Entitled to compensation when flights rescheduled?

Khanis

I booked a flight 5 months ago to get a good deal on flights for myself, the missus and the nipper to fly to Edinburgh for my sister's wedding. All in all it came in at 285 Euro.

Last week I got an email from Ryanair with a change of flight times. The time difference was significant and they offered me a full refund which I accepted.
The only problem is, now I'm trying to arrange alternative transport and because it's only a month away it's going to cost me THREE TIMES the price !!

Now.. it seems to me that airlines can screw consumers around with impunity. If I needed to change my flight times I'd pay a hefty surcharge (that's if it was even possible) but they get to change the rules and all I get is my money back?

All I want is the difference in what it's costing me because they changed the return flight in such a way as to render it useless to me. Even more remarkable, I couldn't keep the outbound flight (which was fine) and just reschedule in inbound flight, I had to cancel both.

The way I see it, there was a contract between us that they'd provide an agreed upon service at an agreed upon time and now they've changed their side of the bargain.

I don't know if this falls into Small Claims jurisdiction as the difference between the two sums is less than €2000.

Any legal eagles out there who might be able to shed some light on my options?

Nody

They changed the contract as noted and due to this returned the full payment to you making your contract null and void. The cancellation was done well before the flight was due and hence you have nothing to stand on if you try to take them to court, esp. as you accepted the cancellation!

Khanis

A succinct appraisal but I don't think it's entirely accurate.

I options I was presented with were

a) Accept the new flight times

OR

b) Take the refund.


Neither options were acceptable but I took the refund because the alternative was the lesser of two evils.
However, that doesn't mean that Ryanair weren't in breach of contract because my they changed the terms of our contract without my consultation or permission and I'm pretty sure Irish contract law says you can't do that without prior agreement. Now I'm sure there's something in size 6 font in the terms of service saying "We can change anything we want without consulting you" but I also believe that there is a judge out there who thinks that it isn't right that airlines can do this sort of thing i.e. leave the consumer carrying the can

Nody

You assume it has to be acceptable to you which of course is NOT a requirement of law.

Companies change their contract on a regular basis and guess what, you don't get the option to veto it! For example Eircom increasing the line rental, you don't have the option to say "That is not acceptable to me, I'll sue you". This of course also excludes the fact that you agreed, and clicked that you agreed, to these conditions of the sale in the first place, so no, sorry you don't have a leg to stand on here legally.

I've even gone out to get you the exact quotes (all copied from http://www.aviationreg.ie/APR_Cancellations.HTML):
Financial compensation may also be payable in cases of flight cancellation, unless one of the circumstances below applies:

1.
The airline can prove that it was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. The Regulation gives the following examples of circumstances which may fall within this exception: political instability, weather conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of the air carrier.
2.
Adequate notice of the cancellation was given. No compensation is payable in the following circumstances:

Notification Rerouting (if applicable)
2 weeks or more before scheduled departure

So lets repeat it again shall we, you where given adequate notice (i.e. more then two weeks) and got the required legal offers (pick the new flight or get your money back) and have no legal leg to stand on at all.

Khanis

Nody wrote: »

You assume it has to be acceptable to you which of course is NOT a requirement of law.

Of course it does, it has to be acceptable to both parties. That's the essence of a contract

Nody wrote: »

Companies change their contract on a regular basis and guess what, you don't get the option to veto it! For example Eircom increasing the line rental, you don't have the option to say "That is not acceptable to me, I'll sue you". This of course also excludes the fact that you agreed, and clicked that you agreed, to these conditions of the sale in the first place, so no, sorry you don't have a leg to stand on here legally.

I don't think you're right here. If Eircom told me they'd charge me amount X for a service due to start in 6 months and we entered into a contract for that service then they would be contractually obliged to meet their side of the bargain or leave themselves open to a lawsuit for breach of contract. Which is exactly what I am proposing.

Hidden legal gobbledigook that undermines a consumers rights are untenable under Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (see below)

Nody wrote: »

I've even gone out to get you the exact quotes (all copied from http://www.aviationreg.ie/APR_Cancellations.HTML):
Financial compensation may also be payable in cases of flight cancellation, unless one of the circumstances below applies:

1.
The airline can prove that it was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. The Regulation gives the following examples of circumstances which may fall within this exception: political instability, weather conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of the air carrier.
2.
Adequate notice of the cancellation was given. No compensation is payable in the following circumstances:

Notification Rerouting (if applicable)
2 weeks or more before scheduled departure

Yeah, I read that too. I haven't heard of any meteors/hurricanes/other acts of God striking Scotland recently so lets assume they've just changed the flight times because it suits the company to do that.
Those regulations your make reference to are completely one-sided and the compensation available is pathetic. Let's assume for a moment that they hadn't bothered to contact me until the last minute. 250 quid for missing someone's wedding is supposed to be adequate compensation? I don't think so.
In any case, irrespective of the legislation, I'm perfectly entitled to seek damages for breach of contract. Let's not forget, I'm not looking to take the piss here. I just want to be fairly treated and that's not what's happening.

Nody wrote: »

So lets repeat it again shall we, you where given adequate notice (i.e. more then two weeks) and got the required legal offers (pick the new flight or get your money back) and have no legal leg to stand on at all.

Sure I do:

Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts

Article 3

1. A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.

I've bolded the specific breaches items detailed in the annex of the directive.

ANNEX

TERMS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 3 (3) 1. Terms which have the object or effect of:

(a) excluding or limiting the legal liability of a seller or supplier in the event of the death of a consumer or personal injury to the latter resulting from an act or omission of that seller or supplier;

(b) inappropriately excluding or limiting the legal rights of the consumer vis-à-vis the seller or supplier or another party in the event of total or partial non-performance or inadequate performance by the seller or supplier of any of the contractual obligations, including the option of offsetting a debt owed to the seller or supplier against any claim which the consumer may have against him;

(c) making an agreement binding on the consumer whereas provision of services by the seller or supplier is subject to a condition whose realization depends on his own will alone;

(d) permitting the seller or supplier to retain sums paid by the consumer where the latter decides not to conclude or perform the contract, without providing for the consumer to receive compensation of an equivalent amount from the seller or supplier where the latter is the party cancelling the contract;

(e) requiring any consumer who fails to fulfil his obligation to pay a disproportionately high sum in compensation;

(f) authorizing the seller or supplier to dissolve the contract on a discretionary basis where the same facility is not granted to the consumer, or permitting the seller or supplier to retain the sums paid for services not yet supplied by him where it is the seller or supplier himself who dissolves the contract;

(g) enabling the seller or supplier to terminate a contract of indeterminate duration without reasonable notice except where there are serious grounds for doing so;

(h) automatically extending a contract of fixed duration where the consumer does not indicate otherwise, when the deadline fixed for the consumer to express this desire not to extend the contract is unreasonably early;

(i) irrevocably binding the consumer to terms with which he had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract;

(j) enabling the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract;

(k) enabling the seller or supplier to alter unilaterally without a valid reason any characteristics of the product or service to be provided;

(l) providing for the price of goods to be determined at the time of delivery or allowing a seller of goods or supplier of services to increase their price without in both cases giving the consumer the corresponding right to cancel the contract if the final price is too high in relation to the price agreed when the contract was concluded;

(m) giving the seller or supplier the right to determine whether the goods or services supplied are in conformity with the contract, or giving him the exclusive right to interpret any term of the contract;

(n) limiting the seller's or supplier's obligation to respect commitments undertaken by his agents or making his commitments subject to compliance with a particular formality;

(o) obliging the consumer to fulfil all his obligations where the seller or supplier does not perform his;

(p) giving the seller or supplier the possibility of transferring his rights and obligations under the contract, where this may serve to reduce the guarantees for the consumer, without the latter's agreement;

(q) excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, particularly by requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions, unduly restricting the evidence available to him or imposing on him a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract.

The directive is available to read in full here

It seems to me that the legislation is in place, so why are the airlines getting away with this crap ?

cgarvey

Have you read the Ryanair T&C that you agreed to? I haven't, but there is likely to be a clause allowing them exit the contract with the maximum liability being the full price paid, and no more.

Your eircom analogy isn't quite correct, because they (and most service contracts) have provisions for price changes.

ircoha

OP;
from the directive

2. The contractual terms which reflect mandatory statutory or regulatory provisions and the provisions or principles of international conventions to which the Member States or the Community are party, particularly in the transport area, shall not be subject to the provisions of this Directive.

From the ryanair t/c's
“CONVENTION” means the Montreal Convention 1999.

so i would think its time to google sherman as in tank

supermouse

To make the reservation you would have had to click agreement in the Terms and Conditions box on the costing page. In the Terms and Conditions you will read the following in relation to flight time changes :
Flight cancellations and schedule changes

If your flight is cancelled or before the date of travel, is rescheduled so as to depart more than three hours before or after the original departure time then you will be entitled to a travel credit or full refund of all monies paid if the alternative flight/s offered are not suitable to you and you do not travel.
Ryanair does not provide monetary compensation under Article 7 of EU Regulation 261/2004 for flights which are delayed or cancelled for reasons beyond Ryanair's control (extraordinary circumstances). You may therefore wish to ensure that you have suitable private insurance cover in force to cover such eventualities. Your rights under EU Regulation 261/2004 are unaffected, so in the case of denied boarding, flight cancellation or a delay in excess of two hours you will be provided with a written notice setting out the rules for compensation and assistance in line with such Regulation.
Passengers who book well in advance should re-check their outward/return flight timings on www.ryanair.com or with a Ryanair reservations centre between 24 and 72 hours prior to departure.

So you were told what was going to happen in relation to flight changes prior to confirming the booking and entering into a contract between yourself and the airline. You clearly didnt read the t&c so as far as Ryanair are concerned they have done their bit. Sorry mate, they will do naff all to help you.

MysticalSoul

You see neither option was acceptable to you, but by taking one of the options, you give the message that you are satisfied IMHO.