EK fined for false advertising in NZ.

Back to Forum
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

  • rferguson
    Participant

    This is an interesting one and would be quite something if it was to set a precedent.

    A NZ couple took Emirates to a disputes tribunal after booking a trip with EK in business class.

    They claimed that EK uses the new 777LR or A380 seat in their advertising in NZ and were shocked to find they had an outdated 777-300 with angle flat seating on their flight from AKL to DXB.

    EK claimed that it is in their contract of carriage that they can substitute aircraft at any time.

    The dispute tribunal however claimed that this however wasn’t a one off equipment change but the aircraft that EK regularly rosters to NZ because the aircraft with newer cabins are allocated other routes. The reason for this is quite interesting with the disputes service claiming Emirates had stated that its newer planes were required on other routes due to its New Zealand operations being run at a loss.

    The tribunal awarded the couple NZ$13,555 to be paid by EK.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/131468446/emirates-pays-tauranga-man-13555-over-misleading-and-deceptive-advertising-of-business-class-seats


    MartinJ
    Participant

    About time those employing bait-and-switch tactics got a slap on the wrist.

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    cwoodward
    Participant

    Very long overdue and other derestriction’s should take note and follow the example of Air NZ.
    This sort of thing defiantly happens frequently with the ‘sandpit’ airlines and frequently to secondary and often the poorer countries in Asia.
    Without naming the airlines I am aware that this sort of thing happens out of both Brisbane and Perth.
    However I would mention that I have read that SIA is not immune from this sort of slight of hand ether.

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    FDOS
    Participant

    Just for correctness.

    EK was not fined for a criminal offence, a couple were awarded civil damages arising from a judgment of not receiving the product advertised.

    Authorities seem to sit on their hands when it comes to airlines – I reported an airline for advertising something that was not available years ago and no action was taken – the same practice is still happening today.


    cwoodward
    Participant

    I take your point FDOS and its relevance to this sort of switch selling and lack of action by industry and government authorities is limitable. Imagine the uproar in the Daily Fail if Curry’s had be caught switch selling a washing machines…

    Where is IATA (the industries tame policeman) with this I am wondering – also looking the other way it seems?

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    CathayLoyalist2
    Participant

    In general worldwide, I would say regulatory bodies across many sectors, are in name only. Sums up the quality of, or complete lack of. effective leadership

    2 users thanked author for this post.

    AMcWhirter
    Participant

    I remember when BA introduced its fully flat beds in Club World from year 2000.

    Back then the BA ads would specify the limited number of routes / flights on which the new product was offered.

    This was necessary at that time because there was a huge difference between the cradle seat and the new flat bed.


    cwoodward
    Participant

    The story has been picked up by the below Australian based forum:

    https://www.executivetraveller.com/news/business-class-downgrade-compensation

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Business Traveller February 2024 edition
Business Traveller February 2024 edition
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls