Which? challenges UK flight compensation reforms
The consumer advocate argues that the reforms could slash compensation for passengers and disincentivise airlines from providing a high standard of service
Consumer advocate Which? has warned that plans by the UK government to reform flight compensation rules could lead to a fall in average payouts of £163 per customer, and potentially ‘weaken a vital deterrent against delays and cancellations’.
Under current EU261 rules, passengers on domestic UK flights can claim £220 after a flight delay of more than three hours. However, the UK government is considering replacing this rule with new legislation mandating compensation based on ticket price and the length of the delay – similar to current ‘Delay Repay’ in force across the UK rail network.
A seven-week government consultation on the proposal, run by the Department for Transport (DfT), is currently underway and is due to end on 27 March.
The change proposed by the DfT would give passengers
- Refunds of 25 per cent of a ticket price for delays of between one and two hours
- Refunds of 50 per cent for delays of between two and three hours
- Full refunds for delays of three hours of more.
In a statement announcing the consultation, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said: “People deserve a service that puts passengers first when things go wrong, so today I’ve launched proposals that aim to bolster airline consumer protections and rights. We’re making the most of our Brexit dividend with our new freedoms outside of the European Union (EU) and this review will help build a trustworthy, reputable sector.”
The change could quarter the amount of compensation passengers are entitled to
However, consumer advocate Which? estimates that while the proposed new system could save airlines substantial sums of money per flight, compensation would plummet to around a quarter of the current average – to around £57 per passenger.
It cites figures provided by travel agency Skyscanner, which calculated how much airlines would have to pay out for long delays across some of the UK’s most popular routes, assuming eligibility for all passengers and a full capacity of 180 passengers.
For a flight from Edinburgh to London, which has an average economy ticket price of £44, an airline would potentially have to pay out up to £39,600 for delays of three hours or more under current rules. Under the proposed scheme, the maximum pay out is just £7,920.
Likewise, a flight from Gatwick to Belfast, average ticket price £55, would require the airline to pay out up to £39,600 for a three-hour delay under current rules. Under the proposed scheme, payouts fall to just £9,900.
The change could also reduce incentives for airlines to provide a quality service
In addition, Which? warns that the reduction in compensation payments could remove a ‘significant deterrent’ against airlines ‘consistently letting down passengers with delays or cancellations’.
The advocate argues that the potential costs are far higher than in the rail industry, which the current plans are modelled on, due to the higher risk of incurring ongoing additional costs due to pre-booked accommodation or travel at the destination.
Which? also says that the change would disproportionately affect residents of the ‘devolved’ nations of the UK, such as Northern Ireland or Scotland, who are more likely to take domestic flight due to geographic boundaries such as the Irish Sea.
In addition, Which? says that it is concerned that the change could set a precedent which weakens passenger compensation rights and incentives for airlines in the wider international market.
Which? supports changes to CAA powers and mandatory ADR scheme
However, Which? has confirmed that while it is concerned about this specific proposal, it is supportive of a separate proposal outlined as part of the same DfT consultation, which would grant administrative fining powers to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).
Another proposal supported by Which? would make it mandatory for airlines to join the Alternative Disputes Resolution (ADR) scheme, which would provide a framework for airlines to settle disputes outside of court. At present, only two airlines in the UK are part of the ADR scheme.
The consumer advocate has called on the government to administer this proposal alongside the introduction of a statutory ombudsman for aviation.
Rory Boland, Editor of Which? Travel, said: “Ripping up current compensation rules for UK flights would be a huge blow for passenger rights and embolden airlines to act with impunity. Unfair practices such as overbooking and denied boarding could once again become more commonplace if this essential deterrent is removed, leaving passengers out of pocket.
“The government should reconsider these reforms and instead give passengers confidence that they will be protected when their journey is disrupted by giving the aviation regulator the powers it needs to crack down on airlines trying to flout the rules.”
Which? also previously published a list of six key methods by which fraudsters have been scamming travellers in recent years.