[FDOS_UK]

This is really devloping a life of its own and making Ryanair look incompetent.

[CathayLoyalist2]

….incompetence is probably an understatement. It is now bordering on deception leading to potentially fraudulent. All of a sudden this has surpassed a Ratner moment!

[MartynSinclair]

Out of interest, why is it only the UK CAA who have become interested. What about the other aviation agencies around Europe where Ryan have bases, including Ireland…

[capetonianm]

Ryanair, BA, Amadeus/Altea … next?

[drflight]

The CAA sent a second legal letter on 28th September to Ryanair:

https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/CAA/Content/News/News_files/2017/CAA%20letter%20to%20Ryanair%20-%20280917.pdf

The original letter, sent 27th September (posted earlier in previous page), is here:

https://www.caa.co.uk/uploadedFiles/CAA/Content/News/News_files/2017/Julisz%20Komorek%20Ryanair%20270917.pdf

This sorry saga continues…..

[FDOS_UK]

[quote quote=828989]….incompetence is probably an understatement. It is now bordering on deception leading to potentially fraudulent. All of a sudden this has surpassed a Ratner moment!

[/quote]

You make a good point – mine was that it is incompetent management to get into a non-compliant situation, so I guess we agree.

[CathayLoyalist2]

FDOS_UK, the question is are the regulations “an either or” situation? Presumably if they opt for another Ryanair flight or re-routing or another airline in the case of the latter, the refund doesn’t apply and does Ryanair pay only the difference between the Ryanair fare and the new airline fare? I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong

[FDOS_UK]

[quote quote=829071]FDOS_UK, the question is are the regulations “an either or” situation? Presumably if they opt for another Ryanair flight or re-routing or another airline in the case of the latter, the refund doesn’t apply and does Ryanair pay only the difference between the Ryanair fare and the new airline fare? I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong

[/quote]

Good question.

EC261 is clear

Article 5 Cancellation
1. In case of cancellation of a flight, the passengers concerned shall:
(a) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 8; and
(b) be offered assistance by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 9(1)(a) and 9(2), as well as, inevent of re-routing when the reasonably expected time of departure of the new flight is at least the day afterthe departure as it was planned for the cancelled flight, the assistance specified in Article 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(c);and
(c) have the right to compensation by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 7, unless:
(i) they are informed of the cancellation at least two weeks before the scheduled time of departure; or
(ii) they are informed of the cancellation between two weeks and seven days before the scheduled time of departure and are offered re-routing, allowing them to depart no more than two hours before the scheduledtime of departure and to reach their final destination less than four hours after the scheduled time of arrival;or
(iii) they are informed of the cancellation less than seven days before the scheduled time of departure and areoffered re-routing, allowing them to depart no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departureand to reach their final destination less than two hours after the scheduled time of arrival.
2. When passengers are informed of the cancellation, an explanation shall be givenconcerning possiblealternative transport.

People who do not fall under 5c i, ii or iii will also be due compensation, which is obviously separate from a refund.

Article 8 Right to reimbursement or re-routing
1. Where reference is made to this Article, passengers shall be offered the choice between:
(a)-reimbursement within seven days, by the means provided for in Article 7(3), of the full cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought, for the part or parts of the journey not made, and for the part or parts already made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to the passenger’s original travel plan,together with, when relevant,
-a return flight to the first point of departure, at the earliest opportunity;
(b) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity; or
(c) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at a later date at thepassenger’s convenience, subject to availability of seats.
2. Paragraph 1(a) shall also apply to passengers whose flights form part of a package, except for the right toreimbursement where such right arises under Directive 90/314/EEC.
3. When, in the case where a town, city or region is served by several airports, an operating air carrier offers apassenger a flight to an airport alternative to that for which the booking was made, the operating air carriershall bear the cost of transferring the passenger from that alternative airport either to that for which thebooking was made, or to anotherclose-by destination agreed with the passenger.

I would have thought that the onus would be on the airline to re-route and ticket, but I’m not sure if Ryanair have the ability to do this as a point to point airline – probably TimFitzgeraldTC would know this, I’m not sure how happy the CAA would be with a ‘do it yourself’ approach whereby the pax has to fund the difference, until Ryanair re-pay.

Also, Ryanair will have to pay for transfer costs, if re-routing through different airports.

[Flightlevel]

Certainly adding up now FR know they have to pay for alternative airline services, etc. not just on their airline ‘though not compared to their profit.
CAA is perhaps more observant of these matters and most FR pax are British, no doubt the EU wiĺl send a fine in due course.
Italian regulator was first too complain and maybe one reason FR no longer after AZ?

[drflight]

The official Ryanair clarification of what will happen now:

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/fr-prod-static-pdf/Ryanair+Clarifies+Customer+Entitlements+Sept+29.pdf

[Swissdiver]

Just read that one and have to share it…

Michael O’Leary, Chief Executive of Ryanair after arriving in a hotel in Manchester went to the bar and asked for a pint of Guinness.

The barman said, “That will be £1 please, Mr. O’Leary.”

Taken aback, O’Leary replied, “That’s very cheap,” and handed over his money.

“We do try to stay ahead of the competition”, said the barman. “We have the cheapest beer in England”.

“That is remarkable value”, Michael comments.

“I see you don’t have a glass, you’ll need one of ours. That will be £3 please.”

O’Leary scowled, but paid up. He took his drink and walked towards a seat.

“Ah, you want to sit down?” said the barman. “That’ll be an extra £2. If you’d pre-booked it would have cost £1.”

O’Leary swore to himself, but paid up.

“I see you’ve brought your laptop” added the barman. “That wasn’t pre-booked either, that’s another £3.”

O’Leary was so incensed and his face was red with rage.
“I’ve had enough! I insist on speaking to a manager!”

“Here is his e-mail address, or if you wish, you can contact him between 9.00 am and 9.01am every morning, Monday to Tuesday. Calls are free, unless answered, then there is a charge of only £1 per second”.

“I will never use this bar again”.

“OK but do remember, we are the only hotel in England selling pints for £1.”

[ImissConcorde]

Ryanair is not a member of IATA consequently they do not have the ability to interline tickets. To put passengers on another airline FR would have to pay for the ticket up front. Looks like the corporate credit card will take quite a hit!

[CathayLoyalist2]

It has been suggested that FR could offer buses, trains or taxis as alternative transport!!. Initially their call centres were instructed not to offer an alternative flight that was more than 3 times the original FR flight albeit that might have been withdrawn. How does a CEO who has behaved like this not have the good grace to resign noting that ‘grace’ and ‘O’Leary’are rarely seen in the same sentence let alone the same article.

[PeterCoultas]

No excuse now for Ryan as there will be lots of redundant pilots at Monarch

[AnthonyDunn]

Peter Coultas

The only point being that Monarch flew Airbus whereas Flyanscare is all B737-800. Bearing in mind that FR requires its pilots to pay for their own training costs, type-certification, uniforms and then requires them to be self-employed sub-contractors, I really would not be overly confident that many of the ex-Monarch flight deck personnel will be knocking on O’Blarney’s door anytime soon.

[Author]

Posts