Latest news with #GinaCassGottlieb
The Australian
28-07-2025
- Business
- The Australian
Webjet pays $9m over fake airfare ads
Aussies drawn in by rock bottom airfare prices only to be hit by additional charges can take some comfort after Webjet ordered to pay a huge penalty for 'misleading' advertising. On Monday, the Federal Court ordered online travel agency Webjet to pay $9m in penalties for making 'false or misleading statements about the price of flights and booking confirmations'. Webjet admitted that between 2018 and 2023 it made false or misleading statements on its website, promotional emails and social media posts when it advertised airfares that excluded compulsory fees. Webjet also admitted that between 2019 and 2024 it provided false or misleading booking confirmations to 118 consumers for flight bookings which had not actually been confirmed. Webjet then asked for additional payments of up to $2120, for these bookings, in order for consumers to be able to complete the booking. Webjet has now refunded these consumers. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission began its investigation after a consumer complained about an airfare advertised as 'from $18', which cost almost three times that price after Webjet added its compulsory fees. An example of the misleading advertising Webjet admitted to. Picture: ACCC 'We took this case because we considered that Webjet used misleading pricing by excluding or not adequately disclosing compulsory fees in its ads,' ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said. 'Seeking to lure in customers with prices that don't tell the whole story is a serious breach of the Australian Consumer Law.' The Webjet fees comprised the 'Webjet servicing fee' and 'booking price guarantee' fee which ranged from $34.90 to $54.90 per booking, depending on whether the flights were domestic, to New Zealand and the Pacific, or other international destinations. While Webjet's website, app and most emails contained information about the additional fees, some users had to scroll to the fine print near the bottom of the screen to see them. In its social media posts, Webjet didn't disclose the additional fees at all. Example from Webjet website advertising 'from $100' getaways. Picture: ACCC In a statement from February, when the ACCC agreement was initially approved, Webjet said 'it is important to note that, since being advised of the issues of concern by the ACCC in November 2023, Webjet Marketing has voluntarily and proactively implemented improvements to its fee disclosures'. 'Webjet Group is confident that any customer concern with its offering, disclosure, service or pricing was limited,' the statement said. '[Webjet] has always prided itself on its high levels of trust with all customers and stakeholders and has fully co-operated and positively engaged with the ACCC to resolve this matter.' The ACCC found that in the relevant period of late 2018 to late 2023 the Webjet fees represented 36 per cent of the company's total revenue. The matter was resolved outside of court when Webjet and the ACCC agreed to settle on the conditions that Webjet: 'pay a proposed total penalty of $9m; publish a corrective notice in a form agreed with the ACCC for a period of 60 days; review, maintain and continue to implement an Australian Consumer Law compliance program in an agreed form; and contribute $100,000 to the ACCC's costs'. Robert White Cadet Robert got his start as an Editorial Assistant at the Daily Telegraph in 2024 before entering the Newscorp cadet program. With a background in history and law Robert has a passion for politics and crime reporting as well as telling meaningful stories. @white_robb73416 Robert White
News.com.au
28-07-2025
- Business
- News.com.au
Webjet cops $9m over 'false or misleading' airfare ads
Aussies drawn in by rock bottom airfare prices only to be hit by additional charges can take some comfort after Webjet ordered to pay a huge penalty for 'misleading' advertising. On Monday, the Federal Court ordered online travel agency Webjet to pay $9m in penalties for making 'false or misleading statements about the price of flights and booking confirmations'. Webjet admitted that between 2018 and 2023 it made false or misleading statements on its website, promotional emails and social media posts when it advertised airfares that excluded compulsory fees. Webjet also admitted that between 2019 and 2024 it provided false or misleading booking confirmations to 118 consumers for flight bookings which had not actually been confirmed. Webjet then asked for additional payments of up to $2120, for these bookings, in order for consumers to be able to complete the booking. Webjet has now refunded these consumers. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission began its investigation after a consumer complained about an airfare advertised as 'from $18', which cost almost three times that price after Webjet added its compulsory fees. 'We took this case because we considered that Webjet used misleading pricing by excluding or not adequately disclosing compulsory fees in its ads,' ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said. 'Seeking to lure in customers with prices that don't tell the whole story is a serious breach of the Australian Consumer Law.' The Webjet fees comprised the 'Webjet servicing fee' and 'booking price guarantee' fee which ranged from $34.90 to $54.90 per booking, depending on whether the flights were domestic, to New Zealand and the Pacific, or other international destinations. While Webjet's website, app and most emails contained information about the additional fees, some users had to scroll to the fine print near the bottom of the screen to see them. In its social media posts, Webjet didn't disclose the additional fees at all. In a statement from February, when the ACCC agreement was initially approved, Webjet said 'it is important to note that, since being advised of the issues of concern by the ACCC in November 2023, Webjet Marketing has voluntarily and proactively implemented improvements to its fee disclosures'. 'Webjet Group is confident that any customer concern with its offering, disclosure, service or pricing was limited,' the statement said. '[Webjet] has always prided itself on its high levels of trust with all customers and stakeholders and has fully co-operated and positively engaged with the ACCC to resolve this matter.' The ACCC found that in the relevant period of late 2018 to late 2023 the Webjet fees represented 36 per cent of the company's total revenue. The matter was resolved outside of court when Webjet and the ACCC agreed to settle on the conditions that Webjet: 'pay a proposed total penalty of $9m; publish a corrective notice in a form agreed with the ACCC for a period of 60 days; review, maintain and continue to implement an Australian Consumer Law compliance program in an agreed form; and contribute $100,000 to the ACCC's costs'.
ABC News
28-07-2025
- Business
- ABC News
Webjet fined $9 million for excluding fees from ads, falsely confirming bookings
Travel giant Webjet has been fined $9 million after it admitted it failed to include compulsory fees in some of its advertised airfare costs, and it provided misleading booking confirmations. In the Federal Court case, brought on by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), Webjet admitted it made misleading statements in promotional emails and social media posts on airfare prices between 2018 and 2023. Webjet further admitted it provided false or misleading booking confirmations to 118 customers for flights it had not actually confirmed between 2019 and 2024, then asked for payments of up to $2,120 from consumers to complete the booking. Webjet has since refunded those customers. The consumer watchdog began investigating Webjet after a customer complained that an airfare advertised as "from $18" ended up costing triple that amount once all the compulsory fees were added. "We took this case because we considered that Webjet used misleading pricing by excluding or not adequately disclosing compulsory fees in its ads," ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said. Compulsory fees, including "Webjet servicing fee" and "booking price guarantee" fee, ranged from $34.90 to $54.90 a booking, depending on the destination. While fees were disclosed on the website, app and most emails, Webjet's social media posts did not disclose the additional fees. "Retailers must ensure their advertised prices are accurate. They should clearly disclose additional fees and charges," Ms Cass-Gottlieb said. Webjet's fees made up 36 per cent of its total revenue between November 1, 2018 and November 13, 2023. Webjet cooperated with the ACCC, admitted liability and agreed to make joint submissions to the court about orders, including the penalty. A statement published to the ASX by Webjet Group on Monday acknowledged the agreed penalties. "In accordance with the Federal Court's orders, and consistent with the agreement reached between the parties, Webjet Marketing has agreed to: In a February ASX statement, Webjet said it had "voluntarily and proactively implemented improvements to its fee disclosures". "Webjet Group is confident that any customer concern with its offering, disclosure, service, or pricing was limited," it said. "It has always prided itself on its high levels of trust with all customers and stakeholders and has fully cooperated and positively engaged with the ACCC to resolve this matter."
Daily Mail
28-07-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Bombshell as Webjet is hit by a HUGE fine for misleading customers in landmark court ruling
Webjet has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay $9million in penalties for making false or misleading statements about the price of flights and booking confirmations. The case run by the ACCC, saw the online travel agency admit between 2018 and 2023 it made false or misleading statements when it advertised airfares that excluded compulsory fees. The statements were made on its website, and in promotional emails and social media posts. Webjet also admitted that between 2019 and 2024 it provided false or misleading booking confirmations to 118 consumers for flight bookings which had not actually been confirmed. Webjet later asked for additional payments, of up to $2,120 from consumers to complete the booking. Webjet has refunded these consumers. The ACCC started its investigation after a consumer complained about an airfare advertised as 'from $18', which cost almost three times that price after Webjet added its compulsory fees. 'We took this case because we considered that Webjet used misleading pricing by excluding or not adequately disclosing compulsory fees in its ads,' ACCC Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said. 'Seeking to lure in customers with prices that don't tell the whole story is a serious breach of the Australian Consumer Law.' The Webjet fees comprised the 'Webjet servicing fee' and 'booking price guarantee' fee which ranged from $34.90 to $54.90 per booking, depending on whether the flights were domestic, to New Zealand and the Pacific, or other international destinations. While Webjet's website, app and most emails contained information about the additional fees, some users had to scroll to the fine print near the bottom of the screen to see them. In its social media posts, Webjet didn't disclose the additional fees at all. 'Retailers must ensure their advertised prices are accurate. They should clearly disclose additional fees and charges,' Ms Cass-Gottlieb said. The Webjet fees represented 36 per cent of Webjet's total revenue in the period from 1 November 2018 to 13 November 2023. Webjet co-operated with the ACCC, admitted liability and agreed to make joint submissions to the Court about orders, including the penalty. The Court also made declarations and other orders proposed, including that Webjet review its compliance program and pay a contribution to the ACCC's costs.
Yahoo
30-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Health insurer fined $35m, misled 4k members
Private health insurer Bupa has been fined $35m after conceding it engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct to talk more than 4000 Australians out of claiming hospital treatments. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission said in a statement on Monday that Bupa admitted to the breaches after telling customers they were not entitled to private health insurance benefits for their claims, even though they were entitled to make a claim. This left some customers thousands of dollars out of pocket for medical treatments they had to pay for when Bupa should have paid at least part of the bill. The ACCC said some policyholders also upgraded to more expensive policies to ensure they were covered. ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said Bupa's conduct affected thousands of members over more than five years and caused harm to consumers, some of whom delayed, cancelled or went without treatment for which they were, at least partially, covered under their health insurance policies. 'Consumers purchase private health insurance to provide peace of mind, certainty of coverage and the ability to choose where and when to undertake their procedures,' Ms Cass-Gottlieb said. 'Bupa's conduct denied certain members benefits to which they were entitled to under their private health insurance policies.' Bupa APAC chief executive Nick Stone said he was deeply sorry for failing to get things right because customers were saddened by the impacts this has had on them or their families. 'Our priority has been to communicate and compensate our affected health insurance customers and providers, along with putting in place measures to help ensure this does not happen again,' Mr Stone said. Bupa has admitted over a five-year period between May 2018 and August 2023 that it misrepresented members over two separate insurance types – 'mixed cover claims' and 'uncategorised items'. A mixed cover claim includes both treatment that is covered in part by a customer's policy and another part covered by the customer itself. According to Bupa, the private health insurer pays out more than $20m in claims a year as well as six million in-hospital and medical claims, with the mixed coverage claims representing less than 0.02 per cent of assessed customers over the five-year period. Similarly, Bupa says about 0.004 per cent of claims fall under uncategorised items, which include treatments that were not assigned to a standard clinical category in Bupa's claims assessment systems. The ACCC says Bupa's conduct occurred because Bupa staff did not have consistent and clear instructions and training for assessing mixed coverage claims, and its systems were programmed to incorrectly reject mixed coverage and uncategorised item claims. 'Private health insurance is complex, and consumers should be able to trust their health insurer to assess and pay health insurance claims accurately,' Ms Cass-Gottlieb said. 'Bupa's conduct is very serious and falls well short of what is expected of one of the largest health insurers in Australia. Bupa should have invested in the necessary systems, processes and training to prevent this from happening, and address it promptly when it occurred.' The ACCC and Bupa will jointly ask the court to order Bupa to pay a penalty of $35m among other orders. It is a matter for the court to determine whether the penalty and other orders are appropriate. Bupa started compensating affected members, medical providers and hospitals before the start of this legal action and has paid $14.3m for more than 4100 affected claims. Sign in to access your portfolio
