Transportation Department, Senators Seek New Consumer Protections
Joe Cortez August 03, 2022
In two separate announcements, two senators and the Transportation Secretary proposed new laws and rules which would help travelers get money back when plans go sour.
New Rules Come in Form of Senate Bill, Transportation Department Notice
The first of the two proposals were introduced to Congress on Monday, August 1, 2022, backed by Senators Ed Markey (D-MA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), alongside Representatives Steve Cohen (D-TN), Jesús G. “Chuy” García (D-IL) and Jamie Raskin (D-MD). The Cash Refunds for Flight Cancellation Act would require major air carriers to offer cash refunds if a flight is significantly delayed or cancelled, while allowing flyers to cancel their ticket and get a refund up to 48 hours before their travel.
“Just as hotels often allow consumers to cancel their reservation and receive a full refund, the Cash Refunds for Flight Cancellations Act would extend a similar requirement for air travel,” Sen. Markey said in a press release. “These airlines must get their heads out of the clouds and deliver the effective and accountable service that travelers deserve.”
If passed, the law would require airlines to offer a travel voucher to flyers if it includes a “clear and conspicuous notice of the flyer’s right to a cash refund and the voucher is valid,” while extending the validity indefinitely. The Transportation Department would be able to impose a $1,000 civil penalty on airlines who do not offer a cash refund on a significantly delayed or cancelled flight within 30 days of the flight date.
The second rule was proposed by the Transportation Department on Wednesday, August 3, 2022. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would provide clear definitions for “significant changes” to a flight, which include:
- Changes of three hours or more for a domestic flight, or six hours or more for international flights.
- Changes to departure or return airports.
- Changes which increase the number of stops on an itinerary.
- Changes to aircraft type if it “causes a significant downgrade” in experience or amenities.
The rule would also change the definition of a “cancelled flight” to one that was published in a computer reservation system, but not actually operated by an airline.
“When Americans buy an airline ticket, they should get to their destination safely, reliably, and affordably,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in a press release. “This new proposed rule would protect the rights of travelers and help ensure they get the timely refunds they deserve from the airlines.”
Both rules are in the evaluation process, with no timeline on when they could be implemented.
You’re Reading
United airlines loves to credit funds as ecredits. However you can't use ecredits with travelbank cash. They do this on purpose to cause breakage. The airlines are not doing business on good faith. Stop treating them with kid gloves. And no Republican senator thinks the passengers should be treated better?
An airline ticket is a contract of transportation. For too long the burden is on the passenger. The airlines have a free pass. They love to give out vouchers because they know 80% are never used (according to my xboss at AA). Time to have vouchers with no expiration date. Time to have them pay for failing the contract. Sorry is not enough
Major portion of this proposal is already law. Who advises these people, or is it just grandstanding?
Schedule Change/Significant Delay - A consumer is entitled to a refund if the airline made a significant schedule change and/or significantly delays a flight and the consumer chooses not to travel"
Being able to cancel upto 48 hrs before travel would be revolutionary. It will probably raise ticket prices.
The first change is an entirely new rule. As the article states, the second change "would provide clear definitions for 'significant changes'" to a flight. As you've noted, there's already a rule for significant changes, but it has lacked a definition of "significant," and left that up to the airlines.
Edit: I think the sub-headline might have made it sound like it was a new rule entirely.