USA: DOT fines ticket agent and Qantas for advertising violations
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) fined ticket agent Unister USA, also known as Flights24.com, USD 30,000 for violating the Department’s rules on fare advertising and disclosure of code-share flights. An investigation by the Department’s Aviation Enforcement Office found that, from at least July 2011 through October 2011, ads on Unister’s website failed to disclose at the first point fares were displayed that additional taxes and fees would be imposed, including Unister’s service fee. Unister’s website violated DOT rules requiring any advertising that includes a price for air transportation to state the full price to be paid by the consumer, including all carrier-imposed surcharges. Until Jan. 26, 2012, only government-imposed taxes and fees assessed on a per-passenger basis, such as passenger facility charges, could be stated separately from the advertised fare, but they had to be clearly disclosed in the advertisement so that passengers could easily determine the full price to be paid. Internet fare listings were permitted to disclose these separate taxes and fees through a prominent link next to the fare stating that government taxes and fees were extra, and the link had to take the viewer directly to information where the type and amount of taxes and fees were displayed.
The Enforcement Office also found that Unister violated the Department’s code-share disclosure rule. Under code-sharing, an airline will sell tickets on flights that use its designator code, but are operated by a separate airline. DOT requires airlines and ticket agents to inform consumers, before they book a flight, if the flight is operated under a code-share arrangement, as well as disclose the corporate name of the transporting carrier and any other name under which the flight is offered to the public. From at least July through September 2011, Unister failed to disclose the name of the carrier providing the transportation when advertising code-share flights on its website.
In another case, the DOT assessed a civil penalty of USD 40,000 against Qantas Airways for violating federal aviation laws and the Department’s rules prohibiting deceptive price advertising in air travel. For a period of time in the fall of last year, Qantas displayed advertisements on numerous websites that did not provide any information on additional taxes and fees. Even after consumers clicking on the advertised fare were taken to a page on the carrier’s website where sample routes and prices were displayed, the type and amounts of additional taxes and fees could be seen only if a consumer scrolled to the bottom of the page.
Source: DOT press releases 27-12 and 28-12.
The consent orders are available at www.regulations.gov, docket DOT-OST-2012-0002.
European Court of Justice: insolvency protection also applies in case of a package organiser’s fraudulent conduct
The Landgericht Hamburg (Regional Court, Hamburg, Germany) had asked the ECJ whether the protection of consumers pursuant to article 7 of the Package Travel Directive (PTD) also applied where the insolvency was attributable to fraudulent conduct on the part of the travel organiser. The Landgericht Hamburg must rule on the action brought by Mr Blödel-Pawlik against HanseMerkur Reiseversicherung AG, a German insurance company, concerning its refusal to refund the cost of package travel which did not take place because of the insolvency of the travel organiser, Rhein Reisen GmbH. The travel organiser – which, in the view of the Landgericht, had never really intended to organise the trip which Mr Blödel-Pawlik had booked for himself and his wife – became insolvent because it had embezzled the money paid by prospective travellers. It had taken out insurance against insolvency with HanseMerkur Reiseversicherung AG and had provided Mr Blödel-Pawlik with two notices of guarantee confirming that the cost of the trip would be refunded if the trip did not take place owing to the organiser’s insolvency. According to the insurance company, however, the Package Travel Directive is not intended to protect travellers against fraudulent conduct on the part of a package travel organiser.
In judgment of Feb. 16, 2012, the ECJ held that the protection conferred on travellers under the PTD in the event of insolvency on the part of the package travel organiser applies even where the insolvency is attributable to the organiser’s own fraudulent conduct. The directive is specifically aimed at arming consumers against the consequences of insolvency, whatever its causes. Accordingly, the fact that the insolvency of the travel organiser is attributable to its own fraudulent conduct cannot constitute an obstacle to the refund of money paid over or to the repatriation of travellers.
Source: ECJ press release 13/12 of Feb. 16, 2012
Find full text of judgment in Case C-134/11 - Jürgen Blödel-Pawlik v HanseMerkur Reiseversicherung AG here>>.
USA: New York law firms file class action against Costa
As reported by "Travel Weekly", New York-based personal-injury law firm Proner and Proner said it joined forces with Codacons, the Italian consumer-protection organization, in filing a class action against Costa Cruises. A second New York law firm, Napoli Bern Ripka Shkolnik, also will represent passengers in the class action.
Proner said that the suit will seek at least USD 160,000 for each passenger who was aboard the ship at the time of the Jan. 13 disaster near the Italian island of Giglio.
Source: Travel Weekly; find article here>>.
European Union: new Directive on Consumer Rights published in Official Journal
The new Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of Oct. 25, 2011, on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council has been published in today's edition of the Official Journal of the European Union.
The new Directive applies (under the conditions and to the extent set out in its provisions) to any contract concluded between a trader and a consumer. However, it does not apply to
contracts which fall within the scope of the PTD or the Timeshare Directive as well as
contracts for passenger transport services (except of some articles of the directive which do apply to passnger transprot contracts).
The full text of the directive which comes into force on the 20th day following its publication and has to be implemented by the member states into national law by 13 December 2013 is available here>>.
USA: DOT fines Orbitz for violating price advertising rules
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) on Oct. 17, 2011 fined the online ticket agent Orbitz USD 60,000 for violating federal aviation laws and the Department’s rules prohibiting deceptive price advertising in air travel. For a period of time in early 2011, Orbitz’s homepage displayed advertisements that did not provide any information on additional taxes and fees.
European Commission publishes results of the Online ticket Sales Sweep
Results of the 2010 sweep websites selling tickets to cultural and sporting events are positive, the Commission announced on 29 Sept. 2011: 88% of the websites checked for breach of EU consumer rules are now in line compared to only 40% in 2010.
This sector was chosen after European Consumer Centres received numerous complaints.
USA: DOT fines Virgin Atlantic for deceptive online advertising
The U.S. Department of Transportation has fined Virgin Atlantic USD 50,000 for deceptive online advertising. The DOT said that Virgin Atlantic displayed air fares, but without government taxes and fees. To see taxes and fees, consumers had to scroll down to the bottom of the page to read the fine print.
USA: DOT fines JetBlue for deceptive pricing
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) fined JetBlue Airways USD 50,000 for violating federal aviation laws and the Department’s rules prohibiting deceptive price advertising in air travel.
