Jetstar refund???

Forums › Off topic › Jetstar refund???

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#732531 14-Dec-2012 12:28

Looks like they cover themselves pretty well ...

From the Conditions of carriage

NordVPN

Protect your online activity with NordVPN (affiliate link).

Talkiet

4689 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#732546 14-Dec-2012 13:04

They certainly seem to be better at writing T&Cs than they are at running an on time, reliable domestic airline service.

The sad fact is that Jetstar run a VAST number less flights than AirNZ, so any impact with a plane for them is going to have a much bigger impact than it does for AirNZ.

To me, saving a tiny amount of money just isn't worth the substantial risk that you will be very late. I'm no fan of how AirNZ is degrading their Koru and Star Alliance services, plus how they are starting to tack on Ryan Air like nickel and dime fees, but they do run largely to time and have flights far more often than Jetstar.

In this instance, I'd keep pushing Jetstar and refuse to accept anything but a refund, and if necessary take it to small claims (or whatever it's called now). The only ambiguous bit I see is their clause in 9.1c where they say "(except where this is the result of circumstances beyond our control)"... To me, it's not clear if that clause relates just to flight cancellation or cancellation AND significant change to departure time. Could be either.

The best thing you can do is simply vote with your wallet. Don't use them again.

Cheers - N

Please note all comments are the product of my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.

wallop

367 posts

Ultimate Geek

#732551 14-Dec-2012 13:14

The best thing you can do is simply vote with your wallet. Don't use them again.

Of course if we all do this then they no longer fly in NZ and then we go back to the good old days where it costs more to fly CHC - AKL than to Australia.

Personally I would still fly Jetstar if they had not stuffed up their flight schedule. I just love those $1, $9 and $19 fares.

Of course the only time I got the $1 fare they changed the schedule so I ended up cancelling and going Air NZ.

Talkiet

4689 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#732552 14-Dec-2012 13:21

wallop:
The best thing you can do is simply vote with your wallet. Don't use them again.

Of course if we all do this then they no longer fly in NZ and then we go back to the good old days where it costs more to fly CHC - AKL than to Australia.

Personally I would still fly Jetstar if they had not stuffed up their flight schedule. I just love those $1, $9 and $19 fares.

Of course the only time I got the $1 fare they changed the schedule so I ended up cancelling and going Air NZ.

I understand to some extent the desire to support the little guy, but when the little guy has worse service, less reliable planes, worse support, less choice of flight times, older fleet etc etc etc I'm not prepared to be the martyr that keeps flying them.

Don't get me wrong... I DO HOPE there are enough people that don't care about flight times, support, service, reliability etc to keep them in business.... It's just I'll never be one of those people.

Cheers - N

Please note all comments are the product of my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#732555 14-Dec-2012 13:24

I'll fly Jetstar for quick flights to Chch, I would usually book a week out and use Jetstar.

Further out I go Webjet and try to get onto grab-a-seat.

Yesterday I flew down to Chch and back with Jetstar on flights I booked on the preceding Friday.

I didn't have any issues, however as I was flying with work it would only cost me time not financially, as it was that flight was delayed but only by 30 min.

I will not fly Jetstar from Melbourne as last time I did the plane had fixed seats that couldn't recline, so on a flight that left at 11pm I couldn't get a sleep on!

Jetstar is budget and you have to expect some discomfort, really it is up to the user to decide if that is worth $40 or $50 ?

as far as your refund I wouldn't be assuming it wont happen until they tell you so, book your flight on Air NZ and follow up if they reject you later.

k14

623 posts

Ultimate Geek

#732576 14-Dec-2012 14:01

BraaiGuy: Looks like they cover themselves pretty well ...

From the Conditions of carriage

Perfect, thanks for that! Part c of 9.1 seems to be exactly my scenario. If only the call center were able to know their own conditions! Although they do use the word "significant" so I guess that gives them a little bit of wiggle room, depending on each sides definition of "significant". Three hours for me is significant, any more than about 20-30 mins and I would deem that significant.

ajobbins

5050 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#732597 14-Dec-2012 14:51

"9.1 (a) Jetstar does not guarantee it will be able to carry you and your Baggage in accordance with the scheduled date and time of the flights specified. Schedules may change without notice for a range of reasons including but not limited to bad weather, air traffic control delays, strikes, technical disruptions and late inbound aircraft. Flight times do not form part of your contract of carriage with us."

You could argue it's not fair that the airline can change it's mind about flight time without penalty but you can not. If they claim that flight times do not form part of your contact of carriage, can you then not claim you can rock up any time you want as long as you have a valid ticket, and get on the next plane?

I also suspect that the CGA of FTA doesn't allow them to do that anyway. I'd take it to the Disputes Tribunal if they don't agree, if nothing else to try and embarrass them and perhaps get a precedent set so that others in this position have some clarity on the situation.

Twitter: ajobbins

ajobbins

5050 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#732599 14-Dec-2012 14:53

k14: Perfect, thanks for that! Part c of 9.1 seems to be exactly my scenario. If only the call center were able to know their own conditions! Although they do use the word "significant" so I guess that gives them a little bit of wiggle room, depending on each sides definition of "significant". Three hours for me is significant, any more than about 20-30 mins and I would deem that significant.

I would agree. 'Significant' is subjective, and in your case 3 hours is enough to impact other plans you have to the point where the flight is no longer suitable for the purpose it was sold to you (because of their doing).

Twitter: ajobbins

rayonline

1730 posts

Uber Geek

#732609 14-Dec-2012 15:07

I'm no lawyer but if goes thru the disputes, they may want evidence of what inconvenience and/or losses you incurred.

Who knows, maybe airfares is the exception to the CGA. Things outside their control may be valid, look at internet - they cannot "gaurantee" also per se. At the moment, NZ is still considering if they wanna follow EU in terms of compensating passengers (or was that fining the airline).

mattwnz

19389 posts

Uber Geek

#732624 14-Dec-2012 15:42

ajobbins:
I also suspect that the CGA of FTA doesn't allow them to do that anyway. I'd take it to the Disputes Tribunal if they don't agree, if nothing else to try and embarrass them and perhaps get a precedent set so that others in this position have some clarity on the situation.

I don't think you can set a precedent, because I don't think disputes tribunal ruling are published anywhere. But I think they should be, and I think they would make some good reading.

In JS terms they do have clauses that say things like 'unless required by law' which is sort of an out clause to their terms. But it does make me wonder how they can write terms, if they may not meet the law of the the land, and they have to put that clause in. I presume that is due to the terms being used in multiple colours.

wellygary

7384 posts

Uber Geek

#732645 14-Dec-2012 16:26

mattwnz: I don't think you can set a precedent, because I don't think disputes tribunal ruling are published anywhere. But I think they should be, and I think they would make some good reading.

Dispute decisions from '06 to '10 are here

http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZDispT/

mattwnz

19389 posts

Uber Geek

#732663 14-Dec-2012 17:00

wellygary:
mattwnz: I don't think you can set a precedent, because I don't think disputes tribunal ruling are published anywhere. But I think they should be, and I think they would make some good reading.

Dispute decisions from '06 to '10 are here

http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZDispT/

That can only be a small selection of them though I would think, as not many there.

gregmcc

2092 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#732670 14-Dec-2012 17:30

Satch:
gregmcc: Simple fact is no mater what Jetstar say they cannot contract out of the CGA.

They offered a specific service at a specific time (irrelevent if they start claiming the time isn't part of the contract) they must provide what they offered or fully refund as set out in the CGA.

If they start giving you the run around, keep track of the time you have wasted sorting this out, you are entitled to additional costs that relate to dealing with the problem, such as hours wasted on the phone waiting to talk to someone, filing fee with the disputes tribunal, make them aware of these facts when you request the refund.

Ha, I remember someone else recently pulling you up on similar advice :). Out of interest, what experiences have you had where you have charged additional for your time wasted for such matters?

no expereience, just had a read of the CGA and it quite plainly tells what you can claim for.

I recently had a problem with an appliance store, in the end a nicely worded letter faxed to the store concerned and their head office quoting the CGA and the remidies allowed and the problem was resolved by the end of the day.

I'm sure that most companies have a good working knowledge of the CGA but rely on customers not having this knowledge and getting away without following thru on their obligations, so when they get a customer who does know they quite quickly do the right thing

ajobbins

5050 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#732674 14-Dec-2012 17:37

gregmcc: I'm sure that most companies have a good working knowledge of the CGA but rely on customers not having this knowledge and getting away without following thru on their obligations, so when they get a customer who does know they quite quickly do the right thing

Not always. I had a dispute with DSE that went on for months. They played dumb the whole time, ignoring my references to the law in written responses, and blatantly lying about my rights to me verbally.

In the end I took it to the disputes tribunal. The day they got the hearing notice they immediately fulfilled their obligation.

Knowing they were in for a big refund to me, they basically stonewalled me hoping I would eventually give up. I suspect most people do - it takes quite a lot of time and effort to get the DT hearing scheduled. Companies know this and know that if they make it hard enough, most people just wont bother.

Twitter: ajobbins

mattwnz

19389 posts

Uber Geek

#732689 14-Dec-2012 18:01

ajobbins:

Not always. I had a dispute with DSE that went on for months.

I had a problem with them too with the CGA, even went through to their regional manager. I had to go to the manufacturer to get it resolved, and to their credit they did

1 | 2 | 3 | 4