Section:GDN 1N PaGe:54 Edition Date:190907 Edition:01 Zone: Sent at 6/9/2019 11:56 cYanmaGentaYellowbl
- The Guardian Saturday 7 September 2019
(^54) Money
Consumer champions
Miles Brignall & Rebecca Smithers
Time this ‘unfair’ airline
tactic was grounded
I arrived at the airport in Billund,
Denmark for a KLM fl ight to Cape
Town, only to fi nd that my ticket
had been cancelled and my seat
sold on to someone else.
I had booked a return fl ight
because it was actually cheaper,
planning to only use the return
leg. However, representatives at
the airline told me that fl ights are
automatically cancelled if you miss
the fi rst leg. I was forced to buy a
ticket with another airline because
all KLM could off er instead was a
prohibitively expensive business
class seat.
I found an article in the
Guardian that said KLM does
not automatically cancel the
second leg if you miss the fi rst –
contradicting my own experience.
KLM customer service agents
repeatedly told me the return leg
is automatically cancelled, and
off ered no refund. If this fair?
ME, Cape Town
Passengers around the world are
familiar with complex airline
conditions that seem almost
deliberately designed to catch you
out. You fell foul of an obscure
“no-show clause” in KLM’s ticket
terms , which prevents customers
from taking advantage of deals that
mean return fl ights are cheaper
than singles. Airlines argue that this
constitutes abuse of their off ers –
although it really refl ects the warped
economics of air travel.
Consumer group Which? has
said the practice is unfair and
unjustifi ed, allowing airlines to
take advantage of customers who
miss a fl ight and more than double
their money in some cases when
they sell on the ticket. In this case,
KLM told us its ground handlers
in Denmark had made a mistake
about its policy.
It maintains customers must
pay an extra €500 fee to access the
second leg, rather than having their
tickets cancelled.
Following our intervention
KLM has agreed to refund the £932
cost of the replacement ticket.
However, they reduced that by
the €500 fee it says it should
have charged you to change your
original tickets.
As a goodwill gesture it also
off ered a €250 voucher for
misapplying policies and wasting a
signifi cant amount of your time – an
outcome you are happy with.
It’s time airlines were forced to
end this practice, once and for all.
Others take note. KLM is not the only
airline that adopts this strategy.
Chain Reaction’s customer
service is in the frame
Back in May last year I bought a
£3,000 specialist mountain bike
from the “worlds biggest online bike
store”, Chain Reaction Cycles – part
of cycling retailer, Wiggle.
Less than a year later – in March
this year – the frame developed a
crack and I submitted a warranty
claim. The problem is, the company
just won’t deal with it.
After endless delays, I fi nally
received an acknowledgement that
a replacement had been allocated
in August. I was told it would be
dispatched in 24 hours.
Nothing happened and I
eventually discovered that my
allocated frame had been sold to
someone else. The warranty team
will not answer emails, the “live
chat team” tells me it passes on
messages but they seem to get
Often it’s cheaper to choose a return
ticket than a single fl ight ... but there
can be a costly catch
PHOTOGRAPH: ALAMY
nowhere, and you cannot ever
speak to anyone on the phone. In
short, I feel like I’m being ignored.
Trading Standards has advised
me to send a letter stating the
company is in breach of contract,
but I suspect that this will be
ignored, too.
ML, Thatcham
Given the huge size of Chain
Reaction and its parent fi rm
Wiggle, we get very few complaints
about these fi rms which are
the Amazon of cycle retailing. I
have used both and always had
excellent service.
That said, your case is not a good
advert for Northern Ireland-based
Chain Reaction, taken over by
Wiggle in 2016.
In fairness, once we raised it with
Wiggle HQ it resolved the problem
very quickly. Chris McKee, CR’s
manager, told us that a technical
error led to the fi rst replacement
delivery being cancelled. “We’re
investigating why this happened to
ensure the same issue doesn’t occur
again. We’re deeply sorry for the
experience he has had.
“We’ve already contacted him to
apologise and a new frame is on its
way,” he says.
You are just hugely relieved
that you have the £2,000
replacement frame.
We welcome letters but cannot answer
individually. Email us at consumer.
[email protected] or
write to Consumer Champions,
Money, the Guardian, 90 York Way,
London N1 9GU. Please include a
daytime phone number. Submission
and publication of all letters is subject
to our terms and conditions: http://
gu.com/letters-terms
Compiled this week by Miles Brignall
and Jasper Jolly
RELEASED BY "What's News" vk.com/wsnws TELEGRAM: t.me/whatsnws