump has focused his ire on Canada, which he has blamed for the fentanyl crisis in the US, a charge that Canada's prime minister Mark Carney has rejected. Trump on Friday announced that he would raise tariffs on Canada, a top trading partner, to 35%, as tough negotiations between the two sides continued. Carney, who had coined the elections slogan 'Elbows up, Canada' as a signal of defiance against Trump's tariff and annexation threats, said he was 'disappointed'. 'While we will continue to negotiate with the United States on our trading relationship, the Canadian government is laser focused on what we can control: building Canada strong,' Carney said.
The Sun
2 hours ago
- The Sun
I could get £10,000 back due to car finance scandal despite judges landmark ruling – but I'm devastated for others
PIZZA delivery worker Roy Turner could be set to get £10,000 back in car finance compensation despite a landmark Supreme Court ruling in favour of banks. Roy, 57, from Tayport, bought a BMW 118D in 2016 to help his disabled wife, Elaine, with her mobility issues. He is one of millions who could still be due back cash as part of the car finance scandal as banks will still be liable to pay out claims for those hit with excessive interest, which dealers earned commission from. The UK's highest court was considering an appeal against a Court of Appeal ruling made in October last year, which were about three different claims from people who had each bought a car on credit. In each case, the car dealer made a profit on the sale of the car but also made commission for introducing the business to them - which the three people claimed they did not know about. These were known as "commission disclosure complaints" and could apply up to 99% of car finance loans. The Court of Appeal ruled in October that the firms broke the law by not telling borrowers about 'secret' commission payments. Two lenders, FirstRand Bank and Close Brothers, challenged the ruling in April, calling it a "egregious error". Today, the Supreme Court overturned the ruling in two of the cases but it does not entirely close down the path for compensation for drivers. Firstly, it upheld the judgement in the case of Mr Johnson, who was an extreme example of where excessive interest had been charged. But the UK's highest court ruled that banks are not liable for so-called secret commission payments. However, they will still be liable for discretionary commission arrangements, which applied to 40% of car finance deals. The city watchdog - The Financial Conduct Authority - has been considering a financial redress scheme for drivers over PCP and hire purchase agreements from before 2021. It is where brokers and dealers could increase the amount of interest they charge without telling them. If they did, they got increased commission. The Supreme Court ruling had put these claims on hold - but now the FCA is set to reveal within six weeks whether it will launch an industry wide compensation scheme. It is deciding whether this scheme will involve automatic compensation refunds or whether drivers will have to "opt-in". It is also looking at the interest rates for compensation payments. Payouts could have been as high as £44billion for the scandal in total if the Court of Appeal decision had been upheld, but now they are now expected to be around £20billion. This will be a big win for the banks and disappointing for affected drivers - but you could still get cash. Roy had a discretionary commission arrangement for his car, so could still get a payout. Commenting on the ruling, he said: "These companies have been robbing the poor to benefit the rich. I'm devastated for others." Roy bought his car for £8,650, but the cost of the credit was an eye-watering £9,356, bringing his total bill to £17,996. He said the car dealer, John Clark Aberdeen, did not do an affordability check to see if he could afford the monthly repayments, even though he had a bad credit rating. The monthly repayments were £157 a month, and he was charged an interest rate of 39.1% APR. The term of the loan was five years. Roy said that he cannot remember having a conversation about any commission he would have to pay for. 'It's been stressful - it was hard to afford the car loan,' he said. 'I was struggling to afford phone bills. If the car needed repair work or an MOT, I would need to borrow money from friends. It was very embarrassing. 'I wish I never took it out because of the interest rate.' Roy decided to ring legal firm Courmac Legal after watching an advert on television about the mis-selling scandal. The firm has put in a claim on his behalf, and says that while his lender, Advantage Finance, has not disclosed the level of commission charged, his claim could be worth as much as £10,000. 'I feel disgusted,' Roy said. 'I was completely misled by the dealer and lender when I took out a loan to buy my car. 'The financial impact on my family of the hidden commission was considerable and I've been fighting to get the compensation I'm owed. 'I felt like a fool for paying all that money for a car.' Roy's local MP, Wendy Chamberlain, said she was 'shocked' to hear about Roy's case. She said: 'Loans must be transparent practices, not riddled with hidden commissions for those who sell them at the expense of honest people's hard-earned money.' Advantage Finance and John Clark Aberdeen were contacted for comment. Who can claim? That has not been confirmed but anyone who had a car, van or motorbike on PCP or hire purchases before January 28 2021 could be due back £1,000s. More than 23million people believe they could be in line for compensation, polling by consumer law firm Slater and Gordon suggests. Consumer groups have estimated that motorists took out more than 30million car loans over those years. The FCA will decide who and how this will work within six weeks of today's judgement. It has said it may even do it without the need for people to reclaim, with firms ordered to make automatic refunds. It is likely that you won't be able to complain about agreements taken out before April 6 2007, as this is when the Financial Ombudsman took over motor finance complaints, but the exact rules are still being worked out. DCAs were banned after January 2021, so anyone who took out an agreement after this time wouldn't be able to claim. How to claim While we wait for the FCA to reveal it's plans you can still lodge a claim. If you think you should be compensated, consumer finance website has a free email template to help you complain to your finance provider. You can also complain directly to your provider without using the template. Anyone who took out car finance and could be eligible should file a claim, even if their previous one was denied. In your complaint, ask whether you were overcharged due to your broker receiving a commission and ask the company to rectify this if it happened. If you are not happy with the company's response then you can escalate your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service for free. You have until July 29, 2026, or up to 15 months from the date of the company's final response letter to do so, whichever is longer. 'My jaw hit the floor when I discovered the huge £44billion car finance scandal' PAUL Carlier's jaw hit the floor the moment he discovered that dealerships and brokers were arranging finance deals with high interest rates for customers so they could bag a higher commission. It was back in 2015, when he and his wife were taking out a deal for a new Mercedes, that the car dealer revealed the scandal. 'I was gobsmacked - I had to pick my jaw off the table,' he said. Little did he know that this would mark the beginning of a huge £44 billion mis-selling expose. Paul, 56, who investigates financial crime for a living, is the whistleblower who first exposed the car mis-selling finance issue in 2016. He has been fighting to expose the alleged dodgy deals ever since and get redress for affected drivers since. It all started in 2011, when Paul's mother-in-law Alison took out a car finance agreement with a high interest rate of 14.9%. Paul, knew something was wrong. Alison, now 84, had a perfect credit score so shouldn't have been charged such a high rate. Alison bought a Ford S Max for £25,574 in September 2011 from car dealer SMC Motors. Her finance agreement was with Black Horse, and the total cost of the credit was £9,424, making her total bill around £35,000. The interest rate on her deal was 14.9% APR, which Paul believed was way too high based on her pristine credit history. 'I thought the APR was excessive and inappropriate,' he said. He made a complaint to Black Horse in May 2012, but after the lender investigated, he was told that she had not been mis-sold. 'I wasn't happy, it didn't add up,' he said. In December 2015, his wife, Louise, also bought a car on finance. The Mercedes E Class was £27,950 and the cost of credit was £8,376 - bringing the total bill to £36,326. The interest rate on her deal was 8.9% - which Paul said was 'much better than his mother-in-law's' to the car dealer at 123 Prestige. Then, the car dealer started to unveil how the finance deals were arranged. 'The higher the APR charged, the bigger the commission the dealer gets paid,' he said, which means dealerships and brokers were incentivised to charge higher interest rates. Paul made complaints to Black Horse, the FCA and the Financial Ombudsman about both Louise's and Alison's deals, which were both discretionary commission arrangements. They could still get compensation. Commenting on the Supreme Court's decision, Paul said: "It's not over - this won't end here - with the evidence we've got, we will bring new claims and class actions on behalf of the victims who have today been denied justice." Black Horse and SMC Motors was approached for comment.
Daily Record
4 hours ago
- Daily Record
Dozens of new jobs could be created through electric bus charging hub after Renfrewshire Council green light
Ember Core has been granted planning permission to develop the facility on land to the southwest of St James Interchange. Dozens of new jobs could be created through the introduction of an electric bus charging hub in Paisley after plans were given the green light by Renfrewshire Council. Ember Core has been granted planning permission, subject to conditions, to develop the facility on brownfield land to the southwest of St James Interchange. The Edinburgh-based company, an electric coach operator, will use the site as a base for charging its vehicles and expects it to support approximately 60 new jobs, including driving roles, hub support and operational staff. An operational statement submitted with the application explained: "Ember, the UK's first 100 per cent electric coach operator, based in Edinburgh, plans to establish a new hub at West March Road, Paisley, to be used as a base for charging its vehicles. "This hub will allow Ember to establish new long-distance bus services from Glasgow Airport and Glasgow, for example, to Aberdeen, Inverness and Edinburgh." It continued: "Once fully operational, Ember anticipates that this site will support approximately 60 new jobs. This includes driving roles as well as hub support and operational staff. All roles will pay well above the real living wage. "The proposed site is a brownfield site close to Junction 29 of the M8. The location has been chosen due to its proximity to Glasgow Airport and Paisley, both attractive passenger destinations." Ember will primarily use the site for parking and charging buses and there will be a total of 18 parking bays, including space for up to 11 buses to charge simultaneously. During the day, an average of two to four buses are likely to be charging at any one time, with all bays only occupied overnight. The company also intends to add staff parking, a welfare unit for driver breaks and a gantry bus wash to make sure its fleet can be cleaned frequently. The nearest residential properties, which are found at St James Avenue, are located in excess of 200 metres to the southeast of the site. A report of handling by the council's chief planning officer said: "Given the nature and scale of the proposed development, it is considered that it would be compatible with the surrounding area without detriment to amenity."
