Quick recap. Booked a BA holiday to Phoenix. BA LHR-PHL was downgraded from First to CW (aircraft switch to A350 with no First). Asked BA for 75% reimbursement of this proportion of the journey following the flight. BA refunded but excluded the YQ repeatedly describing it as a tax, but also confirming in email that whilst treated as a tax it is not a tax.

CEDR response.

1. Article 10 of Regulation 261, now the APR Regulations, says that if an operating air carrier places a passenger in a class lower than that for which the ticket was purchased, it shall within seven days reimburse 75% of the price of the ticket for flights over 3,500km. 2. Reimbursement is payable only for the flight on which a passenger was downgraded, and not for the whole journey included in a single ticket. 3. The company has provided the customer’s PNR Booking which shows that the customer paid £xxx.xx to travel in First Class on BA67, 75% of which is £xxx.xx. 4. There is no dispute that the customer has received a refund of £xxx.xx from the company. 5. The crux of the customer’s claim is that 75% of the ‘YQ’ charge should also have been refunded on the basis that it is neither a tax nor a fee and is part of the fare. 6. While neither party has explained what the ‘YQ’ charge is, I note that in its email to the customer dated 26 February 2025, the company advised that the “YQ fuel surcharge sits as part of the taxes, but is not a tax and is not refundable”. 7. Information on carrier imposed charges on the company’s website here, https://www.britishairways.com/trave...e/public/en_gb says that “British Airways may impose a charge called a carrier imposed charge as part of the total price of the airline ticket, which you may see stated separately in certain displays during the booking process or on your final e-ticket receipt. A refund of the carrier imposed charge or fuel surcharge where applicable may be made on unused flights in your itinerary if permitted by the fare rules and conditions applicable to your booking.” 8. This supports that the YQ charge is only refundable if permitted by the fare rules and in the event that a passenger does not use their ticket. In this case, the customer travelled on BA67 and therefore, a refund of the YQ charge would not apply. 9. I find that reimbursement for downgrading excludes taxes and fees except insofar as they resulted from the higher class originally purchased (Mennens v Emirates (C-255/15)). 10. This means that a downgrading refund is based only on the price of the ticket itself, not on taxes and fees. 11. I appreciate that the customer feels that the YQ charge is part of the fare. 12. However, in Mennens, the CJEU ruled that “Article 10(2) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that, the price of the ticket to be taken into consider for the purposes of determining the reimbursement owed to that passenger, where he is downgraded on a flight, is solely the price of the flight itself, to the exclusion of taxes and charges indicated on that ticket, as long as neither the requirement to pay those taxes and charges nor their amount depends on the case for which that ticket has been purchased [emphasis added].” 13. Therefore, I am not persuaded that a carrier imposed YQ charge or fuel surcharge is pertinent when calculating a downgrading refund. 14. As a result, I am persuaded that the customer is not entitled to a refund of 75% of the YQ charge paid to travel in First Class on BA67. 15. Downgraded passengers are however entitled to a refund of the difference in taxes, fees, or charges paid for the higher class of travel. 16. However, the company has provided evidence of fare examples in the defence to show that the YQ charge paid to travel in First Class and Club World is the same. 17. As such, I am satisfied that the customer would have paid the same YQ charge if they have travelled on BA67 in First Class or Club World and that therefore, no refund is due. 18. As a result, the customer’s claim does not succeed.

😟