Airline passenger news and views
19 May 2012 | Sign In
Why should airlines have to foot the ash bill ?
I agree with O’Leary, that the law should be amended.
Over a month after the volcanic eruptions, some airlines including BA say their ash-related expenses, including compensation claims, are still amounting to £15-20 million a day.
Why though should airlines have to foot the bill for the natural occurrence of a volcano erupting?
Well I can see both sides of the picture on this one, since I was in Spain covering a golf conference when the first wave of ash chaos struck last month. Instead of doing the (with hindsight) sensible thing of sitting it out at the hotel, five of us bought a car and drove the 1,000 miles up to Belgium and across to Hull on the ferry.
It was a pro-active decision on our part to start moving when it seemed possible airports could be closed for months.
Although a memorable and unique experience, the extra trip ended up costing over £500 each.
The first thought is “right someone, who isn’t me, is paying for this”, but then on reflection, why should they?
The law, of course, says someone should, so now airlines are dishing out millions to those who waited patiently at their hotels, but not to those who set off.
On this one, I agree with O’Leary, that the law should be amended and only the price of tickets refunded, in such a case as this, as is the way with trains and ferries.
Whilst government handling of the situation has been dire, surely if someone puts themselves in the position of being overseas, perhaps it should not be expected for others to sort everything out if it goes wrong?
| Comments | Post a comment |
|
Clinton Pembury, London 20 May 2010, 02:56PM | |
The simple answer is that they have to pay because the law says they have to. The question ought to be whether or not the law needs to be changed. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Colin Trimble, Bath 21 May 2010, 07:46AM | |
When the EC Regulation was originally announced, I thought it was a good idea because there had been a number of incidents where low-cost airlines had left passengers stranded. The law put the responsibility for compensation firmly where the fault lay ie with the airlines. | |
| Rating (0) | |
I am sorry for the airlines. The ash cloud crisis is simply not their fault and there is no reason why they should have to pay for all of the costs and expenses that resulted from it. In this case the law or the application of the law is wrong. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Mark, Bolton 21 May 2010, 12:02PM | |
I agree with you Jenny, the knock on effects of these laws will put travellers out of pocket by elevating ticket prices. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Karen J, Essex 24 May 2010, 11:35AM | |
Airlines should foot the bill, they obviously make huge profits and should be able to handle it. It is almost certain that passengers will be the ones to suffer the most with ticket prices going sky high. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Geoffrey Price, Westminster 26 May 2010, 12:01PM | |
Europe's biggest airline brands are backing a controversial proposal by the European Union that national governments step in and cover the estimated £2.2bn-worth of losses accrued by the industry as a result of the volcanic ash crisis. It looks like the EU is backing airlines on this one. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Leslie Bench, Wolverhampton 27 May 2010, 06:16PM | |
People ought to be able to get proper insurance that covers this type of thing. Making the airlines pay for things that are not down to them will simply push up prices. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Tim, UK 7 June 2010, 04:58PM | |
The way I see it our CAA told the planes they could not fly, they then a week later said they could but at own risk. Why not take that stance in the first place. | |
| Rating (0) | |
|
Richard Paul 9 June 2010, 02:08PM | |
The Airlines should pay, for far to long now the CEO's have compromised safety with cost cutting measures which impact on safety yet keep assuring the Public that safety is non negotiable. | |
| Rating (0) | |
