India-based Airlines - Now spicejet is throwing tantrums

I have booked a flight for HYD-VTZ sector, and I came to know that the flight has been taken out of schedule(Spicejet didnt even inform me about it). Now I call Spicejet to confirm the same, they said they can push me into an early morning flight or an evening flight as they have cancelled the afternoon flight and they also said they can give me a full refund.

As I cant travel on the other options given to me, I have asked for the refund. They said they can return the entire amount except for the transaction fee :rolleyes:. Now how on this earth can they justify that? I am not the one who cancelled my ticket, it was Spicejet which didn't honor the schedule and why should I pay the transaction fee when they didn't offer me the service?

Ps: They didn't refund my transaction fee, I have mailed them about the same. Its not about Rs.100 here, its about the unfair practice.

I don't think your thread title accurately describes spicejet's actions.


Well the policy is somewhat unfair, if the policy is in the terms and conditions of the ticket (which I assume it is) and not in violation of any local law (which I assume it isn't) the policy is just something you will have to accept. But it isn't a 'tantrum' in any sense.


Charging your credit card, processing a ticket, and then refunding your card does have real costs to the airline, probably much more than the transaction fee.

Charging your credit card, processing a ticket, and then refunding your card does have real costs to the airline, probably much more than the transaction fee.

Agreed.

However, the airline chose to cancel the flight here, so it's not the passenger's burden.

I had a similar situation with Jet, where they cancelled the flight. Long story short, they first claimed I was only owed the taxes, then they agreed they owed me the fare as well. It takes a bit of perseverance.

I don't think your thread title accurately describes spicejet's actions.


Well the policy is somewhat unfair, if the policy is in the terms and conditions of the ticket (which I assume it is) and not in violation of any local law (which I assume it isn't) the policy is just something you will have to accept. But it isn't a 'tantrum' in any sense.


Charging your credit card, processing a ticket, and then refunding your card does have real costs to the airline, probably much more than the transaction fee.

I am willing to pay their transaction fee if they provide me the service. But if they cancel the service, why I am I supposed to pay? I am not questioning their transaction fee here(If I have problem with their fee I would chose another airline which is not charging)how can they charge me when they cancel the flight?

how can they charge me when they cancel the flight?

They can because it is in the terms of the ticket you bought. But I agree that it is unfair.

Is my two-second google search correct that you are talking about 100 Indian Rupees, which is about $1.80USD? If so, I wouldn't waste my time emailing or calling about this. If you continue to complain, you might get it refunded but you will have spent far too much in time and effort (or postage) than it is worth.

how can they charge me when they cancel the flight?

They can because it is in the terms of the ticket you bought. But I agree that it is unfair.

Is my two-second google search correct that you are talking about 100 Indian Rupees, which is about $1.80USD? If so, I wouldn't waste my time emailing or calling about this. If you continue to complain, you might get it refunded but you will have spent far too much in time and effort (or postage) than it is worth.

It's not about the money

Hi,

I agree that this is unethical, however followed by most of the airlines and also included under their terms and conditions. I had a similar experience with Air Asia when they canceled the flights from Delhi to Bangkok and still unable to provide complete refund and when asked, they did mention that it was under their terms and conditions and there is nothing they could do.

Thanks and Regards
taran_2005

Is my two-second google search correct that you are talking about 100 Indian Rupees, which is about $1.80USD? If so, I wouldn't waste my time emailing or calling about this. If you continue to complain, you might get it refunded but you will have spent far too much in time and effort (or postage) than it is worth.

Its not about Rs.100 here, its about the unfair practice.

I have booked a flight for HYD-VTZ sector, and I came to know that the flight has been taken out of schedule(Spicejet didnt even inform me about it). Now I call Spicejet to confirm the same, they said they can push me into an early morning flight or an evening flight as they have cancelled the afternoon flight and they also said they can give me a full refund.

As I cant travel on the other options given to me, I have asked for the refund. They said they can return the entire amount except for the transaction fee :rolleyes:. Now how on this earth can they justify that? I am not the one who cancelled my ticket, it was Spicejet which didn't honor the schedule and why should I pay the transaction fee when they didn't offer me the service?

Ps: They didn't refund my transaction fee, I have mailed them about the same. Its not about Rs.100 here, its about the unfair practice.

Did you read terms and conditions before you booked? What do they say? Was there a separate transaction fee at the time of booking?

I don't think your thread title accurately describes spicejet's actions.
I don't think it's the airline that's throwing tantrums. ;)

I don't think your thread title accurately describes spicejet's actions.

Charging your credit card, processing a ticket, and then refunding your card does have real costs to the airline, probably much more than the transaction fee.

i agree on both counts....its not just spicejet but a lot of other airlines that do this....

recently i had a similar problem with jet....they changed the timing of their flight by a couple of hours which would result in me missing my connecting flight....they agreed to refund the full amount but wouldn't refund the transaction fee....to make matters worse, they said they would have to charge me another transaction fee to process the refund....i eventually got both transaction fees waived but it took more time than i was willing to spend....not worth it in my opinion to save inr 300....

same problem with united....they changed their flight time by a little under an hour which again would have resulted in me missing my connecting flight....they agreed to change my flight without any change fee but said i would have to pay the difference in fare for moving to the new flight....it was only $8 so i didn't fight it....

Did you read terms and conditions before you booked? What do they say? Was there a separate transaction fee at the time of booking?

I have read the terms and conditions and this is what it says

"For every booking on the basic fare there would be fuel charge depending on the sector flown, a Government fee (PSF), a Government service tax and in addition applicable UDF/ADF will be charged.

Flight Cancellations
SpiceJet will make all reasonable efforts to ensure timely operations of its scheduled flights. However, due to unforeseen circumstances causing a delay or cancellation of its scheduled operations :

SpiceJet shall endeavour to inform the passenger(s) about flight cancellation atleast three hours in advance through telephone call or SMS, provided the passenger(s) have given correct and working mobile number at the time of effecting the reservation.

In respect of passenger(s) who have provided correct and working mobile number at the time of effecting the reservation and have not been informed at least three(3) hours in advance about the cancellation of the flight on which they were scheduled to travel, SpiceJet shall
provide following financial compensation only if the amount of tickets price is higher than the compensation amount as below:
Rs.2,000 or the value of the ticket whichever is less for flights having a block time of upto and including one hour.
Rs.3,000 or the value of the ticket whichever is less for flights having block time of more than one hour and upto and including two hours.
Rs.4,000 or the value of the ticket whichever is less for flights having a block time of more than two hours.

If the cost of the ticket is less than the amount of compensation indicated above, the airline will be liable to compensate an amount equivalent to the ticket price. AND
refund the ticket price to the passenger(s) in the event they do not wish to travel instead on any subsequent SpiceJet flight or on another carrier's flight or if so desired by the passengers, they shall be offered alternate travel opportunities at no additional cost. AND
provide reasonable refreshments in the event they have already reported for their original flight and whilst they are waiting for the alternate flight / arrangement."

There was a separate transaction fee and no where it is mentioned that transaction fee will be collected in the first place.

HYD to VTZ
1 Adult fare: 2,520.00
(basic fare + airline fuel charge + transaction charge)
Charges and Fees
Passenger Service Fee: 225.00
Airport Fee - UDF/ADF/DF: 484.00
Service Tax @4.95 %
(Incl.2%EC,1%SHEC): 125.00
Price Total: 3,354.00

This is the general fare breakup now. For my ticket it was like this after the booking

Fare
(fare + airline fuel charge + transaction charge) 827.00

Passenger Service Fee 225.00

Airport Fee – UDF/ADF/DF 484.00

Card Transaction Charge 100.00

Service Tax @ 4.95%
(Incl. 2%EC,1%SHEC) 141.00

That the terms and conditions say whatever it is they say is not in question. That too can (and should) be challenged for being, well, dumb.

Tomorrow they may add a clause that they owe passengers no refund of any kind in any situation. That doesn't mean it can stand scrutiny.

That the terms and conditions say whatever it is they say is not in question. That too can (and should) be challenged for being, well, dumb.

Tomorrow they may add a clause that they owe passengers no refund of any kind in any situation. That doesn't mean it can stand scrutiny.

I agree with you..But its not in the T&C in the first place:)

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/5.0.0.822 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102)

That the terms and conditions say whatever it is they say is not in question. That too can (and should) be challenged for being, well, dumb.

Tomorrow they may add a clause that they owe passengers no refund of any kind in any situation. That doesn't mean it can stand scrutiny.

I agree with you..But its not in the T&C in the first place:)

There you go. One just needs to be persistent - in the absence of regulation / legislation.

That the terms and conditions say whatever it is they say is not in question. That too can (and should) be challenged for being, well, dumb.

Tomorrow they may add a clause that they owe passengers no refund of any kind in any situation. That doesn't mean it can stand scrutiny.
Whether it can stand scruitinty or not depedns on if it violates any legal provisions. Otherwise as long s it's in terms and conditions, it stands any challenge.

Limitations on your 9W upgrade vouchers is an example. You may huff and puff and hyperventilate, but it will stand any scruitiny
I agree with you..But its not in the T&C in the first place:)

The airline does not guarantee that the timings would suit you in case of IRROPS. The airline does provide you alternatives. Alternatives do not suit you. As a courtesy, the airline gives you a refund, which a good airline should.
If the fee is explicitly not listed in T&C, one would have to examine what the fee is for and if it the fee is implied.
Prima-facie evidence is that the fee is a transaction fee.
If you buy something by mail order and you are not happy with the product. The merchant may allow you a refund. But you may have to pay to ship it back. And if you have paid for shipping at the time of purchase, you might not get it back. It's not illegal for the merchant to not refund you your shipping charges in case of return.
A similar example is warranty service. Your warranted product needs service. You may have to ship it at your cost. There is nothing illegal about it.
Sometimes we don't like certain fees. It does not necessarily mean that the fee is wrong.
Maybe Keyser can give an opinion.

If you buy something by mail order and you are not happy with the product. The merchant may allow you a refund. But you may have to pay to ship it back. And if you have paid for shipping at the time of purchase, you might not get it back. It's not illegal for the merchant to not refund you your shipping charges in case of return.


Great example. The fee was for a 'transaction'. Seeing as a transaction occured (2 including the refund), I am not sure you have much to complain about.

Whether it can stand scruitinty or not depedns on if it violates any legal provisions. Otherwise as long s it's in terms and conditions, it stands any challenge.

Limitations on your 9W upgrade vouchers is an example. You may huff and puff and hyperventilate, but it will stand any scruitiny


The airline does not guarantee that the timings would suit you in case of IRROPS. The airline does provide you alternatives. Alternatives do not suit you. As a courtesy, the airline gives you a refund, which a good airline should.
If the fee is explicitly not listed in T&C, one would have to examine what the fee is for and if it the fee is implied.
Prima-facie evidence is that the fee is a transaction fee.
If you buy something by mail order and you are not happy with the product. The merchant may allow you a refund. But you may have to pay to ship it back. And if you have paid for shipping at the time of purchase, you might not get it back. It's not illegal for the merchant to not refund you your shipping charges in case of return.
A similar example is warranty service. Your warranted product needs service. You may have to ship it at your cost. There is nothing illegal about it.
Sometimes we don't like certain fees. It does not necessarily mean that the fee is wrong.
Maybe Keyser can give an opinion.

What if you have not received your item from the merchant? If it is delivered only you will decide whether its good or bad right? Will you pay the shipping charges to the merchant if its not delivered at all? Its the same case here. Spicejet cancelled the flight, its not me who cancelled the reservation. I don't agree with your explanation at all.

What if you have not received your item from the merchant? If it is delivered only you will decide whether its good or bad right? Will you pay the shipping charges to the merchant if its not delivered at all? Its the same case here. Spicejet cancelled the flight, its not me who cancelled the reservation. I don't agree with your explanation at all.

No you wouldn't pay shipping charges if nothing was shipped.

(But it is a reasonable policy to say that) there was a 'transaction', and thus the 'transaction fee'.

No you wouldn't pay shipping charges if nothing was shipped.

(But it is a reasonable policy to say that) there was a 'transaction', and thus the 'transaction fee'.

The "transaction" here is the booking of the ticket, with the intent of flying on the said flight, which spicejet publicized on their website. Given that subsequently SJ cancelled the flight altogether, the first transaction is now rendered unnecessary. So SJ needs to refund the transaction fee too, as the transaction was incurred due to their mistake (couldn't find another term here).

No you wouldn't pay shipping charges if nothing was shipped.

(But it is a reasonable policy to say that) there was a 'transaction', and thus the 'transaction fee'.

If thats the case then spicejet can create a dummy schedule sell lots of tickets, then cancel the schedule and make lots of money with transaction fees. Will you guys say the same thing then?

The "transaction" here is the booking of the ticket, with the intent of flying on the said flight, which spicejet publicized on their website. Given that subsequently SJ cancelled the flight altogether, the first transaction is now rendered unnecessary. So SJ needs to refund the transaction fee too, as the transaction was incurred due to their mistake (couldn't find another term here).

I see what you are saying and I agree that the policy is somewhat 'unfair'. But what I have been saying is that the policy is reasonable as it does not violate the terms and conditions and (most likely) does not violate any local laws. Therefore, the airline can have whatever policy it wants. Whether customers choose to accept it, is up to the customer.



If thats the case then spicejet can create a dummy schedule sell lots of tickets, then cancel the schedule and make lots of money with transaction fees. Will you guys say the same thing then?

No. First of all, that would likely be fraud (but don't trust my knowledge of Indian law). Secondly, the airline probably doesn't make money off of the transaction fee, it just helps to cover some of the cost. There is no doubt that charging your card, providing the customer service, and refunding the card cost the airline more that $1.80USD.

What if you have not received your item from the merchant?
An airline ticket has two parts and it involves service for a fee or performance (transport service) for consideration )fee-fare). You did receive the merchandise, the ticket, but it does not provide the service to you as you had expected. The airline has not refused to fulfill its obligation, which is to fly you to your destination. But, what the airline is offering to provided you as alternative flights has little value for you.
As I have stated before, the airline does not guarantee on time arrival, nor is liable for consequential damages due to delays or schedule changes.
You can argue that the airline has substituted the merchandise you had paid for. I am not sayi8ng that it would hold in court, because airline agreed to fly you from A to B on a certain date at a certain time, subject to delays and schedule changes. Change of aircraft or schedule is permitted. But you can claim that the substituted merchandise does not have the same vale for you that the original merchandise did,

If it is delivered only you will decide whether its good or bad right? Will you pay the shipping charges to the merchant if its not delivered at all? Its the same case here. Spicejet cancelled the flight, its not me who cancelled the reservation. I don't agree with your explanation at all.
See my explanation above. A merchant can argue that they have provided to an alternate merchandise, just as good as the other one. If you don;t want it. return it at your expense.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. Nor anti-consumer or airline sympathiser.
P.S> follow the thread Delta is "detaining" my daughters in MSP? URGENT ADVICE NEEDED (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta-skymiles/1366807-delta-detaining-my-daughters-msp-urgent-advice-needed.html)
It's very instructive on how people feel they have been wronged when an airline sis simply doing the best it can. It's also very instructive on how I reach my conclusions.

If thats the case then spicejet can create a dummy schedule sell lots of tickets, then cancel the schedule and make lots of money with transaction fees. Will you guys say the same thing then?

That would be fraud. Also, no transactions have occurred. For a transaction to take place, there has to be a seller or a service provider who is offering to provide a service or goods at a certain price, and a wiling buyer.
Fraudulently created dummy records do not constitute a transaction.

No you wouldn't pay shipping charges if nothing was shipped.

(But it is a reasonable policy to say that) there was a 'transaction', and thus the 'transaction fee'.

Right. But in this case, the claim that the merchandise (service) was not delivered, may not be sustainable. The merchant would say you refused to accept delivery.

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/5.0.0.822 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102)



There you go. One just needs to be persistent - in the absence of regulation / legislation.

Being PErSisTent does not always pay. Sometimes it does because the merchant would given in just to get rid of a pest.

[QUOTE=will2288;18949162]I see what you are saying and I agree that the policy is somewhat 'unfair'. But what I have been saying is that the policy is reasonable as it does not violate the terms and conditions and (most likely) does not violate any local laws. Therefore, the airline can have whatever policy it wants. Whether customers choose to accept it, is up to the customer.




This is what the local law says
"In other words, the `net fare’
or `the transaction fee model’ is not sustainable under the relevant law since
charging of transaction fee, which is an integral part of this model, contravenes the relevant provisions of the Aircraft Rules, 1937. "-DGCA Website

I have already posted Spicejets T&C's, nowhere I found anything regarding this. Even if there is one, it is an Unfair one.

I don't think the credit card transaction charges would be more than 1-2%, in which case spicejet is still making money on this fee.(Anyways this is not my concern)

I respect yours and Yaatri's views but I dont agree with them.

That would be fraud. Also, no transactions have occurred. For a transaction to take place, there has to be a seller or a service provider who is offering to provide a service or goods at a certain price, and a wiling buyer.
Fraudulently created dummy records do not constitute a transaction.

They can have a schedule saying that they are going to start a flight say from MAA-->HYD in december and sell tickets for the month of December and they can change the schedule and cancel it in november and still can retain the fee. This is what has happened to me. I got the ticket in June for a flight in August and then they change the schedule and cancel that flight in July.

The "transaction" here is the booking of the ticket, with the intent of flying on the said flight, which spicejet publicized on their website. Given that subsequently SJ cancelled the flight altogether, the first transaction is now rendered unnecessary. So SJ needs to refund the transaction fee too, as the transaction was incurred due to their mistake (couldn't find another term here).
People always think if an airline does not do what benefits them is acting unlawfully. But when you look at an issue honestly, you discover there is another side of the story, and what the airline is doing is well within its rights. Despite claims to the contrary, there is no evidence of the airline misleading people.
The airline offered alternative flights, without additional transaction fee, I believe. Schedule changes do not violate T&C. Since the alternatives offered to the customer do not suit their needs, the airline, displaying generosity, offered a refund for the flight. The transaction still did occur.

They can have a schedule saying that they are going to start a flight say from MAA-->HYD in december and sell tickets for the month of December and they can change the schedule and cancel it in november and still can retain the fee. This is what has happened to me. I got the ticket in June for a flight in August and then they change the schedule and cancel that flight in July.

Unfortunately, they can. But nothing prevents them from refunding your fee.

You drive to a mall. Buy something. You take it home and find out that t's defective. You drive back and return it for a full refund. Should the merchant pay for your fuel, parking and other costs of operating your car when you drove to the merchant's place of business? A merchant may, but it's difficult to make a legal claim.

[QUOTE=will2288;18949162]I see what you are saying and I agree that the policy is somewhat 'unfair'. But what I have been saying is that the policy is reasonable as it does not violate the terms and conditions and (most likely) does not violate any local laws. Therefore, the airline can have whatever policy it wants. Whether customers choose to accept it, is up to the customer.




This is what the local law says
"In other words, the `net fare’
or `the transaction fee model’ is not sustainable under the relevant law since
charging of transaction fee, which is an integral part of this model, contravenes the relevant provisions of the Aircraft Rules, 1937. "-DGCA Website

I have already posted Spicejets T&C's, nowhere I found anything regarding this. Even if there is one, it is an Unfair one.

I don't think the credit card transaction charges would be more than 1-2%, in which case spicejet is still making money on this fee.(Anyways this is not my concern)

I respect yours and Yaatri's views but I dont agree with them.

What you have quoted above is a legal interpretation of the author. I am not qualified to comment on that. I would not even attempt to comment even as a layman, because I have not read his arguments, only his opinion.
Whether this legal opinion is sustainable in court is a legal matter that requires expertise neither you nor I have.

Interesting thread and I am not involved in any fashion, but after reading I am going to comment.
What this airline is doing is just wrong, one could say immoral. If any other airlines are doing similar things they are just as wrong. When you pay for goods or services you have a reasonable expectation of these services being delivered. When the airline cancelled the flight, they gave you the option of a different flight or a refund. Not a partial refund a refund of what you had paid. For example if you were in a store and picked up a item and went to the cashier and the cashier told you he could not give you that item (demo unit say), but would get you a new one from the back. When he comes out with something different you have the right to refuse and get your money back. What is taking place here in not much different. In the US we would call this bait and switch.
I also enjoy reading about people saying why bother it is such a small amount, it is you whom the airlines are counting on to permit them to get away with such actions.
The airline should do the right thing and refund all the fees involved. I wonder how much it costs the airline everytime you call about this. Keep it up and make them pay a fortune in lost productivity even if you never see a rupee.

Interesting thread and I am not involved in any fashion, but after reading I am going to comment.
What this airline is doing is just wrong, one could say immoral. If any other airlines are doing similar things they are just as wrong. When you pay for goods or services you have a reasonable expectation of these services being delivered. When the airline cancelled the flight, they gave you the option of a different flight or a refund. Not a partial refund a refund of what you had paid. For example if you were in a store and picked up a item and went to the cashier and the cashier told you he could not give you that item (demo unit say), but would get you a new one from the back. When he comes out with something different you have the right to refuse and get your money back. What is taking place here in not much different. In the US we would call this bait and switch.
I also enjoy reading about people saying why bother it is such a small amount, it is you whom the airlines are counting on to permit them to get away with such actions.
The airline should do the right thing and refund all the fees involved. I wonder how much it costs the airline everytime you call about this. Keep it up and make them pay a fortune in lost productivity even if you never see a rupee.

You are wrong about it being bait and switch. There is a fee for booking on the phone, for example. If you are offered a refund due to schedule change, your phone-booking fee is not refundable. There is nothing immoral or illegal about it. The same thing goes if you book with a TA and cancel. You may even have to pay for advice even when you don;t purchase anything from a TA.

You are wrong about it being bait and switch. There is a fee for booking on the phone, for example. If you are offered a refund due to schedule change, your phone-booking fee is not refundable. There is nothing immoral or illegal about it. The same thing goes if you book with a TA and cancel. You may even have to pay for advice even when you don;t purchase anything from a TA.

While I can agree that bait and switch may not be accurate, it is only on this point we can reach some agreement. On the others we will need to agree to disagree.
I stand by my point that when a Airline is the one who changes or cancels a flight they do not get to keep any of the fees. To me that is just wrong, in this case the customer paid the fee expecting to fly. And yes he agreed to the fee when he purchased the ticket, as he was expecting to fly. Had he cancelled then no refund of anything is expected, but when the airline cancels the flight then it should refund all the fees. They should not get to keep anything for not delivering a service.
I just hope many people are like the OP and keep after the airline for the refund they deserve. Maybe the airline(s) will start to realize that it is costing them more money to deal with the calls then is was to keep the fee.

When I called the customer support, the executive told me that they cant refund the fee and its ONLY Rs.100. I asked him to transfer the call to his supervisor, but he said there were none available and he asked me to email as the request cant be taken over phone.
I mailed them regarding the same and I got a reply within 8 hours. They said they gonna refund the transaction fee. The refund proves that they were wrong.

When I called the customer support, the executive told me that they cant refund the fee and its ONLY Rs.100. I asked him to transfer the call to his supervisor, but he said there were none available and he asked me to email as the request cant be taken over phone.
I mailed them regarding the same and I got a reply within 8 hours. They said they gonna refund the transaction fee. The refund proves that they were wrong.
Glad that you got your money back.
It's not black and white. They decided it was better to part with he one hundred rupee fee than risk adverse publicity.
They were wrong about "No one would care about Rs. 100".

How much time did yo send on this?

Glad that you got your money back.
It's not black and white. They decided it was better to part with he one hundred rupee fee than risk adverse publicity.
They were wrong about "No one would care about Rs. 100".

How much time did yo send on this?

There should be something wrong in order to get u a wrong publicity isn't it? Customers are not dumb, they know what is reasonable and what is not. When I say customers, I mean majority of them. You know who the majority are when you read this thread.

5 mins for the call, 2 mins for the mail...Rs.100 for 7 mins is not bad ain't it?

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/5.0.0.822 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102)

And k819, there you cannot put a price on a wrong that is righted.