Latest news with #passengerrights
The Guardian
15 hours ago
- The Guardian
UK air traffic control disruption: your rights as a passenger
Wednesday's air traffic control technical fault came as many thousands of families prepared to head off on their summer holiday. Those whose flights have been disrupted have significant rights and entitlements in relation to everything from refreshments to refunds. If your flight is significantly delayed – the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) explains how this is defined on its website – you are entitled to care and assistance while you wait, which means food and drink and the ability to make phone calls, plus accommodation and the necessary transfers if the flight is delayed until the next day. Many airlines will provide vouchers for you to buy food and drink, and overnight accommodation will typically take the form of a nearby hotel. Sometimes airline staff are unable to arrange care and assistance for all passengers, in which case you can sort yourself out, and claim the cost back later. But do not head straight to a posh restaurant or five-star hotel. The CAA says: 'If you end up paying for things yourself, keep every receipt and do not spend more than is reasonable. Airlines are unlikely to refund you for things like luxury hotels or alcohol.' Some airlines will provide guidance on reasonable costs. If your flight has been cancelled and is covered by UK law (that means one departing from an airport in the UK on any airline, or arriving at an airport in the UK on an EU or UK airline, or arriving at an airport in the EU on a UK airline), your airline must offer you the choice of an alternative flight or a refund. If you select an alternative flight, it is up to you whether to fly as soon as possible or at a later date. In terms of a refund, you can get your money back for all parts of the ticket you have not used. So if you have booked a return flight and the outbound leg is cancelled, you can get the full cost of the return ticket back from your airline. Once you decide to take a refund, or to travel later than the first available flight, your airline has no obligation to provide you with food, drink or accommodation. Naomi Leach, the deputy editor of Which? Travel, advises: 'If you are due to travel today or tomorrow, check the advice from your airport or tour operator, or airline apps and airport social media feeds, for the most up-to-date advice.' While airlines have a duty to look after their passengers when flights are disrupted, they do not have to put their hand in their pocket when the disruption is caused by 'extraordinary circumstances'. Leach says that if your flight is cancelled or delayed as a result of these latest problems, you are unlikely to be owed compensation by the airline. This is because the technical issue affecting flights will be considered an extraordinary circumstance and out of the airline's control. The CAA says that 'if it wasn't the airline's fault, don't expect to receive any compensation'. If your flight is delayed or cancelled and it is part of a package holiday, you have some additional protections, says Abta. If your holiday ends up being cancelled, or new arrangements are made that result in a significant change to your holiday, then your travel company must offer an alternative holiday if it can, or a refund for the full price of your package holiday. Generally, a change of more than 12 hours on a fortnight's holiday is considered a significant change, it says. Your first point of contact should probably always be the airline. However, in situations where the disruption is beyond the airline's control and – for example – you are unable to travel or are stranded at your destination, you may be able to claim on your travel insurance, depending on the level of cover. 'Beyond the flight itself, certain costs like non-refundable hotel stays, hire car expenses or even pre-booked activity fees may be recoverable under specific circumstances,' says Alex Cross, the chief customer officer at Tesco Insurance. However, he adds that it is crucial to understand your policy's coverage. If in any doubt, contact your insurer for more details.
CTV News
2 days ago
- CTV News
WestJet ordered to pay travellers $2K for cancelled flights
A pilot taxis a WestJet Boeing 737-700 plane to a gate after arriving at Vancouver International Airport in Richmond, B.C., on Monday, Feb. 3, 2014. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck B.C.'s Civil Resolution Tribunal has ordered WestJet to pay two passengers $1,000 each after it deemed the airline did not provide enough evidence to prove their flight was cancelled for safety reasons. The airline argued it cancelled Nathan and Leah Baugh's flights from St. John's to Vancouver with a stop in Toronto due to weather conditions, and therefore did not need to compensate them. Under the Air Passenger Protection Regulations, travellers are entitled to compensation if they arrive at their destination more than nine hours after they were supposed to – if the reasons were within the carrier's control. The Baughs' flights were scheduled to depart on March 7, 2022. They said they received an email the previous day, about 17 hours before the flight, notifying them the trip was cancelled and rebooked for March 8. The pair ultimately landed in Vancouver about 24 hours later than originally scheduled. WestJet said it cancelled an incoming flight from Toronto to St. John's on March 6, which led to the cancellation of the Baughs' March 7 flights leaving from Newfoundland. The Baughs submitted a screenshot showing flights from other airlines were leaving St. John's on March 7 as normal, to argue that the weather was safe enough for flight. They also claimed they received two different explanations from WestJet as to why their flights were cancelled – in the first email that it was due to weather, and in a later call with an agent that it was due to a scheduling change. 'WestJet does not deny that their agent told the Baughs that their flights were cancelled due to a scheduling change,' the decision reads. 'However, WestJet says that their agents work with limited resources and information. WestJet says that the cancellations were caused by weather conditions and not a scheduling change.' For its part, WestJet submitted terminal aerodrome forecasts purportedly showing the weather conditions leading to their decision to cancel the flight, including wind speeds over 62 kilometres per hour and a winter storm around the city on March 6. In his decision issued last week, tribunal member Max Pappin noted that WestJet didn't provide any information about the specific aircraft or its limitations, or any expert evidence. 'Additionally, much of the evidence provided consists of unexplained acronyms, codes, and numbers, whose meaning is far from obvious. I find this evidence is highly technical and requires expert evidence to explain whether it shows that there were meteorological conditions that made safe aircraft operation impossible under APPR,' he wrote. 'I find the submitted evidence is not sufficient to show that safe operation of the aircraft was impossible due to meteorological conditions. Based on the evidence before me, I find that the flight cancellations were for reasons within WestJet's control under APPR.' Therefore, Pappin ordered WestJet to pay the pair $1,000 each for inconvenience, as well as $126.72 each in pre-judgment interest and $125 in CRT fees.
CTV News
3 days ago
- Business
- CTV News
Delays, cancellations, compensation disputes, Canada's transport agency is drowning in airline complaints
Travellers look at the arrival and departure board at Montreal-Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport in Montreal, Friday, Sept.13, 2024. (Christinne Muschi/The Canadian Press) A backlog of 85,000 complaints from air passengers is piling up at the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA), and one advocate says the system is failing passengers. From delays and cancellations to compensation disputes, the CTA is drowning in complaints. 'It is going to take them more than two years to deal with just a current backlog,' said Air Passenger Rights founder Gabor Lukacs. Since the CTA resolution office launched in 2023, the number of complaints continues to grow. Lukacs said that the agency's method of dealing with grievances is complicated and ultimately fails customers. 'In Canada, they have this system where the airline will say, 'Well, it's outside our control, so we don't have to pay you anything,' he said, adding that, from the airline's perspective, it's easier and more profitable to refuse to pay and instead tell passengers to file a complaint through the CTA. 'So the Canadian Transportation Agency has the power to fine airlines that don't obey the law, but they're not using those powers,' he said. The CTA said it's proposing charging airlines nearly $800 for each eligible complaint, but for some airlines, the proposal is not welcome. 'Charging airlines $790 for each complaint, including the vast majority when we are found to have applied the legislation correctly, would not be balanced nor an equitable way of addressing the issue,' said Air Canada in a statement. "Air Canada cooperates with the CTA on a continuous basis, and our standard is to respond swiftly to all files transmitted by the agency and meet their response deadlines." 'The Canadian Transportation Agency's punitive proposal reflects a troubling disconnect between the Agency and the realities of Canada's economy and aviation sector,' said Westjet. 'Imposing additional costs on Canadian travellers, in an industry already oversaturated with high government taxes and fees, is very concerning—particularly during an affordability crisis in Canada." Westjet adds that the agency's priority should be dealing with improving its administration and reducing wait times. The CTA said, however, that in 2024-2025, the agency closed over 33,600 complaints, but did not say how many were resolved in favour of passengers. Lukacs said he's taking the CTA to court due to the agency's lack of transparency. 'Because not only that, it takes more than two years, and they have a huge backlog,' he said. 'They're also trying to gag passengers who have a case before them.' In the meantime, he says that if passengers have complaints against airlines, heading to a small claims court is a better option. CTV News reached out to Canada's Ministry of Transportation for comment, but did not hear back.
Daily Mail
4 days ago
- Daily Mail
Moment Ryanair passenger SOBS after being stopped from boarding plane because her 'hand luggage was too large'
This is the shocking moment a Ryanair passenger sobbed after being stopped from boarding a plane due to her hand luggage being 'too large'. Filmed at Sofia Airport in Bulgaria, the dramatic footage captures a tearful woman who was brought to her knees in distress as she banged on an airport door while pleading with members of security to allow her onto the aircraft. The incident is said to have taken place on Thursday, July 24, with the unnamed female passenger set to travel on a flight from Sofia to Vienna, Austria. A member of 'Border Police' staff angrily gestures to the door, while the woman appears to emotionally plead with him. Shocked passengers waiting to board a bus to the aircraft watched on as the tearful woman hit the doors separating her and the other passengers in despair. Meanwhile, three other members of staff, two of which were also seen adorning jackets titled 'Border Police', appeared to be closely monitoring and discussing the ensuing chaos. Nikolay Stefanov, who witnessed the shocking ordeal and captured the video footage, said that he believed the airline had initially offered the woman to pay extra for her baggage. However, she refused, due to her bag fitting within the sizer. Adding that the situation then 'escalated quickly', he said: 'She was pleading with us not to leave, but we were threatened that the entire flight would be cancelled if we didn't get on the bus, so passengers became frightened and left.' Mr Stafnov also claimed that another passenger, who was standing behind the woman in line, with 'no issues', was removed from the flight. When the confused traveller queried this, a Ryanair staff member was said to have remarked that 'reopening the gate risked the woman trying to get on the bus'. Mr Steafnov added: 'What shocked me most was the utter lack of compassion from the staff member, who looked right through the woman with complete indifference. Even though they could have resolved the problem, they simply refused.' The passenger also claimed that a Ryanair staff member 'deliberately hid his name badge when questioned' and attempted to confiscate a phone from a woman who was recording the incident as it unfolded. Following the shocking event, Bulgaria's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Transport Grozdan Karadjov has reportedly ordered an inspection of the airport's security cameras, according to Bulgarian news site In a statement provided to NOVA, Mr Karadjov is said to have described the behaviour of ground operator employees captured in the video as 'outrageous', reports. Mr Karadjkov also declared that the main ground operator involved was given the 'highest fine' alongside a 'verbal warning' that he could have his licence revoked were a similar situation to occur in the future. But Goldair Handling Bulgaria, who provide the ground handling services for several flights operating out of Sofia Airport, have insisted that the employee acted 'professionally and without any physical contact with the passenger'. In a statement provided to BNT News, the company said: 'All rules regarding passengers' baggage, its permissible size and the fees payable for baggage are determined solely, entirely and unilaterally by the airlines, and Goldair Handling Bulgaria OOD is solely obliged to monitor compliance with these rules by the airlines. 'This also applies to hand luggage, as Goldair Handling Bulgaria OOD is obliged to monitor the dimensions of this baggage and collect excess baggage fees, which fees are determined by and are entirely for the benefit of the airlines.' The handling company added that in this incident, their employee 'did not violate the rights of a passenger' and also did not 'behave rudely or disrespectfully'. The statement added: 'The employee only complied with the rules and procedures of the airport operator and the airline, indicating the permissible dimensions of the baggage and checking for compliance with them. 'They acted professionally and without any physical contact with the passenger.' Ryanair's hand luggage policy allows for passengers to fly for 'one small personal bag', free of charge. However, it must be sized 40cm x 20cm x 25cm and 'fit under the seat in front of you'. It comes as just last month a British couple vowed they would 'never fly with Ryanair again' after their decision to not pay extra to reserve seats ended up getting them kicked off the flight. But Goldair Handling Bulgaria, who provide the ground handling services for several flights operating out of Sofia Airport, have insisted that the employee acted 'professionally and without any physical contact with the passenger' In a separate incident, Scott McCormick and his girlfriend, Helena Boshwick, both 33, were set to fly from Birmingham Airport on May 1 to Palma de Mallorca, Spain, for a week-long break and gym mentorship event. The couple chose not to reserve seats - which typically costs between £4.50 and £33 per seat - prior to boarding as they 'didn't mind' sitting apart during the two-hour flight. The fitness mentor, from Birmingham, West Midlands, said: 'We checked in the night before and we didn't reserve a seat but you normally just get a random one. 'Me and my partner thought it's not that much of a problem if we're not sitting together for a two-hour flight, we're adults here.' He added: 'We were the first ones at the gate ready for boarding. The lady scanned our boarding passes and told us to step to the side for a second. That moment was a red flag, I thought: "There's something happening here". 'When everyone boarded, she said: "the plane is full, there's only one seat remaining and we will have to reimburse you for the other seat or you'll have to get on the next flight".' The news led to Scott and his girlfriend having a 'meltdown' as they had wanted to catch the same flight and arrive to their destination together. He explained: 'There was no compassion or care whatsoever. After going back and forth we said we're not going to take separate flights and be in separate countries for hours.' Despite the gym owner claiming that Ryanair said they would initially receive a refund for both tickets, when the couple went to the check-in desk again, they were reportedly told they still had to pay for one of the tickets - while Scott claims he never received a refund. According to the holidaymaker, one of the seats had been marked in the system as a cancelled booking, while the other was put down as a missed flight - meaning the pair would be reimbursed for one while the other had to be paid for. The couple reportedly shelled out a further £100 on a new ticket and waited four hours for the next departing flight to Palma. Mr McCormick claims the experience felt like 'discrimination,' and that the couple were singled out because they are 'young' and childfree. Ryanair later shared a response to Scott and Helena's complaints, simply saying: 'Today is a good day to separate couples onboard' Though the pair were assured that a refund would be processed for one of the tickets, Scott claims he has still not received it or heard from Ryanair. He claims the experience felt like 'discrimination,' and that the couple were singled out because they are 'young' and childfree. The fitness fanatic said he will now avoid flying with the airline due to the staff members' 'lack of compassion.' Ryanair later shared a response to Scott and Helena's complaints, simply saying: 'Today is a good day to separate couples onboard.' MailOnline has approached Ryanair, Goldair Handling, Sofia Airport and Grozdan Karadjov for comment.
New York Times
7 days ago
- New York Times
Southwest Passenger Says She Was Ejected From Flight Based on Her Race
A Black woman who was ejected from a Southwest Airlines flight in November said in a federal lawsuit filed on Thursday that she was targeted based on her race. The woman, Briana Hicks, a pharmacist from Chicago, boarded a Southwest flight from Chicago Midway International Airport to Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 20 and sat in an exit row. When the flight attendant began briefing the passengers in the row about emergency procedures, Dr. Hicks put her phone on airplane mode and then placed it facedown in her lap, the lawsuit said. The flight attendant then singled her out for being on her phone and berated her repeatedly, the lawsuit claimed, and later demanded that she be removed from the aircraft when she reported his behavior to two other attendants. She was rebooked on a flight that landed in Washington four hours after her original arrival time, according to the lawsuit. The suit, filed in Chicago, said that the other passengers in the exit row appeared to be white and that one asked the flight attendant, who was also white, why he was pointing out the actions of the only Black passenger seated there, seeing as others in the exit row were on their phones and laptops as well. 'Being singled out for mistreatment based on my race was painful enough; enduring that discrimination on top of being publicly removed from a flight and having my entire travel schedule derailed was almost unbearable,' Dr. Hicks said in a statement. According to the lawsuit, Dr. Hicks was the only Black person sitting in the exit row. After loudly and repeatedly asking Dr. Hicks to put her phone away, the flight attendant was confronted by the white passenger, who informed him that Dr. Hicks was listening and had put her phone down. After the briefing, the attendant returned to the front of the plane, at which point Dr. Hicks went to the back of the plane to report what had happened to two flight attendants, who informed her they could not do anything about the other attendant's behavior, according to the lawsuit. When the attendant who had confronted Dr. Hicks called the back of the plane on the aircraft's internal telephone system, one of the flight attendants there informed him that Dr. Hicks was 'back here talking about the disrespect she experienced,' the lawsuit said. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
