Ryan air compensation

[crumpet]

went on holiday last april with ryan air in the ash cloud

has anyone received their compo yet as i am still waiting !

[Rupert_Baehr]

Don't hold your breath.

 

Did you take out travel insurance? I understand it was available.

 

In the event that you were to ship merchandise by sea and you declined to insure the shipment and the shipment is lost (as was the case when a cargo of Sheep from New Zealand was lost when the ship sank) then the court would rule against you because (a) you could have insured it, (b) insuring freight is the common-sense thing to do © most eople do manage to have common sense and (d) there is only so far that the law can go when requiring one party to a contract to protect the interests of the other.

 

I'm surprised the EU lawkamers didn't bear that in mind when they passed the law requiring airlines to compensate travellers for late/cancelled flights. If the delay is the fault of the airline, then the airline shold be held responsible, but as Ryanair didn't make the volcano erupt and the passengers could readily have insured against erupting volcanoes, why should the airline(s) bear the cost?

 

Operators of other forms of transport have their liability limited to the value of the ticket. Ryanair have asked why airlines should be treated differently and it's a good question.

 

Perhaps Ryanair (and the other low-cost airlines) will require that passengers take out insurance against cancellation/flight delay as a condition of carriage. They might buy such an insurance themselves and add the cost to the ticket price. Those passengers who were unwilling to pay the increased cost could travel by other means.

 

I don't suppose the full cost operators would be too unhappy about increased costs in the low-cost sector. If Ryanair were to lose so many passengers that they could no longer operate at a profit, then they would first close the non-profitable routes (they've done a fair bit of that recently) and - if that didn't work - they could even wind up the company. They could sell off their equipment and whatever else had a resale value.

 

A lot of people would lose their jobs, those who enjoy cut-price travel would have to re-think their plans, but it wouldn't be the end of the world.

[Twiglet]

 

Perhaps Ryanair (and the other low-cost airlines) will require that passengers take out insurance against cancellation/flight delay as a condition of carriage. They might buy such an insurance themselves and add the cost to the ticket price. Those passengers who were unwilling to pay the increased cost could travel by other means.

 

That can't happen under European law, which states that a European airline must cancel and refund your booking or offer you another flight. Insurance won't cover flight costs for this reason - which is why many passengers flying with non-European airlines found themselves caught out.

[garrence]

Did you take out travel insurance? I understand it was available.

 

Travel insurance unlikely to pay out because it is the airline's responsibility to reroute the passenger and/or pay for their resonable expenses, per EC261/2004.

[HeadingNorth]

That can't happen under European law, which states that a European airline must cancel and refund your booking or offer you another flight.

 

That's exactly why it will happen under European law. Airlines are forced to insure themselves against having to make that payout, and the cost of the insurance is recouped from higher-priced tickets.

 

Ryanair's argument is that the customer should have the choice to opt out of that position, and buy a cheap ticket in exchange for the risk of losing out and not getting a refund.

[lotar]

We got ours about 4 weeks back, we never use travel insurance, got the amount we claimed for.. nice one Ryanair...

[Rupert_Baehr]

The problem - for many passengers - wasn't that the airlines were unwilling to cancel or refund the bookings (Ryanair argued that should be the limitation of their liability) but rather that the airlines were being held liable for all costs incurred by passengers. - Costs such as (but not limited to) food and accommodation.

 

In some cases, Airlines did offer other flights - but those flights were a month away. Not a lot of use to many people.

 

It is possible to take out insurance against almost any occurrence. At a price. There would be nothing to prevent Ryanair from taking out an insurance policy with an underwriter to protect itself against claims for compensation which might arise in the event of a cancellation or delay caused by events outside the control of the airline. Such a policy might add considerably to the operating costs and that cost increase would be passed on to the passengers.

 

There would be nothing to stop Ryanair from saying: "Travel free on Ryanair! (When you buy our €100 volcano insurance)."

 

When Ryanair was sued for charging a disabled passenger for a wheelchair (which they had to hire at short-notice because the passenger hadn't bothered to tell them he needed one) they were punished severely.

 

That'll teach them!

 

They now charge ALL passengers a surcharge to cover the possible costs of wheelchair rental.

 

That'll teach them!

 

Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 covers most of the predictable eventualities, but the Iceandic eruption gave rise to claims which were totally outside the responsibility of the airlines; claims for sums which were disproportionate to the amount paid by the passengers for travel. If an airline (or any other business, for that matter) finds itself exposed to potentially large claims, then it will almost certainly take steps to reduce or eliminate the risk of those claims and will pass the costs on to the customers.

 

Ryanair have had a number of clashes with airport operators, governments and the EU. Sometimes they win, other times the passengers lose - because any awards made against the company any costs of litigation and any increases in operating costs are passed on to the passengers.

 

In 2004, Ryanair had an argument with the Belgians about their operations out of Charleroi. The full cost airlines argued that Ryanair paid lower landing fees at Charleroi than they did at Zavantem (the real Brussels Airport.) That was quite true - but then again, the full cost operators weren't prepared to operate out of Charleroi, either.

 

The arguments became rather silly (IMO) and at one point, Ryanair suggested that they might pull out of Charleroi completely. Instant Panic! - The airport was in a depressed area and it was largely Ryanair's operations that were responsible for its success. Ryanair did eventually scrap the Charleroi-Stansted service but the only real losers were the passengers who had to find alternative (and often more expensive) routes.

 

Ryanair also had a disagreement about an airport they were using at Strasbourg. They pulled out. Overnight.

 

At one time, there were mutterings about them being quite willing to pull out of France completely. (They do operate routes to France, but they have no major route hubs in that country.)