Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Air Canada | Aeroplan
Reload this Page >

Group wants to sue Air Canada for not reflecting actual ticket price

Group wants to sue Air Canada for not reflecting actual ticket price

Old Apr 17, 2015, 1:05 pm
  #31  
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: YYG
Programs: Aeroplan 50K, Club Accor Gold
Posts: 441
It was certified as a class action lawsuit. I'm not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt, but from what I have seen of such things in the past, you would typically have three choices:

1. Contact the appropriate authority to opt out and preserve your rights to sue individually (or not at all);
2. Do nothing, and if the suit wins
a. contact the designated organization with proof you were affected to receive your share of the judgement, or
b. do nothing, and you don't get anything, but your name never shows up anywhere.

However, this is Quebec, and furthermore involves a company that keeps detailed information on everybody who purchases its services, so I am not surprised that you have to act now to opt out. On the other hand, the class is defined in such a way that proving that you were deceived might involve forcing Air Canada to cough up old website information to see what it displayed for a price the particular days you purchased tickets. Or the court might say "screw that; the cost of doing so could easily eat up the entire award, so everybody in Quebec who bought tickets during that time is automatically a winner."

As far as being included without having been asked, that's the point of class action suits. The lawyers for the person seeking certification propose conditions to determine who is included, and if the judge decides that they're reasonable (for instance "every person who has ever lived in Quebec" is not logical since many or even most of them haven't flown Air Canada and many who did didn't travel during the time period specified).
islandcub1 is offline  
Old Apr 17, 2015, 1:41 pm
  #32  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Programs: AC SE100K-1MM, NH, DL, AA, BA, Global Entry/Nexus, APEC..
Posts: 18,877
From another thread, but relevant here

Originally Posted by winnipegrev
...I'm curious why you think suing AC is a better option in any way. Unless you're on the receiving end of the class-action (if even successful), we are all going to pay more.

...As for actual fees incurred by fighting a class-action deterring AC... doubtful. They have a bunch of lawyers on staff who may otherwise have been twiddling their thumbs...

EXACTLY.

This nonsense reminds me of:
1. The chocolate price-fixing lawsuit. Did you all get your free chocolate bar or whatever? Are you happy now?

2. Some legal professionals with perhaps no real work to keep them busy

3. People who seems either lazy or clueless or both as to the rules and regs of buying airline tickets (and if you need further examples, check AC's FB page).

I understand Quebec Consumer Protection Laws as well as some of those in California, but anyone who thinks this will be beneficial in the end is as foolish now as they day these suits were filed.


it's bad enough here in nanny-state-centre-of-the-universe

Last edited by tcook052; Apr 17, 2015 at 1:50 pm Reason: fix quote
24left is offline  
Old Apr 17, 2015, 3:27 pm
  #33  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Montreal
Posts: 260
Originally Posted by rehoult

However, as someone with a long background in IT, rules like this worry me:
  • How is jurisdiction determined?
  • Is it the location of the server?
  • The location of the Company HQ?
  • Or are they saying the fact that a Quebecer can see the ad/website, means the ad/website must comply with Quebec laws?
On the one hand, if they advertise tickets from say YUL to NRT, they know already all the taxes, all the fees, everything, so if they want to advertise it they know the cost already. It's a solved issue since they need to price the ticket in order to sell it.

On the other hand this law is mostly meant to stop the practice of advertising a ticket for half the real price and chalking up the other half to phantom fees.

One of my pet peeves is the practice of advertising one way fees based on two way purchase. There is no way on earth that makes sense. Either off it per direction and let the consumer buy what you are advertising, or price the thing that you are selling.

Hockey skates on sale: $99! †‡*

† per skate price based on two skate purchase.
‡ single skate purchases available at the price of two skates.
* blade fee of $99 per skate not included in price.
nihonto is offline  
Old Apr 17, 2015, 3:43 pm
  #34  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto YYZ UA-1K 1MM,QFgold
Programs: Royal Ambassador/ SPG Platinum 75/Marriott gold
Posts: 14,283
Originally Posted by nihonto

Hockey skates on sale: $99! *

per skate price based on two skate purchase.
single skate purchases available at the price of two skates.
* blade fee of $99 per skate not included in price.
Hilarious, yet some on this board think its OK for AC to do it with airline tickets!

I would love to see them ..... if retail stores did the same thing.
why fly is offline  
Old Apr 17, 2015, 9:11 pm
  #35  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: BKK/SIN/YYZ/YUL
Programs: DL, AC, Bonvoy, Accor, Hilton
Posts: 2,889
Originally Posted by PLeblond
I just got the notice via email.

a) I never asked to be in this!!!!!!
b) according to the email, if I want to opt out, I need to contact the superior court by registered mail???????

I always knew Quebec was looney, but this one takes the cake. What's wrong with this place???? I'm sooooo aggravated right now.

Anybody here knowledgeable about law know how I can get out of this without having to do cartwheels???
The opting out is if you want to litigate your own case. The option protects your rights, so if you think the Quebec court is "looney" for giving you this option, oki dokie. It is nothing new and is common to all class actions.
BTW, BC has a far more active approach to class actions, and Ontario isn't that far behind.

AC has done its utmost to have this class action tossed and it failed. Usually the spurious litigation doesn't get certified. This is going to be an interesting case because it is going to expose some of AC's marketing practices, which I don't think AC wants the public to know about. If AC wants to keep its secrets it is going to have to settle. I do hope this goes to trial because the evidence should be both educational and entertaining.

Originally Posted by 24left
From another thread, but relevant here

EXACTLY.

This nonsense reminds me of:
1. The chocolate price-fixing lawsuit. Did you all get your free chocolate bar or whatever? Are you happy now?

2. Some legal professionals with perhaps no real work to keep them busy

3. People who seems either lazy or clueless or both as to the rules and regs of buying airline tickets (and if you need further examples, check AC's FB page).

I understand Quebec Consumer Protection Laws as well as some of those in California, but anyone who thinks this will be beneficial in the end is as foolish now as they day these suits were filed.


it's bad enough here in nanny-state-centre-of-the-universe
Whoa. Let's look a one of your comments:
People who seems either lazy or clueless or both as to the rules and regs of buying airline tickets (and if you need further examples, check AC's FB page).

I don't doubt that some people are stupid or that they don't read the most evident of the rules. However, an ethical company that sells products or services to the general public has an obligation to not engage in deceptive advertising. A strong argument can be made that AC worded its rules and structured its advertising, in the period to which this case applies, in such a manner as to cause confusion and to mislead the "average" man/woman. I have a decent education and manage complex contracts on a regular basis, yet I still find the AC rules of ticketing and fare structure confusing. Hopefully, this case changes the AC approach and forces AC to use clearer language and to be more transparent. If it accomplishes that, then the majority of consumers will benefit.

Last edited by tcook052; Apr 17, 2015 at 9:59 pm
Transpacificflyer is offline  
Old Apr 17, 2015, 9:49 pm
  #36  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Programs: AC SE100K-1MM, NH, DL, AA, BA, Global Entry/Nexus, APEC..
Posts: 18,877
Originally Posted by Transpacificflyer
Whoa. Let's look a one of your comments:
People who seems either lazy or clueless or both as to the rules and regs of buying airline tickets (and if you need further examples, check AC's FB page).

I don't doubt that some people are stupid or that they don't read the most evident of the rules. However, an ethical company that sells products or services to the general public has an obligation to not engage in deceptive advertising. A strong argument can be made that AC worded its rules and structured its advertising, in the period to which this case applies, in such a manner as to cause confusion and to mislead the "average" man/woman. I have a decent education and manage complex contracts on a regular basis, yet I still find the AC rules of ticketing and fare structure confusing. Hopefully, this case changes the AC approach and forces AC to use clearer language and to be more transparent. If it accomplishes that, then the majority of consumers will benefit.

I stated my opinion.

AC might in fact be responsible for consumer confusion or other issues in this case. I was not stating a legal opinion.

I have no illusions that ticketing rules and those details written in 4pt font size are going to change. If AC ticketing rules are so complex, how is it nothing has really been done about changing the wording?

There are many other examples in this forum of some pax who did not even read the rules for changes, cancellations, or paying for specific seats if on Tango fares. How much of all of this is going to be blamed on AC or other airlines?

The world is a different place than when only TAs booked travel. Not everyone who flies wants to read the COC or the Fare Rules. I see it right on my ticket as well as in the link. Many people don't want to pay for travel insurance. How many people book on aggregator sites and also don't read or understand those sites' cancellation policies? The list goes on.

Anyway, the case will move on and perhaps AC will be forced to make some changes and we will all see different wording. It will not change how some people choose to book and manage their travel details.
24left is offline  
Old Apr 17, 2015, 10:26 pm
  #37  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto YYZ UA-1K 1MM,QFgold
Programs: Royal Ambassador/ SPG Platinum 75/Marriott gold
Posts: 14,283
Originally Posted by PLeblond
I just got the notice via email.

a) I never asked to be in this!!!!!!
b) according to the email, if I want to opt out, I need to contact the superior court by registered mail???????

I always knew Quebec was looney, but this one takes the cake. What's wrong with this place???? I'm sooooo aggravated right now.

Anybody here knowledgeable about law know how I can get out of this without having to do cartwheels???
Wow a court has decided the case has merit, and you are calling it looney? Accept the courts are her to protect you.
Perhaps come back and edit your post.
why fly is offline  
Old Apr 18, 2015, 3:15 am
  #38  
Original Member
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 6,220
Originally Posted by PLeblond
I just got the notice via email.

a) I never asked to be in this!!!!!!
b) according to the email, if I want to opt out, I need to contact the superior court by registered mail???????

I always knew Quebec was looney, but this one takes the cake. What's wrong with this place???? I'm sooooo aggravated right now.

Anybody here knowledgeable about law know how I can get out of this without having to do cartwheels???
I would recommend you petition the courts for permission to initiate a class action against the PQ government, The Quebec Bar, the plaintiffs in the AC action, the estate of King John, and maybe Canadian Tire just for good measure.

Probably the easiest way would be to send the court a registered letter stating your intention to opt out.

Last edited by tcook052; Apr 18, 2015 at 11:03 am
KenHamer is offline  
Old Apr 18, 2015, 8:40 am
  #39  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: West
Posts: 3,357
Originally Posted by rehoult
As a consumer, it drives me nuts when prices aren't all in. I don't mind separating out government mandated fees and taxes ..........
Why are you OK with government taxes as an exception in this or any other pricing. All elements in constructing the total price can be listed but one overall price should be quoted and advertised, period. Gasoline sales are done that way, the only exception in Canada. Laws appear to be passed to deceit the public and rip off the consumer. Why pass new laws to protect us when the first law allowing this practice of tax and fees exclusion to continue, without consequences.

I am for this case to succeed.
1Newflyer is offline  
Old Apr 18, 2015, 9:51 am
  #40  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC*SE 2MM
Posts: 16,579
Originally Posted by monchito
How can I find out if I did pay more? I bought multiple tickets between that date range. If I still have those confirmations, does that even show anything?
That's simple. Up until 2012, AC's website initially showed you the price "excluding taxers and fees", so if you bought a ticket on www.aircanada.com" between those dates in 2010 and 2012 you did pay more.

How soon we forget.
The Lev is offline  
Old Apr 18, 2015, 10:30 am
  #41  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kan@da
Programs: Anything with sweet spots
Posts: 1,790
I am all for punishing corps, especially transportation companies like AC, that go to great lengths in attempts to nickle-and-dime and price-gouge consumers.
MasterGeek is offline  
Old Apr 18, 2015, 12:26 pm
  #42  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,188
Originally Posted by 1Newflyer
Why are you OK with government taxes as an exception in this or any other pricing. All elements in constructing the total price can be listed but one overall price should be quoted and advertised, period. Gasoline sales are done that way, the only exception in Canada. Laws appear to be passed to deceit the public and rip off the consumer. Why pass new laws to protect us when the first law allowing this practice of tax and fees exclusion to continue, without consequences.

I am for this case to succeed.
So let's say I'm running a national ad campaign for a product. What price do I advertise? Or should I have 13 different ad campaigns for the same product because of tax differences?
canadiancow is offline  
Old Apr 18, 2015, 12:29 pm
  #43  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC E50K (*G) WS Gold | SPG/Fairmont Plat Hilton/Hyatt Diamond Marriott Silver | National Exec Elite
Posts: 19,284
Originally Posted by MasterGeek
I am all for punishing corps, especially transportation companies like AC, that go to great lengths in attempts to nickle-and-dime and price-gouge consumers.
A corporation's job is to make as much money as possible. If they don't, they aren't respecting their fiduciary duties.

I'm not defending them, but if they can "get away" with it, they have to. Now, that's the purpose of government and every day I'm becoming more liberal, but that's for a whole other discussion. When the government mandated (IIRC) the all in fare thing, that was awesome. Then of course AC spun it as....we're just trying to be more honest
superangrypenguin is offline  
Old Apr 18, 2015, 12:38 pm
  #44  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: West
Posts: 3,357
Originally Posted by canadiancow
So let's say I'm running a national ad campaign for a product. What price do I advertise? Or should I have 13 different ad campaigns for the same product because of tax differences?
The price you want me to pay.
1Newflyer is offline  
Old Apr 18, 2015, 1:38 pm
  #45  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, SQ Silver, Bonvoy Tit LTG, Hyatt Glob, HH Diamond
Posts: 44,188
Originally Posted by 1Newflyer
The price you want me to pay.
I want you to pay $1000.
The government wants you to pay $1130.

So you're saying you want me to advertise $1000, right?
canadiancow is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.