Modern take on the airline refund saga: A hole in KLM's pocket or just Opodo's trick?
Airline duty obliged to reimburse agency fee following trip termination due to ECJ decision - Workers will now be safeguarded from radiation hazards through a new directive proposed by the Commission on ionising radiation protection.
In a nutshell, the Dutch airline KLM is on the receiving end of a heated legal battle over the infamous 95 euros booking fee. Passengers who had planned trips through the ticket portal Opodo were left high and dry when KLM decided to cancel their flights, receiving a refund of 1958 euros instead of the full 2053.
Enter the Austrian Association for Consumer Information, who flung themselves into the mix on behalf of these travelers. They argue that the EU Air Passenger Rights Regulation of 2004 should cover cancellations and booking fees alike - regardless of whether the airline has the exact figures on hand.
While KLM defended their ignorance of the booking fee agreement with Opodo, claiming they hadn't approved it, Advocate General Norkus wasn't having any of it. He proposed that if KLM had been partnered with Opodo for over a decade and were even known to receive incentives based on ticket sales, their connection was tantamount to tacit approval of the booking fee. The ECJ had already handed down a similar verdict back in 2018.
Now, let's delve into the nitty-gritty. The ECJ has consistently enforced the idea that airlines must bear the burden of compensating passengers in cases of flight delays and cancellations, except when the disruptions are due to extraordinary circumstances. Previously, in the infamous van der Lans vs KLM case, they ruled that technical issues that crop up without warning fall under the umbrella of routine airline mishaps and therefore don't justifycompensation exemptions.
When it comes to flight cancellations via intermediaries like Opodo, the legal waters can get murky. However, the EU Air Passenger Rights Regulation states that the airline is responsible for coughing up the cash for ticket refunds - including booking fees - when a flight gets scrapped. In practice, airlines like KLM sometimes try to dodge responsibility and pass the buck to the intermediary.
Standing commercial relationships between upstarts like Opodo and established airlines don't exonerate those airlines from their obligations to passengers. The ECJ has not carved out a special loophole for partnerships; passenger rights maintain their primacy in the, well, pecking order.
Here's what passengers need to know:
- If your flight gets axed by the airline, you're entitled to a full refund of your ticket cost, including the booking fee, if you decide against rebooking. This claim is backed by the EU Air Passenger Rights Regulation.
- When it comes to disputes over compensation or refunds, exercising your right to take the matter directly up with the airline could be your game plan. If the airline attempts to dodge responsibility, you can seek legal recourse or band together with organizations like AirHelp for assistance.
- Remember, booking platforms like Opodo can facilitate claims, but they don't replace the airline's legal obligation to refund passengers or offer compensation.
In a nutshell, passengers affected by KLM cancellations involving Opodo reservations can stake their claim for refunds, including booking fees, from KLM, citing ECJ rulings and the EU Air Passenger Rights Regulation. So, it seems that KLM may be looking at a hefty bill or a damaging case of buyers' remorse!
- Regardless of the partnership between KLM and Opodo, the EU Air Passenger Rights Regulation mandates that KLM remains responsible for refunding the full ticket cost, including booking fees, to passengers when their flights are cancelled.
- The Austrian Association for Consumer Information's argument that booking fees should be covered under the EU Air Passenger Rights Regulation, regardless of whether the airline has the exact figures, highlights the importance of passengers knowing their rights and taking legal action against airlines that try to dodge responsibility.
