Webjet ordered to pay $9m for dodgy advertising and booking confirmations
By Farid Farid
Updated July 29 2025 - 8:42am, first published 8:33am
Travel giant Webjet has been slapped with a $9 million fine after admitting dozens of customers were slugged with hidden fees. Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
All articles from our website
The digital version of Today's Paper
All other in your area
The Federal Court ordered the flight comparison site to pay $9 million on Monday for making false or misleading statements about the price of flights and booking confirmations.
The fares were advertised on its website, in promotional emails and on social media posts.
An investigation found customers were stung with hidden fees on top of advertised prices. (Dan Himbrechts/AAP PHOTOS)
The Webjet fees represented 36 per cent of the ASX-listed firm's total revenue in the period from November 1, 2018 to November 13, 2023.
"Seeking to lure in customers with prices that don't tell the whole story is a serious breach of the Australian Consumer Law," the commission's chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said.
"Retailers must ensure their advertised prices are accurate. They should clearly disclose additional fees and charges."
The ACCC commenced its investigation after one consumer complained about an airfare advertised for $18, which ended up costing almost three times that amount after the compulsory fees were added.
The Webjet fees comprised the "Webjet servicing fee" and "booking price guarantee" fee, which ranged from $34.90 to $54.90 per booking.
They depended on whether the flights were domestic, to New Zealand and the Pacific or other international destinations.
ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said luring people with misleading prices was a serious breach of law. (Mick Tsikas/AAP PHOTOS)
While Webjet's website, app and most emails contained information about the additional fees, they were in the fine print near the bottom and not clearly communicated to customers.
In its social media posts, Webjet didn't disclose the additional fees at all.
The commission said Webjet admitted liability and it would also foot the bill for some of the ACCC's legal costs.
The online travel agency said in a statement on Monday it had come to an agreement with the commission in February.
"As previously disclosed to the ASX, the parties reached agreement over the proceedings in February 2025. The Federal Court's approval formally disposes of the proceeding," Webjet said.
Australian Associated Press
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AU Financial Review
an hour ago
- AU Financial Review
ASX at risk as Trump's Big Beautiful Bill distorts share prices
The latest surge in the Australian sharemarket above the 8800 level for the first time is being fuelled by a far rosier outlook for US corporate earnings and ignores the growing risk that profits from ASX-listed companies will slow for a fourth year. That's the warning from MST Marquee, which has told clients that the corporate tax changes in US President Donald Trump's Big Beautiful Bill had driven profit upgrades on Wall Street, alongside a weaker greenback and investment in artificial intelligence.
Sky News AU
12 hours ago
- Sky News AU
ASX plunges more than 8 per cent on Thursday following TPG blunder
Sky News Business Reporter Edward Boyd says the Australian stockmarket operator got smashed today – following the TPG blunder yesterday as it dropped more than 10 per cent at the open. 'The ASX also revealed this morning that it expects the ASIC inquiry is going to cost roughly $25 to 35 million dollars during the new financial year, to pay for things like legal expenses, additional resourcing and the establishment of a secretariat,' Mr Boyd said. ASX Limited finished down more than 8 per cent on Thursday.
The Advertiser
12 hours ago
- The Advertiser
PM backs working from home laws amid 'stunt' claims
Victoria has several ways to push ahead with legalising working from home, as the prime minister swings his support behind its potential. The Victorian government has promised to introduce laws sometime in 2026 to allow private and public sector employees to work from home two days a week. Much public discussion has focused on federal industrial relations laws potentially overriding proposed state laws, but employment law expert David Catanese said it was not that simple. The Hall and Wilcox partner pointed to "carve outs" in the federal Fair Work Act that specified state laws that provided more beneficial, flexible entitlements to employees could co-exist with commonwealth laws. "The devil will be in the detail and there will be limits on the extent of laws that can be made, but it is a potential pathway," he told AAP. Another would be adding "significant amendments" by increasing or creating new protections under equal opportunity laws, he said, so they covered a broader category of employees. Premier Jacinta Allan has pushed back against suggestions the move could trigger challenges from the private sector, pointing to advice about an "explicit provision" in the Fair Work Act for state-based anti-discrimination laws. The Fair Work Commission regulated commonwealth, not state law, so Mr Catanese warned it might be difficult for Victoria to enforce the new laws or penalties, depending on how the legislation was drafted. "It's possible we could have state laws without enforcement mechanisms - like a toothless tiger," he said. "That remains to be seen, as we haven't seen the proposed laws." Even so, he said the laws could create change by setting a benchmark negotiated into agreements. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has backed the laws. "I've got to say, it's consistent with our views, which are that working from home is something that's important, something that Australians voted for," he told reporters in Melbourne on Thursday. "Every time an (industrial relations) change is proposed, we hear suggestions that somehow this will undermine things." Property Council chief executive Mike Zorbas described the proposed laws as a "stunt", adding to criticism from a growing number of business groups with concerns including how the policy would affect productivity or office attendance. National office vacancy rates crept up slightly from 13.7 to 14.3 per cent in the six months to July 2025, which the council attributed to a rush of new supply. Mr Zorbas said while working from home was an uncontested benefit for many roles, the proposed legislation would add red tape for businesses of all sizes. Victorian minister Mary-Anne Thomas said the way people used the CBD had changed, although foot traffic had returned to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels. "Productivity has increased as a consequence of now nearly a third of the workforce being across Australia, working from home as part of hybrid work arrangements," she said. "We know that participation in the workforce continues to increase." Federal coalition frontbencher Tim Wilson labelled the policy "professional apartheid" in an opinion piece for the Australian Financial Review but the state opposition has demanded more details before deciding its stance. Opposition frontbencher Georgie Crozier argued many workplaces already had a hybrid model while retailers and hospitality businesses were constantly talking about issues in the city. "Anything we can do to improve the vibrancy and the areas around those concerns needs to be addressed, and I hope the government is listening to them," she said. Victoria has several ways to push ahead with legalising working from home, as the prime minister swings his support behind its potential. The Victorian government has promised to introduce laws sometime in 2026 to allow private and public sector employees to work from home two days a week. Much public discussion has focused on federal industrial relations laws potentially overriding proposed state laws, but employment law expert David Catanese said it was not that simple. The Hall and Wilcox partner pointed to "carve outs" in the federal Fair Work Act that specified state laws that provided more beneficial, flexible entitlements to employees could co-exist with commonwealth laws. "The devil will be in the detail and there will be limits on the extent of laws that can be made, but it is a potential pathway," he told AAP. Another would be adding "significant amendments" by increasing or creating new protections under equal opportunity laws, he said, so they covered a broader category of employees. Premier Jacinta Allan has pushed back against suggestions the move could trigger challenges from the private sector, pointing to advice about an "explicit provision" in the Fair Work Act for state-based anti-discrimination laws. The Fair Work Commission regulated commonwealth, not state law, so Mr Catanese warned it might be difficult for Victoria to enforce the new laws or penalties, depending on how the legislation was drafted. "It's possible we could have state laws without enforcement mechanisms - like a toothless tiger," he said. "That remains to be seen, as we haven't seen the proposed laws." Even so, he said the laws could create change by setting a benchmark negotiated into agreements. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has backed the laws. "I've got to say, it's consistent with our views, which are that working from home is something that's important, something that Australians voted for," he told reporters in Melbourne on Thursday. "Every time an (industrial relations) change is proposed, we hear suggestions that somehow this will undermine things." Property Council chief executive Mike Zorbas described the proposed laws as a "stunt", adding to criticism from a growing number of business groups with concerns including how the policy would affect productivity or office attendance. National office vacancy rates crept up slightly from 13.7 to 14.3 per cent in the six months to July 2025, which the council attributed to a rush of new supply. Mr Zorbas said while working from home was an uncontested benefit for many roles, the proposed legislation would add red tape for businesses of all sizes. Victorian minister Mary-Anne Thomas said the way people used the CBD had changed, although foot traffic had returned to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels. "Productivity has increased as a consequence of now nearly a third of the workforce being across Australia, working from home as part of hybrid work arrangements," she said. "We know that participation in the workforce continues to increase." Federal coalition frontbencher Tim Wilson labelled the policy "professional apartheid" in an opinion piece for the Australian Financial Review but the state opposition has demanded more details before deciding its stance. Opposition frontbencher Georgie Crozier argued many workplaces already had a hybrid model while retailers and hospitality businesses were constantly talking about issues in the city. "Anything we can do to improve the vibrancy and the areas around those concerns needs to be addressed, and I hope the government is listening to them," she said. Victoria has several ways to push ahead with legalising working from home, as the prime minister swings his support behind its potential. The Victorian government has promised to introduce laws sometime in 2026 to allow private and public sector employees to work from home two days a week. Much public discussion has focused on federal industrial relations laws potentially overriding proposed state laws, but employment law expert David Catanese said it was not that simple. The Hall and Wilcox partner pointed to "carve outs" in the federal Fair Work Act that specified state laws that provided more beneficial, flexible entitlements to employees could co-exist with commonwealth laws. "The devil will be in the detail and there will be limits on the extent of laws that can be made, but it is a potential pathway," he told AAP. Another would be adding "significant amendments" by increasing or creating new protections under equal opportunity laws, he said, so they covered a broader category of employees. Premier Jacinta Allan has pushed back against suggestions the move could trigger challenges from the private sector, pointing to advice about an "explicit provision" in the Fair Work Act for state-based anti-discrimination laws. The Fair Work Commission regulated commonwealth, not state law, so Mr Catanese warned it might be difficult for Victoria to enforce the new laws or penalties, depending on how the legislation was drafted. "It's possible we could have state laws without enforcement mechanisms - like a toothless tiger," he said. "That remains to be seen, as we haven't seen the proposed laws." Even so, he said the laws could create change by setting a benchmark negotiated into agreements. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has backed the laws. "I've got to say, it's consistent with our views, which are that working from home is something that's important, something that Australians voted for," he told reporters in Melbourne on Thursday. "Every time an (industrial relations) change is proposed, we hear suggestions that somehow this will undermine things." Property Council chief executive Mike Zorbas described the proposed laws as a "stunt", adding to criticism from a growing number of business groups with concerns including how the policy would affect productivity or office attendance. National office vacancy rates crept up slightly from 13.7 to 14.3 per cent in the six months to July 2025, which the council attributed to a rush of new supply. Mr Zorbas said while working from home was an uncontested benefit for many roles, the proposed legislation would add red tape for businesses of all sizes. Victorian minister Mary-Anne Thomas said the way people used the CBD had changed, although foot traffic had returned to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels. "Productivity has increased as a consequence of now nearly a third of the workforce being across Australia, working from home as part of hybrid work arrangements," she said. "We know that participation in the workforce continues to increase." Federal coalition frontbencher Tim Wilson labelled the policy "professional apartheid" in an opinion piece for the Australian Financial Review but the state opposition has demanded more details before deciding its stance. Opposition frontbencher Georgie Crozier argued many workplaces already had a hybrid model while retailers and hospitality businesses were constantly talking about issues in the city. "Anything we can do to improve the vibrancy and the areas around those concerns needs to be addressed, and I hope the government is listening to them," she said. Victoria has several ways to push ahead with legalising working from home, as the prime minister swings his support behind its potential. The Victorian government has promised to introduce laws sometime in 2026 to allow private and public sector employees to work from home two days a week. Much public discussion has focused on federal industrial relations laws potentially overriding proposed state laws, but employment law expert David Catanese said it was not that simple. The Hall and Wilcox partner pointed to "carve outs" in the federal Fair Work Act that specified state laws that provided more beneficial, flexible entitlements to employees could co-exist with commonwealth laws. "The devil will be in the detail and there will be limits on the extent of laws that can be made, but it is a potential pathway," he told AAP. Another would be adding "significant amendments" by increasing or creating new protections under equal opportunity laws, he said, so they covered a broader category of employees. Premier Jacinta Allan has pushed back against suggestions the move could trigger challenges from the private sector, pointing to advice about an "explicit provision" in the Fair Work Act for state-based anti-discrimination laws. The Fair Work Commission regulated commonwealth, not state law, so Mr Catanese warned it might be difficult for Victoria to enforce the new laws or penalties, depending on how the legislation was drafted. "It's possible we could have state laws without enforcement mechanisms - like a toothless tiger," he said. "That remains to be seen, as we haven't seen the proposed laws." Even so, he said the laws could create change by setting a benchmark negotiated into agreements. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has backed the laws. "I've got to say, it's consistent with our views, which are that working from home is something that's important, something that Australians voted for," he told reporters in Melbourne on Thursday. "Every time an (industrial relations) change is proposed, we hear suggestions that somehow this will undermine things." Property Council chief executive Mike Zorbas described the proposed laws as a "stunt", adding to criticism from a growing number of business groups with concerns including how the policy would affect productivity or office attendance. National office vacancy rates crept up slightly from 13.7 to 14.3 per cent in the six months to July 2025, which the council attributed to a rush of new supply. Mr Zorbas said while working from home was an uncontested benefit for many roles, the proposed legislation would add red tape for businesses of all sizes. Victorian minister Mary-Anne Thomas said the way people used the CBD had changed, although foot traffic had returned to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels. "Productivity has increased as a consequence of now nearly a third of the workforce being across Australia, working from home as part of hybrid work arrangements," she said. "We know that participation in the workforce continues to increase." Federal coalition frontbencher Tim Wilson labelled the policy "professional apartheid" in an opinion piece for the Australian Financial Review but the state opposition has demanded more details before deciding its stance. Opposition frontbencher Georgie Crozier argued many workplaces already had a hybrid model while retailers and hospitality businesses were constantly talking about issues in the city. "Anything we can do to improve the vibrancy and the areas around those concerns needs to be addressed, and I hope the government is listening to them," she said.
